A (2:57)

Well, I can't wait to join you for that.

B (2:59)

Okay. And then that comes with two potato latkes and a couple pickles of your choice. And then dinners is separate. I mean, it depends. You really want to eat for dinner where you want to go? I mean, the choices in Chicago are quite extensive. You want to go old school, you want to go new, you want to go high end, you want to go into the neighborhoods. That's the beauty of Chicago's culinary scene. So I. We'll leave that. We'll leave that one open for when you actually book a flight here.

A (3:28)

If you'll take me out, I'm coming. So thank you for that. Thank you for that.

B (3:31)

Well, look, I'll take you if you're paying.

A (3:32)

I'm happy to pay. All right. We got a lot you can talk about everything. It's amazing. I've listened to so much of you recently and over the years, pretty much my whole life. And so we're to try and get through as much as we can in a short time with a lot of important topics, since the topic of the day is Iran. So I just want to quickly start there. I guess really the main question I have is that you had this outrage after and you had this again. We're back to our political divides, Democrats and Republicans. So can you speak a little bit about your initial thoughts and then where you think this divide is and is it right or wrong and what you

B (4:13)

mean on the war, on this particular military. Yeah. So look, here's where I start. And this may be channeling my. My experience and my resume. I think the president and his team missed a major opportunity. And what I mean by that is, I think start from the premise that the country is stronger when we go to war, united. Look at Desert Storm under George Bush. Now put aside for a second the war. Whether should or should happen? Why now? What was it precipitated? Given the president's decision, he should have addressed the country. Because you are putting a major amount of America's future, its Youth at risk, let alone reputational, political, etc. And he should have said, look, I spent a year at the negotiating table with Iran. I wanted to solve this diplomatically. My choice was first, diplomacy. I said I wanted to resolve the issue of nuclear weapons. I wanted to resolve the ability of Iran ever to deliver those weapons, a nuclear weapon and its ballistic missile program and its state sponsor of terrorist organizations throughout the Middle east and Europe. My preference was diplomacy and the negotiating table. But I also believe that America's word is worth something and worth preserving. And so when we gave a commitment Iran would never get a nuclear weapon, and we gave a commitment they would not be a force for this, you know, disunion in the world and specifically in the Middle east and through terrorism and through its ballistic missile program, I was going to preserve America's word. Now, that would have brought some semblance of unity. Second, it would have actually reminded Europe and our allies that we actually try to work at this diplomatic. And you could score whether it was sincere or not. But they tried. And he should have taken political advantage with the American public in Europe with that. Second, I think the president made a horrible mistake, not just how he delivered it with a baseball hat and all that, but then jumping the tracks and going into the political regime change which has set up the military to fail. You're never going to accomplish it, as you've seen in the last 24 hours. And you are going to actually have degraded, if not done severe damage, worse than degraded, the nuclear facilities, the ballistic missiles, the ballistic missile delivery systems. And from Syria to Yemen to Lebanon to Iraq to Gaza, the forward defense or slash, the system that Iran spent 46 years building throughout the Middle east of just destabilizing. The rest of the Middle east has been degraded. That you could then say, we succeeded. And that has its own virtues. Now, that puts aside another set of questions. How he declared war, whether you have a War Powers act, et cetera. That to me would have at least put some consensus of the country around our young men and women who need it and given America some credit for what was done at the negotiating table. And I think we should have deposited that credit account of two months, three months, whatever you want to count the Wyckoff Kushner endeavor. And said, that would have been my preference. And he said it. And the weird thing is, everything I just said to you, he has said before that he wanted to do this negotiation. I think what happened at the White House and that delivery of that eight minute on social truth media was a real Disservice, let alone then in those eight minutes, the president, United States said he were going to war. So you have to have a war. Second, you're never doing regime change. Nobody has ever done regime change from the air, and we're not very good at doing it, even with boots on the ground. Now, the two ends of the goalpost are North Korea with nuclear weapons and we didn't do anything in the early 90s when we could have. And Libya, where we did take action and we have implosion. Those are your two goalposts. There was a thread that would get you towards saying we've achieved our goals and that has both political, strategic and military value and deterrence value going forward.

A (8:49)

Thank you for that answer. And you have answers for a lot of questions. This one I'm, you know, Henry Kissinger

B (8:58)

once says, does anybody have questions for my answers? So you get.

