The Ricochet Podcast - Sajak's Capital Idea

Episode Date: March 25, 2015

Yep, it’s a special Wednesday edition of the Ricochet Podcast featuring our good friend Pat Sajak (note to prospective guests: when you’re a beloved and iconic contributor to Ricochet and the culture at large, we’ll accommodate your schedule). This week, Ted Cruz declares; can he win? Then, Pat joins to discuss his not happening Senate campaign, whether the weather is changing, and why we ought to... Source

At LiveScoreBet, we love Cheltenham just as much as we love football. The excitement, the roar and the chance to reward you. That's why every day of the festival, we're giving new members money back as a free sports bet up to €10 if your horse loses on a selected race. That's how we celebrate the biggest week in racing. Cheltenham with LiveScoreBet. This is total betting. Sign up by 2pm 14th of March. Bet within 48 hours of race. Main market excluding specials and place bets.

Terms apply. Bet responsibly. 18plusgamblingcare.ie You have $2,350. Spin or solve? I'm going to solve. All right. Cornow Curl Cabinet.

Hello, everyone. I'm not going to get... I don't know what's going to happen here. I don't have any information on that. They don't understand what you're talking about. And that's going to prove to be disastrous. What it means is that the people don't want socialism. They want more conservatism. Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall.

It's the Ricochet Podcast with Peter Robinson and Rob Long. I'm James Laddix, and our guest today is that noted pole vault enthusiast, Pat Sajak. He wants to move the Capitol. Where? Let's have ourselves a podcast. There you go again. Welcome to this, the Ricochet Podcast number 254. It's brought to you proudly by Harry's Shape.

Listen, overpaying for drugstore razor blades. You know, you're in New York, there's a Duane Reade every three blocks. Every three blocks? Every two blocks. Every block or so. And you go in there and you spend too much money on a blade and you feel like an idiot, don't be that guy. Go to Harry's, harrys.com, and you'll leave the bad habits of paying too much behind. Make the smart switch to Harry's, and yes, of course, we have a coupon code.

You know what it is. Maybe it's changed. We're going to have to listen and find out a little bit later. Also brought to you by ricochet.com, which is coming to you from, we're straddling the entire country. I'm in flyover land in Minnesota. Peter is in California. And Rob is in New York.

And like a good New York media huckster that he is, he's going to tell you why and how you can part with your shekels for Ricochet. Thank you, James. Well, as you know, I'm not – look, there are a lot of people who are members of Ricochet whose subscriptions are expiring this month or this week, and a lot of them have already expired. So we are offering you, if you're a Ricochet member, go to the ricochet.com slash membership place and use the coupon code rejoin. You get two months free. Even if you're a podcast listener and you're not a member of Ricochet, join. You get two months free. If you don't like it, you can say buzz off.

This is the best time ever to join. We're entering a big election season. We got a lot of things going on on the site, a lot of meetups, a lot of more podcasts coming. We're doing a lot of work, and we need more members. We need more members to sustain this. We don't need that many more members. I mean it's not like we're asking for much. We have tens of thousands of listeners, about 100 – over 100,000 listeners for the Daily Shot. That's free. And think about becoming a member. We absolutely do need you. I'm trying to say this urgently

with a rising whine of panic in my voice, but we do need you. Put it at that. Yes, as the guy in the AM matchmaking radio ad says, we want to welcome you back. So come and use that coupon code and join us. That'll make sense to people who listen to too much AM radio and hear the same five commercials over and over again.

And that wouldn't be Peter Robinson, who I imagine sits around listening to the finest of classical music interspersed with some plummy announcements piped to him by the private channel that the academics get. Peter, you're out there in California. You're looking at the world and you see, for example, well, how do I put this with sadness? The New Yorker calls Ted Cruz uppity. I believe it was one of the other newspapers that called him a white Hispanic.

Isn't it time for us to use coffee cups somehow to have a conversation about race to keep this tide of leftist racism from swapping the country ted cruz driving them nuts does that mean ted cruz is driving them nuts that's exactly right isn't it ted cruz is the two i i guess in a certain sense if the index is which candidates most annoy the other side i guess it's scott walker and now Ted Cruz, which of course means that my two candidates right now are Scott Walker and Ted Cruz. Ted Cruz, I have to say, going into the announcement day, which was what the day before yesterday when he announced for president, I had in my mind, and by the way, I like Ted Cruz. I've spent time with him. I think very, very highly of him. Still, as a presidential candidate, I thought what everybody's thinking, which is he's not collegial.

He went to the Senate to break furniture, not to get work done, to make a point. He's a talker, not a doer. And he's positioned himself as too unpleasant, too confrontational. The country just won't have all of that. But you know what? In the evening of that day, I missed the announcement live, but I googled around and I got some snippets of the announcement speech at Liberty College. And you know what? It was just so refreshing to see someone standing on stage and unapologetically without nuance or subtle, just making the conservative case.

And then Cruz spent an hour, Hannity devoted the entire show to Ted Cruz. And I interview a lot of these guys, getting a politician to go for an hour, let alone after he's flown up from Liberty College after announcing for president of the United States. Getting a politician to go for a whole hour and sound cogent and persuasive and principled is a very difficult feat. Ted Cruz did it. I don't know whether he'll be president. But boy, is it just refreshing to see him out there making the case. Rob, do you have the same opinion?

I don't know if you heard what Peter heard or if you read what he read. I heard snippets as well, and I have a different reaction entirely. Go on. Well, what's your reaction, James? I like what he says. I like what he says. I like the fact that he's saying it. I listened to the speech.

I see a piece of rhetoric that was well constructed and well directed. If every one of Ted Cruz's policies was enacted in this country, I think we'd be in an awful lot better shape. At the end of listening to his speech, I feel as though I'm covered in oil. That's the only way I can put it.

Why? I just do. He does have that effect on people. There are a lot of people who believe that. That's not unusual. I mean, there are a lot of people I hear who say the same thing about Ted Cruz, which is like, yeah, I agree with him, but I don't trust him. So what is that?

No, it's not that I don't trust him. It's just the reaction that I have is it doesn't – the words and the ideas connect. The presentation and the manner does not. And I mean I'm leaning into a guy who says stuff like this. There's just something at the end of it where I feel, yep, I agree and I'm okay about it. I don't know what it is. I think that's a problem for Ted Cruz right there.

Yes, it is. I think the fact that you had that reaction is a big problem for him and it's something he's going to have to – he's really going to have to address because I think there are a lot of people like that. Yes, it is. I'm with him 60 percent of the way. I have separate reservations as a presidential candidate about his ability to administrate. I feel like the Senate is a talker's club. No slight against Ted Cruz, but if he had definitely a drawback from almost every Texas politician, which is that, well, a conservative running in Texas wins in Texas. Let me ask you a question, a quick question right there. He took on a sitting lieutenant governor in what everybody at the time called a real long shot of a race. But that's not quite what you mean. No, I mean you actually go to a state or a bunch of – look. You move public opinion? Is that what you're saying?

Yes. Yeah, 50 percent of America is not conservative. We in our little bubble tend to think that we actually won the last two elections and that people basically agree with us and if we only spoke to them and had the right message that's the thing we always say oh we had a better better message or better messenger that everyone will suddenly fall in line and that just simply is not the case so you would have been more impressed if he'd kicked off his campaign at his alma mater princeton instead of going down to liberty college you'd like to see him i feel like i kind of understand james's problem this guy went to princeton what's he doing at Liberty University? Liberty College, by the way.

Liberty College? I thought it was a university. Well, Google it. He popped it up. Well, because when you speak there, you're guaranteed an audience because I guess – I mean the students have to go to these convocations. Yes, no question. OK. And maybe James will be like a little test case.