A (9:03)

Answer the question you want to answer, not what you were asked. That's a Hollywood. That's a Hollywood trick as well. So this may be impossible, though. I'm not going to ask you to try and understand or explain Donald Trump, although someone said to me, always, just whenever Trump's talking, wherever Trump's in the room, just remember Roy Cohn is always there. And I thought that was actually helpful. He's done so many things, and this, what you just said, highlights it, that he actually could get support for, whether it's broad support or at least congressional approval. And he doesn't do it. And he does it time and time and time again. I mean, he had both houses. I mean, he could have done so many things that were approved by Congress in this. I mean, it's one of the biggest. As one of the most savvy politicians, in some ways, maybe that's the wrong term, but. But, you know, whatever you want to call him, he's been pretty extraordinary, what he's been able to do here and his career he's gotten in politics. Now he just doesn't do it. And so what do you.

B (10:00)

Is there any you. I. Yes. I mean, look, this is my guess. I mean, it's. We're guessing, so I'll give you mine. I don't. I think once you adopt the mindset, he is not trying to govern, he's trying to rule totally different. I want to do it by executive order, try to pass legislation.

A (10:27)

Right.

B (10:28)

So he's issued more executive orders than any other president in the first 50 rounds. And some of them had issued an entire four years of a term.

A (10:35)

Right.

B (10:36)

That's not governing Because a lot of those executive orders dissipate when he's done.

A (10:41)

Yeah.

B (10:42)

Not like that beautiful ballroom that he's building with his name on it. But I'm serious about that. So like, even, like, look at it. Take as an anecdote or an illustration of this point when the tariff ruling came down on the Supreme Court and they said, well, you have to go to Congress. I'm not going to Congress. He has no interest in that branch of government. He has no interest in War Powers Act. He has no interest in anything that would in any way, either from an ally, a member of Congress or another interest group outside of his personal friends and donors, ever want to check with anybody. And so he is not governing in the way. Whatever you say. Take the first hundred days of Franklin Roosevelt, take the Great Society enactment by Lyndon Johnson. These are programs and initiatives that lasted beyond their tenure. That's not what's going to happen if there's a Democratic president with these executive orders. So he's not interested in governing. He's interested in ruling. And when you understand that frame, you understand the choices he's making or not making in the roads he takes, that's the best I can understand it.

A (11:53)

I think that's so well said and I think you're so accurate. You're Jewish. You've been described as pro Israel, your father was Israeli. You had a tumultuous relationship with Benjamin Netanyahu. But I'm curious, when the strikes hit Tehran and continued, I mean, do you have a personal feeling about that? I mean, there's obviously the history with Israel and Iran, the history of the world in Iran. I mean, what do you emotionally, when you first kind of heard those strikes, what was sort of what goes through your head?

B (12:30)

You mean right now?

A (12:31)

Yeah. Or back in June, I mean, I guess. I mean, right now, let's call it.

B (12:37)

Well, I mean, I, I started, you know, I, I somewhat, I thought about this today in the pool. I said, Israel knows or what they want to get done but don't have the means. The problem is the United States has the means but doesn't know what it wants to achieve. They're kind of inverse of each other in this state. I mean, Israel's, you know, the other part of this is even paranoid people have enemies. Was Iran trying to do damage to Israel? Yes. Was the forward defense, whether that's in Hezbollah and Lebanon, what they were doing in Syria before Syria had its own kind of military change of government? Yeah, they were. And there's no doubt about that. I don't think that's one view of Israel. I think, I don't think this president thinks of America's national security independent and separate. Israel's threshold. Israel's security is different than the United States. The United States built a system where we were, you know, the trusted between both our Gulf nations and Israel. That is not true for Russia and China. Russia was kicked out of Syria, lost their Mediterranean port. They were kicked out. They were seen in June as feckless. China in their attempt to bring Syria rather Iran and Saudi Arabia together has also been seen as a feckless friend. We have our own security interests and the Prime Minister of Israel shouldn't be guiding. He can consult advise but his interests are not our interests and never should be confused as the two.

A (14:21)

Right.