It's Liberty University. You were right and I was wrong and I'm saying saying it fast and once, and that's it. Goodbye. Test case about what? I thought it very strange. I read – I was looking in the news, and I saw that there were – there's always waggish reporters, and they went and interviewed the students, and these are college students. Even if they're Liberty University students, they're still college students. And they thought a lot of them were like, ah, we don't like this guy we're for rand paul really and i remember thinking

like okay and then and then the the reporter kind of said yeah i guess that's going to be it's one of ted cruz's biggest opponents here or somebody he's really got to like he it's a cruiser paul i'm thinking those are i can't imagine two more different yeah i don't get it like how how are how are liberty university students saying not cruise yes paul i don't understand i mean no slight against either one of them but it just seems feels like you either like chocolate ice cream vanilla ice cream and these guys are not they're they both nominally on the package are different flavors of freedom and liberty but when you get inside one of them may may seem like it's sweetened with splendor and the other is the real thing. Rand Paul, I have a different reaction to.

Rand Paul, like in Westworld, I'm waiting for the faceplate to fall off and just reveal the diodes behind it. But I mean remember, guys, before the National Review cruise and we were all sitting around there and there was that panel before we got on the ship. And there was Cruise. There was Bolton, and there was Marco Rubio. And these were three very, very different fellows. And everybody got a good reaction. Everybody got a good reception. Everybody liked Cruise. But there was a certain seriousness about Rubio. There's a certain nail gun putting a flyer up on a phone pole directness that the man has.

And then there's Bolton sort of, well, he's not going to be running. So yes, we love him. We want him to be secretary of defense and representative of the UN and the press secretary, all those things. Simple question for the two of you before we go to our esteemed guest. The normal test of the top tier candidates let's say let's say jeb bush marco rubio scott walker ted cruz and paul and rand paul who strikes you as the most normal as a human being james i i'm thinking rob take that again just get i'm i'm who's the most normal

human being yeah just the simple normalcy test. They're all kind of weird. Just even running for president, you got to be a little bit weird. I would say – it's hard because I like Scott Walker, so I'm going to say Scott Walker. But I think Scott Walker is normal. I think – Jeb Bush doesn't strike you as a normal, rounded human being? He is.

He's a lot more normal than I think – he's a lot more normal maybe than he'll come off, but he's a pretty normal dude with some very normal problems. I would – it's hard. That's a hard one. I mean – I think Rob's first instinct is correct, Walker. Bush may seem normal and act normal and has aped the general characteristics of normalcy. But when you think about it, when you wake up, when you grow up in a political family like that and you see the influence and the power that your family wields, it's

a lot different than being the guy who just drops out of college and gets in the car and drives somewhere because he's got a better opportunity. And Walker's got that sort of Wisconsin guy, small town aesthetic experience that's normal. Eventually you can breed that out of a guy, but I think he's still got it, and that's one of the reasons that he connects. One of the reasons he keeps racking up victory after victory. Look at this. Wisconsin student, the ID

requirement, the Supreme Court declined, am I correct, to deal with it, so it's going to stand. Yes, that's huge. You're going to have to show something. They look at the the picture and you want to vote and they look at the picture and they look at you and they look at the picture and they look at you and they say what's different and you say well i got a beard in that one but i'm shaved clean now and you know why because i found harry oh oh he passed us right a fastball that rob didn't even see as it crossed i was like into

i was in the story i was the kind of guy who never shaved and grew a beard lumberjack-like in Wisconsin style because I couldn't find a blade that treated my skin right. But then I found Harry's, and that's why I shave, and that's why I'm different from the picture in my ID. Listen, folks, we joke around. Oh, we do, and we have a grand time here for it. But the truth of the matter is, Harry's.com was indeed started by a couple of guys

who were passionate about creating a better shaving experience for you if you have hair and bristles and stuff, okay? So, wonderfully balanced razors. That's part of it that they get that other places don't. Wonderfully scented emollient creams that baby your face after the blades have done their job. And of course, you think, why do they need the cream at all?

It does such a wonderful job without irritation and that's true. But it's part of the whole manly experience, you know, to put the cream on. Not slap some aqua velvet on that makes your pores shriek. Now there's nothing but pleasant pleasure from a Harry's.com shave. They bought the Blade Factory in Germany, 98-year-old factory now, I believe. And by eliminating the middleman, rhetorically, of course, not literally, they can, well, actually, literally, yes, but not eliminating in the sense of, you know,

bones found in a shallow grave. They can offer this amazing shave at a fraction of the price of drugstore bands. So they ship them to your house. That's the thing. You don't have to go down to the store and pay too much money. You can stay home and pay less. What a great deal. Starter kit's $15.

That includes the razor, three blades, your choice of Harry's shave cream or foaming gel. And as an added bonus, you get $5 off your first purchase with the code Ricochet. Ricochet. After using that code, you'll get an entire month shaving for just ten bucks. Shipping is free. So, why haven't you done this? Do it. Go to Harry's.com and enter the coupon code Ricochet.

And that's H-A-R-R-Y-S dot com. Coupon code Ricochet. Check it out and start shaving smarter today. Speaking of smart, there's a fellow we all know who is probably one of the most beloved Ricochet contributors and guys of all time. He's certainly the most iconic and beloved one in a national scale. And we're proud to have him back because we know this Wheel of Fortune thing ain't going to go forever. And he's going to want to have some place where he can go and be welcomed and loved and that's uh that's why we we once again hoist our glasses and welcome pat sajak are your glasses hoisted oh my cups well i gotta confess that mine's not hoisted

mine's kind of still on the table but theoretically it's you know virtually it's virtually hoisted well that's what i appreciate. I'll virtually hoist mine. Hey, Pat, did you see the Ted Cruz announcement? I didn't see it. I didn't see it in its entirety, nor in real time. But I've seen enough of it and heard all the hoopla surrounding it. And it's what happens. It's what's going to happen repeatedly since we have so many folks who seem to want this office. They will announce. Everyone will wring their hands and say what wild-eyed, radical people they are

and why they can't be president. There'll be a string of those. Yeah, that's pretty – we're in pageant season for that. Can I ask you a question? I mean I don't want you to – I mean I'm not going to put you on the spot and ask you who you like or who you're even leaning towards now because first of all, it's crazy to pick a person, but also it would be a bad thing to do.

Do you find, as I do, and a full disclosure before you get on i was saying i'm i'm i'm i'm i'm not decided um but do you find that you like i found that i liked ted cruz so much more in the days after his speech his announcement because of the attacks on him well yeah those attacks that maybe they, I like that guy. Yeah. First of all, if you ever want to know who's considered a danger on the other side, it's just measure the shrillness of the attacks. And, you know, they seem pretty upset about this guy.

So, yeah, you know, the enemy of my enemy and all that business. But I understand that reaction to it. But, you know, it's interesting. I mean, we have, there are a lot of people who are going to be vying for this position. And they're, you know, and each of them has some qualities that I admire. I mean, it's not a bad bench we have. And it's going to be interesting. I love the advice we get, Republicans get about nominating a moderate. That means like Mitt Romney or Bob Dole or people who will lose. That is – I do love that one when some incredibly, incredibly partisan Democrat reporter or operative says, well, let me tell you what the Republicans ought to do.

Because they stay awake nights thinking, how can we help them win? Yeah. We don't want it to be unfair. Right. Exactly. So, yeah, we have a, you know, we have a history of nominating so-called moderates. By the way, they're only moderates until they're nominated. I mean, you know, John McCain was the Republican that every Democrat loved. I mean, those are the words they used. It's a Republican we can work with. They liked him because he was tweaking the president at that time, President Bush. But once he became nominated, he was just as wild-eyed crazy as Ted Cruz supposedly is. And I'm old enough, of course it's not that old, but to remember that first, or I think it was only, vice presidential debate in 2000 between joe lieberman and dick

cheney and in 2000 the conventional wisdom was i mean the most anodyne the most conventional straight down the middle uh beltway liberal uh conventional wisdom was hey you know either one of those guys would be better than either one of the guys at the top. Both of those guys are moderate. And there's Charlie Dick Cheney. Months later, we're considered villains of the highest order. Villains? How about monsters? Okay.

Well, it is incredible how that happens. And so, as I said, there'll be a string of those things. But I like that. It's going to be an interesting, I'm looking forward to primary season. It's going to be great fun, great theater, if nothing else. Is your former governor going to throw his hat in the ring? He sure would like to, I think. We're talking about O'Malley from Maryland. Yeah. And, you know, there was a thought that he was injured by the fact that his lieutenant governor lost to a Republican. It's very hard to lose to a Republican in Maryland. But it's happened a couple of times in the gubernatorial race.

We had Ehrlich for a term, Republican, just a couple of cycles ago, and now another one. The great Spiro Agnew, let's one. The Great Spiro Agnew. Don't forget the Great Spiro Agnew. Marvin Mandel. There is a history of Maryland governors. Many of them ended up wearing numbers on their uniforms. Exactly right. An odd thing.

But no, it's interesting. O'Malley is going to be – and by the way, he loved taxing. I mean we have a rain tax in Maryland. I still don't know what that is. But I think the press will kind of embrace him. There's, you know, there's that youthful thing and he plays in a rock band and, you know, he's, he works out and things, things that are very important. And I think, I think he'll be treated well initially. And, you know, maybe throughout, I think he's in it. I think from the, from a press point of view, he'll be an attractive candidate. All right. I have one last question to put you on the spot. Yes, sir. Maryland Senate seat is open. Yes. Don't you try to weasel out of this.

Don't say spend more time with my family. I know what that Wheel of Fortune production schedule is. You can do them both. They can move that wheel to D.C. if they have to. Well, I also, the production schedule is such I could work at a bakery too, but I don't want to do that. Are you categorically ruling it out, Pat Sajak? Yeah, I've never been attracted to elected office, elected office. And I don't know why.

And I'm not one of those who turns my nose up at it and I don't want to dirty my hands or any of that kind of talk. I mean there are some wonderful people who have served over the years. But it's just not my cup of tea for some reason and I'm not quite sure why that is. It's just that. Just from what we have to realize, what we have here is we have a game, a professional game show host is saying, I just can't muster the falseness required to do this to make people vote for me. First of all, that alone, James. I mean, imagine the fodder we're giving them. It is. A game show host running for office. That alone.

An active game show host. Not even a retired game show host. No, that's not going to happen. But thanks for asking. Okay. All right. My yeast is rising now. I have to go. So we won't be seeing Patsy's blintzes. All right, fine. Incidentally, the water tax that you mentioned, it is such a thing. And it's for the Chesapeake Bay area, if I remember correctly, because people use

fertilizer, people have dog leavings, and so it rains and all the water goes to the Chesapeake Bay. So they tax people. And apparently, just the act of taxing them is supposed to make the water cleaner. I'm not exactly how sure it works. I believe they make a, yeah, there's some device that they build with the money that they put in the water that cleans it, I think. I don't know. I think what they have is an enormous coffee filter, probably three miles wide, that they drape across the riverfront every once in a while. Peter, you had a question. Actually, no. I'm just enjoying sitting here listening.

Pat, what's your favorite sport? And the answer is pole vaulting. So I go into this little event that we have occasionally in the nation's capital in honor of Mr. Robinson. And it's always a delight to be asked and I always enjoy going. But I never know when I walk into this lovely room what will be thrust in front of me. And in this case, it was an iPhone featuring a pole vault by your very talented son. And it was wonderful to see that, but it was just disorienting. It only lasted 27 seconds. I said, here, Pat, look at my son. He pole vaulted. 27 seconds. The rest of the evening, people were coming up to me saying, boy, you're really bored,

Pat. Pat's going around the room saying, ask me anything about pole vaulting. I wasn't bored. I was disoriented. When you walk in and you don't expect in a beautiful library or whatever the room is at this beautiful private club in Washington, you don't expect to begin with a pole vaulting video. That's all I'm saying. I was disoriented by the latest Ken Burns documentary, and I was disoriented by...

You know, by the way, can someone drop a note to Ken Burns and tell him to hold the camera steady? Yeah, stop panning. Stop panning. If somebody gives you a camera and says, here's a pole vaulting video, and it's not Allison's stock, people are really disappointed. But a Ken Burns's a pole vaulting video, and it's not Allison's stock, people are really disappointed. But a Ken Burns documentary on pole vaulting would be interesting.

Now, that would be – Nine hours, three of which would consider going over the top of the thing entirely, and the other three hours about sticking the dismount. And that's just the first night. Pat, let's talk baseball. How are the Nats looking? The Nats. The Nats are fine. But the Orioles are really your team, though, aren't they?

Well, they are, only because we've been attending their games longer, and we have season tickets, and we go there all the time. And I've been to some Nats game and know a lot of the people who run things there. And I love the stadium, and I just don't get there as often. And therefore, they look to me as though they're beginning, and I hope this doesn't happen, but there are some franchises that just get to be star-crossed, and that is you look at them, and you look at their lineup, and you look at their roster, and you look at the rest of the division, and you say they can't lose.

They're going to be among the favorites this year, and I hope they can get deep in the playoffs. Playoffs in baseball, you know, I grew up a Cub fan. Right. And I finally quit a while ago. I said, you know, if they get to 100 years, that's it. That seems fair. 100 years of rebuilding is enough. And that was enough.

You know, they proved that. What's interesting about the Cubs is they were losing. For 50 of the years they were losing, there were only eight teams in the National League. And there were no playoffs. You won your league and then you went to the World Series. You would think by chance they would have won something. It's getting harder now because it's a real crapshoot, the playoffs now, because there are these number of series you have to go through. And anything can happen. Anyone can get hot. And my point is that it's gotten

more difficult to get to the World Series, even if you're a very good team, which doesn't bode well for some of the... If you look at the teams that have won, they're certainly not preseason favorites. They're not the powerhouses. San Francisco's had a great run. You wouldn't call them a dynastic team. The turnover between each of their wins was enormous. Anyway, I don't mean to – Okay, let me ask you one other franchise. Let me ask you less about the team than about the owners.

Okay. The Los Angeles Dodgers. And here's what I have in mind. L.A., huge market, huge market. And for year after year after year after year, the Dodgers were only okay at best. They got bought. New owners are, what, in their third or fourth year now? Has the stadium been spruced up? Are they making more money on television? Are they figuring out how to tap into the LA market and make that team into something? Yeah. I mean, they're spending a

ton of money. They are the biggest spenders now in baseball. I mean, they're what the Yankees were 10 years ago. And seriously, I swear, if you came to them with the right offer and said, I'm afraid this will double your payroll to $400 million, I think they might go for it. Money doesn't seem to mean a whole lot to them. And the problem with that is I think they had a bad mix on the roster last year. I think they have a better mix this year. They're spending a lot of dough. They really want to win. The problem in LA, not to get too much bogged down in this, is you can't see them because there's a battle going on between DirecTV and a cable service out here. And for last year, about 30% of Dodger fans could watch the games. And that still hasn't been resolved. So that's a bit of a mess. But to

answer your question, yeah, they figured it out. That is, this is L.A. It's a big market. We should be spending a lot of money, and they're going to do that. Okay. Last question on baseball, and then we'll revert to politics. Oh, no, please. Keep going.