B (14:22)

And I do think how you think about deterrence and how Israel thinks about deterrence is one thing I happened as you well said in the beginning. I look back in January of 2009. I mean I got not January but in 2009. Prime Minister Netanyahu and I went toe to toe. He called me publicly a self loathing Jewish. I didn't need a war to know what he was about. This was over housing in the west bank going back 20 some years already. There will never be a Greater Israel in the same way there will never be a river to the sea. And the sooner we get rid of these fallacies and these fantasies we can deal with the risks that have been taken for peace. And I think be honest, if I was the President of the United States, given what he has done and what we're in, the only way to make some virtue out of where we are is to be very clear to Prime Minister the settler violence of the west bank will cease and desist. Now the Lebanese government just asked you to sit down and talk directly.

A (15:32)

Go.

B (15:34)

And the President of the United States to help America now given what's happened should be very clear to the Prime Minister this is the price that's going to be happening for what we're doing in Iran together. Because remember we rejected the Gulf countries advice. We have some work to do with not having consulted our European allies. We have some work to do with our Asian allies who are very dependent on Middle Eastern oil. And we have some work to do with our Gulf nations given we have chosen to ignore their advice and take Israeli Prime Minister's advice. We have interests that are not the same with Israel and they're much larger. And to quote President Clinton, when dealing with the Prime Minister does he know who the superpower is so that's how I look at it. And that's my reaction.

A (16:24)

Okay, I'm not going to ask you to make news here. I will say I do want you to run for president in 2028. I do think, I think, I think a robust and primary is critical for, for the Democratic Party. I think it's part of the reason we are where we are. I think your voice, your answers, your questions, your ideas are important. What are the factors going into your final decision?

B (16:51)

Well, one is, look, I think there's certain things that challenge and ail America. And the biggest thing is there's an anxiety about today and tomorrow and that we're also not taking care of business. I think today these tough times require a tough leader who can do the tough things. When I was ambassador to China, Japan rather, I learned a lot about Japan. I learned a lot about the Indo Pacific. But most importantly, I learned about America being 8,000 miles away and we're not taking care of our business. China doesn't decide whether we're comfortable with 50% of our kids not reading at grade level. We decide. China doesn't decide whether we've declared war on the greatest universities the world has ever seen for research, for illnesses, for quantum, for AI. We decide whether we're going to harass and beat up these universities. China doesn't decide whether we have an energy system that's built on the 20th century, not the 21st century. We decide. So do you have a way of addressing that? And do you have a way of helping Americans figure out how more Americans can get access to the American dream? And do you have what it takes? And I think I know something. I kind of say the next president is going to have to be very comfortable in both the classroom and the situation Room and everything between the two. These are very difficult and tough times, and they require a tough person. So there's that. And then I've run for office before. Six times. One. All six. And one thing I know before you make a big decision on an election is you got to make sure your head, your heart and your gut are aligned. And as I, you know, I'll be soon in Wisconsin, soon in South Carolina. I've been in Iowa, Nevada, Mississippi, Michigan. You know, part of this is listening. Part of this is a hearing, and part of it is figuring out that you have something that can address what you think ails America.

A (18:57)

I love you said, you've said effective leadership comes down to knowing why you're doing what you're doing and then having the guts to Follow through, which I think is. Is so well said. And obviously Democratic Party is going through a very challenging time, to say the least. Yes, I can guess your advice for 2026 per se, but I would be curious. And then in addition, you keep hearing about Democratic Party shifting left and going right and center, and I'm sort of curious to where you think, in your opinion, if you were the head of the DNC right now, which maybe you should be,

B (19:44)

what.

A (19:44)

What would be your advice?

B (19:47)

Look, I think 2028 is a different election than 2028. 2026 is totally a referendum because the Republicans own both sides of Pennsylvania. What I do know, in 2025, there have been 13 statewide elections and the Democrats are 13 for 13. In 2025, nine state House and state Senate seats have flipped and Democrats are nine for nine and Republicans are zero for nine. This midterm is like 94. Like, oh, six. Like 2010 and like 2018. High turnout, high energy among Democratic voters, low turnout among Republican voters. Independents breaking 2 to 1. For us, that has played out across the country. 2028 is a choice election, not a referendum election. As I said, there's two wings of the party now. Not what you said in the sense of ideological, but there's a resistance wing. Whatever Trump says we're against, and there's a renewal wing. We have to prove to the country that we're as capable as fighting for America as we are in fighting Trump. Both count, but not one over the other. Yeah. And I think our party has a bit of Trump syndrome. They're not thinking down the road, and there's a lot to resist on this president. But if you want the keys to the car in the next election, and if you want to convince 48% of the country that describes themselves as independents, the largest party in America is independence, we are the smallest of the three parties, Independents, Republicans and Democrats. So we are the smallest. And I, you know, some parts of our party think if you just put smelling salts under the nose, the New Deal coalition will pop up after having been asleep for 30 years. It's not going to happen. So you have to convince independent voters why you are right to get the keys to the car. And the other side is. And part of what I'm doing is laying out an agenda that I think resonates that way. And not only an agenda, but how you talk about, how you think about it and communicate about it. And, you know, the thing that I think energizes about 2028 and for Democrats should be this will be the first election in 20 years that will be about the future. When you think about make America great again and you think about build back better, it was about a restoration of a past. It wasn't about building a future. I'm interested about building a future. If you want somebody else that knows how to restore the past and bring it back, vote for him or her. But I don't think you should drive forward, go trying to look through the rearview mirror at 55 miles an hour doesn't do. And that usually ends up in crashing into a tree just to push you

A (22:28)

a little bit further. You know, we've seen a shift in, in certain places in the, in the elections with obviously Mondami winning in New York and with a member of the dsa. Now we have Nithya Rahman running in Los Angeles, a member of the dsa. You know, do you feel like the Democratic Party is being pulled or are those, is that very unique? And what's your take on the sort

B (22:52)

of that, you know, the man, the Manhattan. Jamie, the Manhattan Institute. No, conservative, but they did a very big survey the other day, released it last week or earlier this. Yeah, last week, 2800 Democrats. So it wasn't 50% of the Democratic Party base. Voters describe themselves as moderate. The other 25%, kind of more traditional pragmatic liberals. Now, Democratic socialists will run, but if that's not your deal, you got to go out there and offer ideas. You just can't run on some kind of historical fumes. Now, that's one. But I will say go back to the New Jersey gubernatorial primary. You had five candidates, the mayor of Newark, the mayor of Jersey, the president of the teachers union in New Jersey, and two members of Congress who were on the conservative to moderate wing of the party. Those 2 combined represented 50% of the vote, kind of similar to what Manhattan Institute said. And the nominee was the most conservative of the five. She goes on to win. And it's the first time in 50 years that one party succeeded itself, meaning it usually flips. In New Jersey, that didn't happen. And she won by a bigger margin than Governor Murphy won in his last election. So I just, you know, I'm not saying there isn't a loud progressive wing or Democratic socialist. They're going to go out and do what they're going to do. But that is not where primary voters are. And we'll see. And if, you know. But I say that I've said this before in a different form. President Obama wins in 08. And we all, including myself, started repeating this stupidity that demographics were destiny. We looked at the how President Obama won, what parts of the electorate he won in, and thought, if you look down the road 20 years, well, that's going to be the majority of the country. And we went to sleep intellectually. We stopped thinking critically about policy and about politics. I can see it in education that I care deeply about. And so as an example in illustrating that point. So you got to go out there and you got to have a battle of the ideas and we're going to have a rumble in 2028. And I think that's good for the country and good for the party.

A (25:25)

I agree. You have a lot of policies that you put on the table that I love. One thing I want to talk specifically about is the mandatory age retirement, because that's obviously something people talk about all the time. You proposed 75. I did like the fact that I forgot who caught this. But if you did run for president and you did win a second term, you would age out of your own term. But, but we'll, we'll. I'm going to let you slide a little bit since you're still figuring out your exact policy.

B (25:55)

I mean, what I said there also to the reporter said, well, you would age out in a second term. I said, well, we've discovered that you know how to count. That's all we know is that, you know good math, you know average math. But here's my thing. As I said when I announced this, it would be part of an ethics package to Power Clean and power Wash. Washington. I don't think the president United States should be doing investor meetings in the Oval Office or anywhere on the West Wing. And I think every member of a family, of the president's family should be required to put a financial disclosure down. I think no member of Congress should be trading in stock, especially in front of stuff that they're going to be voting on. And I don't think anybody in the judiciary branch should be taking a trip or paid speech by somebody who has interest in front of the court, full stop. Now, I also believe across all three branches of government, 75 up and out Washington, and every branch is starting to look like a pork knockoff of the politic Bureau. And that's why I believe and you don't like it, stay. But if my view is what makes you think at 78 you're going to get done what you didn't get done at 75, there's a lot of ways to serve the public that doesn't have to be elected office. You have a senator from Iowa, Senator Grassley, who's in his 90s. You're in California. California has Senator Dianne Feinstein. I love Dianne Feinstein. But by the end of her tenure, she was not functioning as a senator.