Should Pete Rose be in the hall? I'll be talking Star Trek next for you guys. So just keep it up. Pete Rose, Pat. No. And think carefully because I know you've ruled out the Senate campaign in Maryland, but should you change your mind, this answer, the following answer will matter. Really?

The Pete Rose answer? Yeah. People care about baseball more than they care about politics, don't you think? The answer is no, he should not be. And I'll tell you- Okay, go ahead. I'll tell you why. If you walk for decades now, including the time when Pete Rose was playing and managing,

and up until now, I believe, if you walk into any clubhouse in the major or minor leagues, there's a note posted on the door. It doesn't say, don't use steroids. It doesn't say, be a good guy, be a good citizen, don't chew tobacco, don't smoke. It says if you gamble on baseball, you are banned for life. That's it. It's like two sentences. And that's the only warning major leaguers get. That seems pretty clear to me.

I don't know. We have a living constitution. There's a little flexibility in how these things are interpreted. Wow. It's hard to misinterpret that one. It doesn't say you might be in trouble. Maybe you shouldn't do that. We'll give you another chance. It says don't do that.

And he did it and admits to having done it and now wants it not to count. So I understand that that's a hole in the Hall of Fame, but everyone knows the story. I don't know. The only way I can think of doing it would be a way that fully acknowledges what happened and he's sort of a, he's off to a separate, you know, so there's a special name asterisk under his entry in the hall of fame. The guy was a bum, but he could play ball or something. Yeah.

There are lots of asterisks in the hall of fame anyway. Uh, but my answer, my answer would, my answer would be no. Okay. So here we go. One last question now.

And there's a reason I'm talking about baseball and, and we talked about pole vaulting. And it all ties back to you. We went around the room at that dinner in Washington and people stood up and spoke for a few moments each. And I have to say, you gave one of the most moving sets of remarks I have heard in a long time. And what Pat Sajak did was stand up and say, I'm leaving for Los Angeles tomorrow. We're going to be taping a dozen episodes of Wheel of Fortune. A dozen times three contestants in each show means that I'm going to be dealing with 36 ordinary Americans over the next couple of days. And I would take any one of these ordinary Americans over the politicians in this town and the bureaucrats who try to tell ordinary Americans how to lead their lives.

They are good people. They're smart. They care about their country. And I've spent my career dealing with regular Americans. And I think the world of them. We're all 36 good people. Yeah. Like, I think there were two jerks. That's pretty good. That's

not a bad ratio. No, they're all good. In my business, there are a lot of us who fly back and forth, and in politics too, fly back and forth between the two coasts. I have the advantage of the people I fly over, I actually get to interact with thanks to my little show. And not to get too corny about it, but was it Buckley who did the, it's better to take the first 50 names up? Yes, yes, yes. And I feel that way too. I mean, my problem is that when I hear politicians talking about, you know, the little people, the regular folks and how real Americans and all this, in one breath, and then the next breath, what they're saying and how real Americans and all this, in one breath.

And then the next breath, what they're saying is, you know, they're really great. They're really the salt of the earth, but they're really stupid. And, you know, we really need to tell them what to eat and what to drive and where to send their kids to school and which doctor to choose. You can't have it both ways. They're either terrific or they're morons. And they say they're terrific because they want their vote, but they want their vote so they can make them better people by telling them exactly how to live. And that really eats at me because I know these people. And I'm not the only one. We all have acquaintances that go beyond the reach of our businesses. And they're good folks. And they're not all great folks.

And I know I don't want – I wouldn't want to pick a name out of a hat and say you'd be president. But they're really held in contempt by these people who pretend to be their champions and it really annoys me. Hey, Pat, can I ask that question a different way? Yeah. Because one of the things when we talk to politicians or people in politics or people even in creating policy, they almost always come down – when you're talking about something, they almost always say, well, you and I know that's right but the American people won't accept it. They're usually talking about, well, you can't – when they – for instance,

the Affordable Care Act, Obamacare, when they poll the various components of Obamacare, the components of Obamacare poll very well. They're very popular except for one part obviously, which is the individual mandate, the way – whether you agree with it or you don't, the way to pay for it. And so usually politicians say things like, well, we can't it's not so much we have to tell them what to do it's a there's a lot of things we can't tell them a lot of things they won't accept do you do you think that's true i mean that certainly seems to be the way politics is are going that people vote themselves lots of stuff and they don't really want to vote

any way to pay for it because they think someone else is going to pay for it. How would you thread that needle? Well, you know, it still comes down to the notion that they don't know what's good for them. No, I don't believe that. Look, we all vote our, I shouldn't say we all, but most of us consider our interests when we're voting. I mean, that's what voting's all about. I mean, you try to look at the big picture. But this idea that if we're patient with them,

and that leads to the duplicity, which is, you know, they're not going to understand this if we throw this all at them. You know, the Gruber thing. Right, right. And if we, you know, this is, if they could just see what this will actually do for them, they'll come along. So we, the trick is we got to, we got to massage this part a little bit. Got to go easy on that. And again, it all boils down to we believe they're kind of stupid. And not only can we fool them, but once we fool them, they'll thank us for it.

Right, right. That is Gruberism right there. Yeah, it is. That was incredibly shocking to me. And it got some play, not nearly as much as it deserved, I think, because it really did crystallize a lot of that, that thinking that's real common stuff. Look, we all, and I know Rob particularly, uh, because of the business you and I are in, we have tons of very liberal friends. If we didn't, we'd have no friends. So, you know, and they're good people and, you know, most of them and they, you know, they're, they're, they're, they have their ideas and that's fine.

And usually we stay away from politics. But boy, you know, you get a glass of wine in them and you start talking and they're pretty open about that stuff. You know, they'll say, I mean, they'll, you can get them to admit the way they feel, their superiority. I mean I've had people say to me, yeah, but we travel and we've been around the world and we've been to college and we know. They're really nice people but they need to be led and they'll couch it in a different place. But they're pretty open about it. I mean once in a quiet room without microphones. That's right. Quiet room without microphones, two glasses of red wine.

It's amazing what people will admit to. The United States consists of two parentheses of civilization in between which is a roiling rank rotten mass of, you know, of prejudice and ignorance. And, you know, you wonder sometimes if these people just weren't happy where they were and hence they decamped themselves to Los Angeles or New York where they would be welcomed by the rest of the intellectuals. But Pat, you got a proposal that maybe we should move Washington out of this little country. Yeah, let's talk about that. And plop it in a hot state. And I say not only do we do that, not only do we move the capital of the United States to Phoenix. I mean I'd take it here. I'd put it in Iowa. a hot state, and I say not only do we do that, not only do we move the capital of the United States to Phoenix.

I mean, I'd take it here. I'd put it in Iowa. I'd put it any place where it could be just ripped up from the root by the institutions that have grown parasitically around it. But if you put it in Phoenix and then reverted to what Washington was before the invention of air conditioning, which is a hellish place half of the year, you might have something. Government did less when Washington did not have air conditioning because it was a malarial swamp, a miasma of pain and disease. And I think if you brought that back to Phoenix and said, no, sir, you can't have any AC for three, four months out of the year.