A (27:20)

It's a fact.

B (27:22)

You want to make money? Go into selling hearing aids in both the House and the Senate. You'll make a lot of money. Sell batteries. It's crazy. And yes, it would impact me, but I think there's a place for energy like that. And so I've said that. But as part of an ethics package for all three branches of government. Power wash the place.

A (27:46)

I love that. Maybe we modify that. You can't run for elected office if you're over 75. Just allows you to have that second term. If you get.

B (27:54)

Let me say this to you, Jerry. As I used to say in the White House, you're having a bad case of the for reals. Don't worry about it.

A (28:00)

Okay, I appreciate that. That's. That's a good lesson. You, You've proposed, you talked about a few things, but I do. You have so many great plans that sound really interesting to talk about. You know, I would like you to assume you're going to, you know, get most of your policies passed through Congress if you ran for president. But what, are I going to just

B (28:22)

do it by executive order? Why would I do it?

A (28:24)

So. So assuming you were. You were going to do everything by executive order, what are the things that you think are just no brainers that we need to do in our country right now?

B (28:33)

Well, there's. I mean, there's a lot. I mean, first of all, we didn't get in here in one term, but restoring confidence and accessibility in the American dream, owning a home, saving for your retirement, saving for your kids education and being able to afford health care, those are the core pillars that hold up the American dream. I know your family. My family. My kids are in their 20s or not. A college tour in the armed forces, they're going to be fine. But for a lion's share of America, the American dream is unaffordable. So that's the crux of the challenge, both politically and economically. I mean, I'll give this an example. When Amy and I became empty nesters, we decided we were going to. We both like to fly fish. We bought property in Montana. Why am I getting a mortgage deduction on that property? You think that influences how I buy that home? And yet you have a young couple trying to start a family and they can't afford A down payment or the mortgage. And I and the government remember what is a mortgage deduction is. But the rest of you subsidized me buying a home. That's what it is.

A (29:46)

It's insane.

B (29:49)

We have people using their 401k as a backstop for their paycheck. And you have people in California who have a trillion dollar pay packages from one of their three companies. We haven't raised the minimum wage since I was caucus chair in the Congress 20 years ago, 2007. That was the last time the minimum wage was raised. This is insane. So that's core. This is very interesting. I mean I've laid out on, I don't want to repeat, but on education, I would universally across the country put phonics back at the core. Do what Mississippi's done, do what Louisiana's done, do what Tennessee's done and get our third graders back to reading again and math. The data is overwhelming. It's a solution to a problem in which we've allowed a 30 year low in reading scores in this country. Reform high school so it's more college and career preparatory rather than diploma driven. What we did in Chicago, be average first city to give free community college, you got to be average. Second, 50% of our kids graduated with college credit while in high school saving their parents money. Make that a national goal. Third, you can't get your high school diploma without showing a letter of acceptance from a college, a community college, a branch of the armed forces or Vocational School. 70 plus percent of all jobs require something post high school. Make your educational system match the economic and the business world that we all live in today. Lastly, I did some on vocational ed for kids coming out of the armed forces. A $10,000 signing bonus if they go into the trades. So I don't think we should be giving 50,000 for ice. I'd rather get 50,000 for that. And then in a couple weeks I'll be doing something on community colleges. The next item is. I've looked at it. There's 21 Republicans on this and 21 Democrats. This is in the House. The Dignity act in solving immigration. We have in. Last time we passed immigration reform, Ronald Reagan was president. It's been 40 years past Simpson, Mazzoli. Every president's trying to figure out how to resolve this issue with chewing gum, rubber bands and some super glue. Every mayor who's doing sanctuary cities is also trying to do it. The Dignity act has 21Ds and 21 nobody's happy but somebody. We all walk away with something to me, get that done so we can actually have made progress on an issue that is really, really tearing the country apart. And here's a bipartisan solution to something that kind of gets everybody's blood blowing. And it's true to two principles. We're a nation of laws and a nation of immigrants. And we have to honor both of those and then obviously fundamentally upgrade our energy infrastructure system in this country. The weird thing is over 20 years or 10 years, China adopted Obama's all the above and we doubled down on only one source. And so to me, both the quality of the quantity of education of energy and then distribution and transmission of that is going to be key for the economy of the future. Those are kind of examples of the top of the.