They'd go home sooner. They'd do less. We'd all be freer, right? Well, I made that proposal with tongue slightly in cheek, and yet it's- It's caught fire. It's not a bad idea. There's nothing constitutionally that says that place has got to stay where it is. And the idea of even rotating it is, to me, fairly attractive. And, you know, Washington will be fine. They've got all those grand old buildings, as I pointed out in my

ricochet piece. And they'll, you know, they'll be, instead of the White House, it'll be the White House Museum. That's fine. And, you know, tourists will still go to see the monuments and all that. But, you know, some of the people who responded, I thought, had a better idea. And the question became, why in this computer age, why do they even have to meet? Why do they all have to get together? Because that kind of leads to sort of similarity in thinking sometime. I made a little side reference to being liked by the Washington Post style section. You wouldn't have to do that.

You could stay near your constituents to keep your feet on the ground and maybe they can keep your feet to the fire in terms of what you promised when they voted for you. And you could meet via Skype. I'm telling you that the lag on Skype would mean that Robert's Rules of Orders would be impossible because somebody would make a motion and then, you know, 15 seconds into it, they'd be denied or would come back. And listen, it is a good idea. And I like the idea of leaving Washington by itself. But again, Pat, you've got to think in the future, there won't be these wonderful monuments because rising sea levels will inundate Washington. They'll surge up the bay and Washington will be, I mean, you'll have to put on your hip waders and slosh around because of global warming.

Or so perhaps some say. You're not as much on board on that. Are you a denier? Are you going to deny that you're a denier three times before the cock crows? Or what's the deal here? Are you just a fun tweaker of those who believe? Well, that is fun because there's no more earnest group than someone who feels that the world is about to end. I would say this. First of all, I don't think it's the biggest crisis facing the world right now. If

you really want to get into a mega crisis, if you look at numbers and stats, I'm more worried about an asteroid hitting us. I mean, that's a statistical possibility. Well, you know, why don't we throw trillions at that? You know, that seems to be a more imminent threat. I don't know. I'm a skeptic, and that is, look, is the climate changing? Sure. Is it getting warmer? It might be. I don't know. I am, you know, we were talking earlier about being shrill about Senator Cruz. Shrillness always is a red flag to me. And, boy, the whole climate change thing has gotten shrill. And that, you know, I don't think, I don't know what to make of it. I don't believe that the scientists get together in a little room and say, how can we scam the public?

But I do know that reputable scientists are very concerned about being blackballed if they express anything except lockstep agreement with this. And I don't mean deny anything. I mean just ask a question. Question some of the data gathering. Question some of the information that, question some of the information that is sort of cherry-picked. So the question is not what's happening to the climate. Can we really throw enough money at this to adjust the thermostat? And to what end?

I mean, what temperature do we want? Grandma might be cold in the den. What do we do with that? So you're – I get it. You're denying science. You're exactly what Neil deGrasse Tyson was talking about yesterday on Twitter. He said that if he was abducted by aliens, one of the first things that he would ask them, if not the first thing, was whether or not they and their civilization had people who denied science as well, which A, is tendentious and pretentious and posturing his moral greatness before the rest of it. But two, what sort of idiot finds himself in a spaceship and doesn't say things like,

how'd you get here? What's it like? Why is there a third eye coming out of a stalk in your forehead? I mean, to come up with that question. You have just defined the earnestness of these people and their focus on this issue. Yeah, I mean, I could come up with a number of questions I would ask an alien. Like, how do you get baby aliens? I would ask that.

That would be interesting to me, how they do that, rather than science deniers. But that's the way they are. And I'll tell you what, I'll give them this. They are earnest and they can get shrill and they can get angry. And their anger has come down on me, but it's fine. Look, I'm a game show host. I love when they'll tweet back something or they'll send a message, you know, you're not a scientist. Like, I didn't know that.

I'm playing Hangman, and I don't have any Bunsen burners on the set. I know I'm not a scientist. I'm not wearing a lab coat. So, you know, but I'm expressing... But you used to be a weatherman, Pat. I did. You have credentials.

I did. I have credentials. I did. I do know that. And the other thing is you have to be careful when you talk about weather when it comes to climate. They get very annoyed, too, because they explained to you very patiently that there's a difference between climate and weather. And you can't, you know, don't mistake the two. Yes, maybe it's not as warm as we said it was going to be, but blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, and the oceans are swallowing up, whatever they're doing.

Here's my problem with this. Weather doesn't matter unless it fits into what they say. Exactly. That's right. If we didn't have this horrible snowy, icy winter we've just had in the East. If it had been extremely hot, unusually hot, that would have been used as an example of what's happening, what we're doing to ourselves.

When it doesn't fit into that game plan, then you ignore it because weather is not climate. In the southeast, in Florida, in the Gulf, the hurricanes have been unusually quiet since Katrina. And you remember Katrina. After Katrina, this was just an example of how we're going to get slammed every year. Now, had we gotten slammed every year, and I'm awfully glad we haven't, that would have been used to back up their point. The fact that we haven't, that we haven't, you can't argue it in the reverse. So it's, that's what's frustrating. It only, you know, the only data you can use is data that fits in with that whole notion. If it doesn't fit in, it doesn't matter because weather isn't

climate. Yeah. Pat, back to presidential politics, if I may, for a moment, but not to policy, to you and to Rob as television professionals. You mentioned Ted Cruz's presentation, as it were, so to speak. You mentioned Ted Cruz. Let me just name two or three names and you give me the first sentence or two at the most of advice you would give each candidate as regards his presentation, public presentation, the way he pulls it off, handles himself on television. And let's lead with Ted Cruz, Pat, and then Rob, what would you, what advice would you give to the Senator Cruz? I don't know. You know, I always get a little shaky on these grounds because, um, um, uh, I don't want to feed into this notion of cosmetics. I think the important – sometimes I think these guys – the question you just asked,

I think they ask themselves too often. Too often? Really? Yeah. I mean, Rob, wouldn't you agree? I mean, there is – I think people really respond to genuineness. I agree.

I remember getting a call once from – this was years ago from somebody who was working for a candidate. I talked to the candidate. He was appearing on Letterman and he wanted some jokes. He wanted me to give him some jokes to tell on Letterman. I said, you know, all due respect, they pay Letterman 20 million plus dollars a year to be funny. You just have to go in there and be a real person. That's hard enough for half the politicians I've ever met. It's just to be a real person.

And he wasn't really satisfied with that. He said, well, what if he asks something embarrassing? And I said, well, then you get to say, God, that's embarrassing. You get to be a person on the talk show. That's the best gig you're going to get all your entire campaign cycle is you get to be an actual real person, and this is during the Monica Lewinsky thing, and we expected Letterman to ask him questions

about what he felt about Bill Clinton in the White House, and this guy happened to have a lot of daughters, and I said, you can leave it at that.. And this guy happened to have a lot of daughters and I said you can leave it at that. Just say, listen, I have a lot of daughters. So I have some very strong feelings about it that I'll keep to myself. And I said the audience will totally get it. You don't have to entertain. And I feel like sometimes you get these guys that have some kind of media training and

you can see the wires going and you can see those guys like you think, Oh, I got to look at the camera. I got to smile now. And they have that, uh, weird robotic look that just creeps you out. So I sort of agree with Pat,

just be normal, just be a normal person. Yeah. Better, better, less is better. And, and that's,

you know, that's easier said than done. I had a, I was taping the show one day years ago and there was a guy who was a, a soap opera actor. It was in working on a lot and there was a guy who was a soap opera actor. He was working on a lot, and he was doing a pilot for a game show. And he knocked on my door, and I hadn't met him. Nice guy.

And he came for some advice about hosting. And I don't know. I'm not very good at advice. I do what I do, and I don't even know what it is. So I said, essentially what you just said, Rob. Essentially, I said, to be yourself, some fancier version of be yourself. And he didn't get the concept. He said, so you mean I act like, no, no.