A (33:08)

I love those things. And I've been studying some of what

B (33:10)

you all start with the American dream. And I always say this to people, the American dream, when it became unaffordable is exactly when our politics became unstable. So if you want stable politics and you want democracy, restore confidence in the American dream.

A (33:28)

I've been studying what you did a bit in Chicago and you highlighted some of those numbers. The Mississippi miracle that they're calling it I think is pretty extraordinary. I know you went down there, which I love. You just sort of going down to these places and exploring them. I, I am curious. I did see some stats about Mississippi and how it's sort of not holding maybe as much as they like. And how the numbers in fourth grade, they're kind of as they reassess them in eighth and ninth grade, it's not connecting as well. And I don't want to get too bogged down all the weeds of what's going on.

B (33:56)

But here's the thing to the Mississippi. First of all, Mississippi, don't call it miracle. You know what they call it? The marathon.

A (34:02)

Marathon, right. Yeah, I just heard.

B (34:04)

Okay. Second, they noticed that they're hitting their numbers on third grade and by the way, Louisiana, Tennessee and Alabama around Mississippi adopted it and all have seen similar gains. But they're honest enough with themselves saying we're not retaining the gains and they're starting to dissipate. So they've set up these reading clinics. So they are dealing with the challenge. That's a lot better than where we are, where a lot of other states have dumbed down their standards. So every kid's a third grade soccer player. Everybody gets a trophy and you're not doing the kid a service. If they can't read a third grade, letting them go to fourth grade you're not being honest now, at least to their credit. They're honest about their challenges in fourth and eighth grade, and they're starting to address it with real scientific knowledge and experience.

A (35:05)

I'm sure all the Emanuel boys got trophies when they were growing up by their dad. When you did things,

B (35:15)

you must be reading somebody else's documentary, because that ain't true in our family.

A (35:20)

Yeah. Another thing you talked about that I really thought was so well said was this concept of three doors that affect a child's life and education, obviously. Obviously being so important. But can you. Can you talk a little bit about that thought?

B (35:34)

Well, both comes from being a father myself, but also then a mayor of a big city like Chicago. And thinking about, you know, we say, you know, we never want to, as a party, make judgment on people's family or whatever, but there's this wonderful book called the Two Parent Premium. And kids from two parents, regardless of what kind of family is, do better than kids from single parents. And there's a lot of heroic. Both mothers and fathers of single families who are doing heroic work. But there's just. The data is overwhelming. But through all that, I mean, I think about it and I think about it both as a father and I think about it as a mayor, and I think about somebody that was once thinking about becoming an early childhood educator, that there's three doors a child walks through that will determine their lives and their future. The front door of the home, the front door of the school, and the front door of the place of worship. And each of those doors are determinative of the child's life. I can't. You know, one of those doors is closed. Doesn't mean a child won't succeed. But it's a different trajectory with a different altitude. It's just. And you can see what has happened when the family structure starts to break down. That's been around for 5,000 years. What happens to us? And I just believe when I think about it, and I think about the experiences we had raising three kids, Amy and I, what were the things that I think mattered? And it was a home of love, where values were imbued and a sense of value, of education, the type of school they went to, and that their Jewish faith was both a religious but a moral teaching. And I saw it around different parts of the city. And this city is a very diverse city. So I try to make a point of it, but it's my thing view of it that those three doors are determinative of a child's life. And if one of them is shut, it changes that child.

A (37:51)

I think that's, that's so important and highlights so many critical parts though.

B (37:55)

But you know, I will say our party, for fear of acting like it's judging anybody doesn't want to talk about it. And it's weird. I'll just take one about like religion. We're a very big party, unlike the Republicans, but more, more people identify as secular and have no faith as who are Democrats, which is what it is. But it's ironic when you think about like civil rights. One of the great accomplishments spearheaded by the Democratic Party started out of the church. And we've turned our back on the place that was probably the most significant social transformation in America. And we've become kind of benign about how faith and community and the places of worship can create those threads that bind us together in a period of time of divisiveness. It's weird to me, but we're scared about it. And we're scared like also about there is a value and an important value. It doesn't mean that a single parent isn't succeeding against odds, but a child does do better in a two parent family. And we don't want to be seen as somehow making a judgment about that. And so part of what I said is my own history, personal, both growing up being a father myself, but also then being a mayor of a big, big, big city with everything in a city and experiencing it. My conclusion is there are three doors that will determine a child's life.