No, no, no. So you mean I call on my training? No, no. I literally could not get him to understand. How do I fake that, Pat? So it is easier said than done. But I do see that. You can tell when the media handlers have been with them.

And that's what happens to a lot of our candidates once they're nominated. They get not only media handlers, all kinds of handlers. And suddenly this person is another person who's worried about every – not what they're saying at the moment but what the next sentence is going to be. It's possible they haven't been a real person for decades. Well, that's true. They could be inhabited by some kind of worm from outer space. Rob and Pat, you really and truly would not have a word of advice for Hillary Clinton, Rob?

Well, look, you can't tell Hillary Clinton to not be Hillary Clinton. You can't give her that advice because that's even harder than being Hillary Clinton. It's even less like that. What you can tell her is to, I guess what I would say to all these candidates is to acknowledge yourself and acknowledge what your perceived weaknesses are are to get out in front of them

instead of trying to mitigate them. So what I would say to Hillary Clinton is say, listen, I've had trouble in the past with this, is to be actually transparent about it because you can't lie to the camera. It just sees your uncomfortableness and it sees your meretricious sort of you know eye darting it just sees it all and so the best thing to do and and i think it's it's an opportunity for a candidate to connect with somebody watching who just wants to know that you're you're watching the same shows he's watching and if you say to people listen i know this sometimes sounds harsh but and then you say something harsh, people think, oh, well, OK.

So he's already thinking like I'm thinking. I wish – the argument – somebody at Ricochet posted – we talked about this last week, the great Netanyahu TV ad. It was great. When I said in the comment, if you can find – that was last week, so we'll probably link up to it in the show notes so you can find it it's great i mean it's really great ad because it sort of took all of netanyahu's negatives and it didn't turn them into positive sort of embraced them said yeah i am tough but who do you want to babysit your kids and reagan did the same thing too reagan didn't say i'm smart i'm really actually smart reagan acknowledged that people thought he was a little bit slow and he used that to his advantage by saying, well, I know a few things and I feel very strongly about them.

I'm not being articulate, but I think that's – you can't change people's – you cannot change people's minds about who you are. You could only make them think differently about who you are, which is a subtle difference but it's a big difference. And that's why Hillary Clinton is going to accept her negatives and her ads will consist of her stomping around in a walker with a cattle prod, getting people to go into the pens that she wants them to be in. Look, she's saying things like I'm a grandmother. She's doing all this stuff that just sounds creepy and weird. It is true. She is in fact a grandmother and it is true. I bet you she holds that grandchild and she loves it. I don't think Hillary Clinton is some kind of psychopath. I think she has a human, natural

human attachment abilities. But whenever she tries to do that, it's so obvious what she's trying to do. I'm now softening up my image. You've just you've just nailed her campaign slogan. I have human recognition, attribution. I can kill. Exactly right. You've just nailed her campaign slogan, I have human recognition, attribution. Exactly. I can kill. Exactly right. But that's why it's so weird. this question consciously, but somewhere as you're watching them, the question that comes to mind, would, would, would this person be talking to me this way if he were in my living room? Yeah. And, and most often the answer is no, they're on television now. So they're in their television mode. And I think, you know, you might have, did we ever gotten through a show without

talking about Ronald Reagan? But that was, that was, let's hope we never do. Well, that's true. I don't, yeah, that's not a negative,

I guess. But, but you looked at him for a number of things. And, and one of those was that I, you know, that he's talking to, you know,

he's on, he's on camera, he's talking to you, but you had the feeling that if, you know, you were sitting at a bar somewhere, you'd be having the same conversation in much the same way, uh,

that he wouldn't slip into candidate television mode and people recognize that and there is rob referred to an uncomfortability uncomfortableness and uh even though even though sometimes you can't know why you're uncomfortable watching this person but what it boils down to is this person is uncomfortable and it translates yeah it's a very hard thing it translates yeah yeah it's a very hard thing to be somebody else it's a very hard thing it's very few people can actually do it um and there are those none of those people none of those people's in politics uh you you just eventually whether it's our it's articulated or not or the or the voter understands it fully or not. You just can't be somebody you're not. We are correct. Barack Obama is the guy we see. He is an arrogant, jerk, know-it-all

dude who's extremely competitive and doesn't want to have anybody else get any airtime in the room and is a list keeper. We are correct. That was also Nixonian. These are not things that you can hide. The camera is just too close and people are watching your face. There aren't that many people who can control their face. There really aren't. And are making a million dollars at some poker tournament. That's why I like Rick Perry because when people were speaking and he was giving this little smile, the smile was like he was imagining how

they'd dance if he brought out a six-shooter and aimed at their feet. Listen, Pat, we know you have to go, and we thank you. We know that there's probably the mechanics who are tuning up the wheel and getting everything ready for you, and off you have to go. Pat, so what's the schedule now?

Where are you now, and where are you going? Well, I'm actually, I'm in taping mode and we're doing, as Peter pointed out, we're doing 12 shows this week and I'll meet 36 new people. And we're actually getting to the end of our 32nd season. This will be the last tape session.

Wow. Then I can get off this hectic schedule. But now you are going to be doing it. If I read my Deadline Hollywood or my trades properly, you are going to be doing this job for the next 27 years? Something like that. No, I just – I did – I've already – the season we're just wrapping up is coming to an end. And then I have one more season left and I actually just signed a new deal for an additional two years. So – but part of the deal is a hover round. So I'll be in good shape.

Good. That's good. That's what we need. Yeah. So I'm – I'm still enjoying it. People – I love when people say to me, well, aren't you all these years, aren't you worn? How do you do it? Well, they send limos for me, and they pay me a lot of money, and I don't work that much. I want to ask that question of my father who worked for 32 years on a truck. Exactly. Boy, James, I see all the things you write. You work hard. No, no, no, no, no, no. I sit down and my fingers move. My dad had to pick up 32 gallon drums of oil and put them over there. That is work for 32 years.

How do you get up in the morning and say, OK, I get to move more oil today? I mean, that's that's to me, that's really tough. Yeah, we're very, you know, not to be too corny about it. We're really blessed. I mean, the idea that this is some grueling thing. And plus, with the schedule I have in dog years, I've only done the show for five years. That's right, yeah. Anyway, it's always great to be with you. Hey, Pat, listen, between tapings, don't worry. You won't get bored. I'm going to send you a link to a YouTube with hours of pole vaulting. Good.

Because, you know, for some people, one pole vault looks like another, but to those of us who have really become aficionados, you can see where you plant the thing, and then if there are any splinters, I don't know what I'm talking about. You should be very proud of your son, and I actually enjoyed seeing the video,

and I don't want to hear any more about it. See you later, Pat. I'll watch a pole vaulting video if it's in a minefield. I think that would add a little element of surprise to it. My dog is yiping to be let out. Guys, take it from here, and I'll be back in just a few seconds. Don't you love Pat? Don't you think it's ridiculous that he's not going to run for senate

that's crazy i have been working on pat for i guess five years now to run for the senate for maryland and next year barbara mcculskey who turns 80 is stepping down there will be an open seat there's a republican governor in maryland yes you know he can you know he he is that guy like the pat you know have you know have lunch with pat sajak when i'm in la he's that guy he is that guy by the way so when you and pat were talking about being yourself on camera and pat mentioned reagan that i can tell you that there are two people i know for whom there was no difference between seeing them on camera and having lunch with them or dealing with them face to face. I know who they are.

Ronald Reagan and Pat Sajak. Well, also Rob Long. I'd add a third. Oh, I was going to say Buckley. Oh, and Bill. Well, that's true. That's true. That's true.

No, no, that is true. Although Bill – yes, that is true. Bill used big words even in private. He was paying the neck even in private. It is one of those things that it's actually hard to do. It's not – I mean it's harder to – it's harder to fake something and convince people of it than it is to just be yourself. And I feel like especially when you're trying hard to be spontaneous and be appealing, you're just better off being yourself. And I don't understand why politicians don't do that.

They don't say things like, I don't know the answer to that question or this question embarrasses me because it's too personal or I don't know why they don't get inside the cycle of the question. Instead, they're always outside it. Every kid, like every kid is paranoid about a YouTube video. All that is true. At the same time, there are certain technique things.

OK, so let me ask you a question. Here's a very simple question. Reagan always stood behind a lectern. Hillary Clinton always stands behind a lectern. Yesterday or the day before yesterday, when Ted Cruz announced his candidacy, he was wandering around the stage oprah-like which do you prefer well i think hillary actually does the wandering too you know what she does the last paid speech she made to the american camp association she was you know you know freestyling it she was out there at all um well i think older style is lectern, but the newer style is to be more preachery. And I think that probably if you were to take a cruise in that – at Liberty University, that's what's probably appropriate for that location.

And I feel like it's – the audience feels like it's more immediate and that you're speaking from the heart and you don't have any notes and this is all coming right at you and you get to use your body language. And I think that's probably a good choice. I would prefer a candidate – I guess I would prefer a candidate to freestyle it, not a podium. I would agree. I mean a podium does lend a certain amount of gravitas and legitimacy. But on the other hand, yeah, there's that. There are those associations.

Yeah. I don't know. I don't think you can picture. It is impossible to, let's put it this way. For me, it is impossible to imagine Dwight Eisenhower or John Kennedy. Yeah. Stepping out from behind the lectern and wandering around Oprah-like.

But those days are – those men are gone. Those days are gone. Those men are gone. Why should they be gone? Why should those days be gone? Why shouldn't a presidential candidate convey the implicit message that he's running for the most – the office of the greatest dignity in the nation? No? the most, the office of the greatest dignity in the nation. We can bring that back, but we have to bridge it with new style. We have to use the new styles in order to convince people that there is virtue to the old styles as well.

I mean, we're talking about national dads in the case of Eisenhower. And we're talking, I mean, Kennedy was a transitional figure. Kennedy, right, was probably behind the lectern because the back brace was there because he was in such excruciating pain he had to have something to grip. But I don't doubt that if Kennedy was acting today, he would take the hat off and he would wander around a little bit more and point light up the audience and be charming. So, I mean, you can do both. I'm not sure that, Peter, it's like I don't I don't think that it's a question of dignity, not dignity um i think that probably people expect there's so much art much so much more artifice now because we're more aware of it so we don't have these sort of staged events anymore um we don't have a staged presidential speech that then he gives the speech and then

he retires to his office and whatever happens in the office happens in the office we don't have that chummy um uh relationship with the press from the president anymore. Even the acolyte press for Barack Obama, they're still not the same thing as bringing the guys in, giving them a drink and telling them the real secrets and know that they won't print them. Everything is so much more on screen now and out there that i feel like people if they saw somebody who was sort of gripping behind the podium they said what the guy what's the what is that guy hiding um what for better or worse but it's just the way it is um the problem with our politicians

is that they don't that they're terrified of of being real because they're appealing to they all they're always measuring their words to appeal to a certain constituency. And in a primary, it's even more obvious because the tranches are cut even thinner and sliced. So they're even more clear. Now you're not really going for working-class married women. You're going for working- class married women who are Christian, working class married women who are single and also are not church goers. You're like,

it just gets so much more fine. The slicing, the language and the, and the speech making becomes even more and more irritating. Got it. Well, and it may be also that there's an element of the sermon about it. People that have the, the, the old style preachers were behind the pulpit and they rain down hell and bring stone upon you.

The new ones are much more friendly and you're right. It's like Oprah. It's like the new churches where they wander about. And I like to see both and maybe we'll get there. But when Rob mentioned about how you have to parse the speech now to go to the finest little granulated detail, at least we know right off the bat that Ted Cruz is anti-woman. I think this was – I think Progress came out with a piece the other day about he's anti-woman because he wants a flat tax and that doesn't poll well with women. Ergo, the act of disagreeing with what a particular demographic may feel based on nothing is now anti them which is it's absolutely wonderful to learn that a flat tax is gynophobic in its bones but this is what we'll get a little bit

more of i mean they're still going to try to bring the war on women up as much as is right right possible right right that's and and you know the the smart thing for them to do is to wait because you know the the democrat problem is the and the liberals are all in the media and they have to cover this Republican primary. So they're going to recover – they're going to cover it, but they're really going to sort of – I think they're going to exhaust their vocabulary. What they should do is ignore it. They have nothing – they have no stake in it. They're going to be against whoever comes out anyway. It doesn't matter who the Republicans nominate. The White House press and the mainstream media are not going to like that person and they're going to like the other guy, whoever that other guy is. So there's really no percentage in covering these campaigns for liberals.

They should just ignore them. They're just going to burn out all their outrage, I hope. I think they have an inexhaustible supply of outrage. Yeah, that's the one resource they do not believe. This is part of my national review column for this week, the online version. But I was reading a piece on some site about how driverless cars, as foreseen by Mercedes, are just going to highlight these stark radical inequities of the future because people will be able to get into them. They will have no windows, and they will proceed to their destination without seeing homeless shelters,

housing projects, food deserts, and the like. And I thought, as opposed to today, when the people in the limos being driven around have their faces pressed up against the glass, having these epiphanies like the hero of metropolis clutching their breasts and saying i never knew i mean so they'll get outraged about driverless cars they'll get outraged about the apple watch uh edition that to cost and they get outraged rob already is outraged about that although it wasn't any quality was it inequality what was it that bothered you about the apple watch it was too expensive it was and jerky. It's a jerky thing to own. Well, then read my column because you don't understand. You just don't.

Yeah, well, that's always true. Yeah, and you're an icky poo head for saying so. They're outraged about that. And my favorite yesterday, which had to be parody but turned out not to be, there was a conference in England of women getting together to solve all the problems in the world, and one of them was clapping. Apparently the sound of clapping was disorienting and unnerving to some of the people who themselves had come with traumas and triggers.

And so what they were recommending jazz hands instead of clapping, they just wanted people to just sort of wave their hands around Bob Fosse style. That's great. I knew that anyway, because there are strong individuals who can stand up to everything except the accumulated sound of human palms making contact in a rhythmic fashion. Outrage is inexhaustible because the world is just microns away from perfection. If only we could do A, B, and C. But then again, Peter, there's got to be something out there that has outraged you today.

We should come up with that. We should meet the left, outrage for outrage, and every week and have a ricochet, outrage of the week story. What would you – if I had to put you on the spot, what would it be? Today, this very moment? This very week. So far, your accumulated most outrageous thing that has struck you this week that you are – The New York Times had a story. I can't remember whether it was this week or the end of – it was within the last week.

Let's put it that way. The New York Times had a story on the front page that was implicitly attacking Scott Walker because he had stopped pronouncing certain words in a Midwestern Wisconsin fashion. And they were suggesting he had gone to speech coaching and that there was something inauthentic about and i just thought to myself unbelievable that they're now putting this on the front it just was it was just unbelievable i guess the new york times irks me every single morning because they they used to there used to be a distinction between the supposedly putatively straight news stories and those that were headed with the two words news analysis. And I remember this is another – OK.

This is only a couple of days ago. I remember – stop. Look at the stories. Can you tell any difference between the content of opinion in the supposedly straight news stories and the news analysis story? And I concluded there was just no difference it was all just liberal stuff the decline of a once great newspaper that annoyed me well at least i'll never say 97 000 billion for you peter you keep having this i know

i don't know why i don't know why i still go back to it. There's some respect. Don't worry. Don't worry, Peter. The next time that Hillary Clinton says y'all or slips into one of her little southern things, they'll do the same thing about Hillary, don't you? Yeah, yeah. A once great newspaper. Yeah, when? I agree. But, you know, fixing the exact –

The food section is excellent. I got to say, the food section is excellent. I find the whole – well, never mind. Rob, your outrage of the week if you had to. Well, I think my outrage of the week isn't a media outrage. It's an actual outrage that occurred in real life. I'm outraged at the outrage of the Obama administration that Israel briefed Congress. This was in this Wall Street Journal piece a couple days ago.

The Obama administration complained that Israel had somehow found out what the terms of the deal with Iran are. And they had the temerity, the Israelis, to brief Congress on that. And the Obama administration with a straight face decided that they were outraged that the Israelis had told Congress details of a deal that the Obama administration did not want to tell Congress. As David Frum put it, I think he put it really well, you know, whatever you think of David Frum, he's absolutely right about this. He said, the administration's policy seems to be be we won't tell congress what's in the deal we won't let congress vote on the deal and we won't let a future congress revisit the deal that is um yeah fantasy um and that it's okay for iran to know the terms it's okay for russia china france and the uk to know it's even okay for israel to know but it's not okay for

congress to know that is the position of for Israel to know, but it's not OK for Congress to know. That is the position of the official position of the Obama administration. And it's comically ludicrous, but it's also outrageous at the same time. It is. It is all those things. So did you guys, I don't think I've had a chance to talk to, ask you point blank this question, which is Tom Cotton and the letter signed by 47 by Tom Cotton and his 46 of his colleagues, 47 Republicans in the Senate. Did you guys find that letter confrontational? Did it make you queasy in some way?

I guess what I'm saying here is Congress is getting rolled worse than that, ignored by the Obama administration again and again and again. And you've got a couple of people. Rand Paul is one, Ted Cruz is another, and now 37-year-old Tom Cotton, who are fighting. And I find that just wonderful. They are reasserting congressional prerogatives, which are to be found in the Constitution of the United States. But on the other hand, we were told by the left that the letter was an outrage,

that it overturned 200 years of precedent. What did you guys make of it? The left is mad at Tom Cotton because he's the guy in the crow's nest pointing out there's an iceberg dead ahead. Yes. And this is wrong because this is a really big, cool ship and it's his first trip and he's just spoiling things. So hang him from the yard arms. For God's sake, we have an administration that is cracking every vertebrae in its spine to bend over backwards to make a nuclear deal with a country whose leader gets out and nods in a genial paternal fashion to the chant of death for America. I'd like to think he was on our side, this president. I really would. and I desperately cast about for information and

editorial facts, shall we say, to show me otherwise. But no, Tom Cotton's the problem, because he's looking into the dimness and seeing the shape that's going to take down the ship. Well, I think you have to look at it from both sides. I'm just saying that to see if I can

make James Sannix look like the murder one. Mr. Long, did you in fact say you had to look at it from both sides on a podcast? Guilty of murder. James Lilac, America's beloved journalist commentator. It's like – I have two things. One, I kind of don't – I don't like it when the liberals do it, when they get involved in foreign policy. I just don't like it. However, on the – on a scale of one to writing love notes to Daniel Ortega, this is probably a three in that all it did was kind of – what it was essentially was it sent the Iranian leadership a copy of the constitution with certain things highlighted in it, just so you know.

Right. In any event, the problem for the liberal – for the Obama administration is that the information about this deal is correct. The problem is that it isn't crying wolf. It isn't let's bomb Iran. It isn't anything other than you're letting them have everything and you are in fact de facto saying that Iran gets to have a bomb because that's what's going to happen. They're going to be – I don't know how many weeks from Obama if we give them what they want and we allow them to enrich uranium to five times its necessary enrichment for nuclear power. I mean as I said this last week, I'm still stuck on why Iran gets to have nuclear power too. We don't get that. Like Obama is against that here so i mean i'm not even at the nuclear weapons level yet i'm still saying how come we're arguing about how come the the obama administration is saying hey listen

they have a right to have nuclear power that's a good thing everyone should have nuclear power everybody but americans um so beyond that i i the problem for the obama administration is that this is not alarmist that these um that these are really the terms of the deal and i think those countries involved don't see any threat in iran having a bomb because they the threat will i believe this is exactly the wrong thing to do but i'm doing it anyway i think their strategy is nuclear balance of power in the middle east because they think that israel needs to be contained. And that's the only possible explanation for this.

They don't think that Iran is going to be able to put a bomb on a long-range missile. They don't think that there's going to be – they're going to ship a bomb in a container across the Mexican border. They think they're going to use that bomb to threaten Israel and contain Israel, which is something that all those countries want anyway. And for 35, 40, 50 years, the only country, the most powerful country that's been against it has been us. And now we have a president who is not a friend of Israel and hasn't been a friend of Israel forever. It didn't matter whether it's Netanyahu or Mickey Mouse or Golda Meir as a leader of

Israel. He would still be against him. He's against the state of Israel. So that's why you want a nuclear Iran. If he was the head of Sparta, he would be meeting Xerxes with a proposal to widen the gates of hell so that more people could pass through it at a greater clip. Well, we've passed through about an hour and a half here of many things and it's been great fun.

And I hope everybody stuck with us to the end here because now comes the secret word that if you type it in the comments, we'll get you $5,000. I'm kidding. What is coming is a reminder, however, that five is the number of dollars that you can save if you go to Harry's Shave. Harry's.com, enter the coupon code RECOCHET and get your shaving, a whole month's worth of shaving for just 10 bucks. And once you try the blades, you'll never go back. And, of course, every day is what you do when you shave, and every day is what you get when you get the Daily Shot, and it pops up in your mailbox with a wide variety of news

and clever commentary coming to you straight from Ricochet. It's free, absolutely free. And, of course, once you get it, you want more of it, you'll tell it to your friends, they'll join Ricochet to get it, and thus do we prosper. Visit the Ricochet store, by the way. Lots of great Ricochet swag in there that you can give to yourself or hand out to others. And as ever, a million podcasts, of which this is just one.

So join Ricochet.com today. Keep us alive and happy. Enjoying a community of center-right conversation that's the most civil and friendly place on the interweb today. Well, guys, it's been a pleasure, and we'll see everybody in the comments at Ricochet 2.0. Next week. See you next week, fellas. People saying crazy Doing what I'm doing

Well, they give me all kinds of warnings To save me from ruin When I say that I'm okay Well they look at me kind of strange Surely you're not happy now you no longer played the game people say I'm lazy

dreaming my life away well they give me all kinds of advice Designed to enlighten me When I tell him that I'm doing fine Watch his shadows on the wall Don't you miss the big time, boy You're no longer on the wall Don't you miss the big time boy, you're no longer on the ball

I'm just sitting here watching the wheels go round and round I really love to watch them roll No longer riding on the merry-go-round I just had to let it go

Ricochet Join the conversation Ah, people asking questions Join the conversation. problem only solutions well they shake their heads and they look at me as if I've lost my mind I told them there's no hurry I'm just sitting here doing time

I'm just sitting here watching the wheels go round and round I really love to watch them roll Let's spin, Pat! L! Yeah, four L's Pick that up, turn it over Lay it down right over that London trip down Okay

Nice song Mythological Hero Acheleus I can't accept that