A (39:31)

I think it's also so important what's behind those other doors when one is closed can do extraordinary work. I know you've talked about some of the mentors you had in school, obviously religious leaders. And there are other people I think in society who obviously can fill in some of those gaps. We could spend hours talking about your time as mayor, but I wanted to ask a couple questions. You ran Chicago for eight years. What was the single hardest day you had as mayor of Chicago?

B (40:05)

Well, there's a little look, I don't know about a single hardest day. I'll tell you the hardest experience and being a mayor is a great job. There's highs like free community college, where you see the parents, where you help the family in a material way, not have to choose about taking a second mortgage or a second job to give their kids access to the American dream. But the hardest is, you know, you get called and there's, you know, I remember instance, and this is not one because it happened over eight years. You get called and a child was at one of our basketball facilities at the park district and was shot outside. And we left those open for a safe, secure place for kids to play basketball and a child shot. And you run over to the hospital, you run over the family, and all you have to offer is a hug. And, you know, the, the loss of life or the loss of innocence is, you know, just takes it out of you in the same way that you run over to a hospital when an officer's been shot and trying to give comfort to a family, it's just got wrenched or. You know, I've had the situation like with Laquan McDonald here in the city of Chicago, where you thought you had done something and took care of something, and it's clearly deeper and more entrenched than you knew. And the only thing you can take away is lessons learned and applied going forward and stuff like that. So that moment where you can't solve something and it impacts the life of somebody physically as well as otherwise.

A (42:03)

Thank you. That's very poignant and well said. You, you know, as a mayor, you know, you're making really tough decisions that are making people angry at times. Who are people you're seeing on the streets on a daily basis. And it's, and it's interesting as a mayor, and I learned this from being. Being come friendly with Eric Garcetti and other people, whether that's potholes outside their doors or it's crime or it's street vendors or it's homelessness or it's. I mean, there's so many things being. And each thing is just as important to the people in front of them. And how do you sort of. And maybe this goes to your overall leadership thought, but how do you sort of make those decisions of sort of the. Those, those hard calls when you know you're gonna be facing those that constituents every single day?

B (42:52)

Well, I used to joke because I took the train into work, minimum two, sometimes three, four times a week. And I said, you know, when you're mayor, you only got two hand signals. That was it, people, hey, like, you know, that was it. That's all you got. There was nothing between. Nobody ever went like that. Either thumbs up or you got the one finger wave. Now, look, there are certain things. Let me give you what goes for. Somewhat relates to the other issue. I made a decision. We had about 100 schools that were under enrolled and constantly failing. And we had postponed this decision for a long time. Now. Parents were fleeing these schools, But I closed 50 schools in the city. Move schools within eight kids within eight blocks to a better performing school. Now my life would have been a hell of a lot easier if I had never ever touched that subject. Those kids lives would have been miserable for the rest of their life if I left them wallowing in failure. And every year that school got an F. But again, I want to be clear, my life would have been easier but I didn't run for office

A (44:18)

to

B (44:18)

see how well I could husband my political resources. Now not every decision is an A and sometimes you got to decide that. This one you're going to get screamed at and yelled at. But the pain today, the payoff is better and it's better for the kids. Now that was true about education for me. For other people that issue will be something else. That's an A. But you just got to make that decision at some point and then you think about how you could have done it better or whatever. There are things I evaluate but at the end of the day, could I have a stretched it, let's say that decision over five years. But that meant every year for five years we're just killing, we're just ripping ourselves apart. And you're never, you know, the other thing is given what people see in the first year, they may decide years two, three, four and five can't happen. So you never accomplished. So I've thought about it and thought about it but in the end of my conclusion was again like literally teachers went to my kids schools and held signs up. Your dad's an asshole. Your dad's a jerk. So it was not just. And I spoke to a mayor's group yesterday, we decide to run for public office, but our families serve. And there were teachers outside my kids classrooms with signs. But in the end of the day and the kids are strong and they were from home of love, the other kids lives are better going to better schools. Not isolated schools with declining enrollment, but better schools. And you make that choice and you, you live with the good and the bad and the toughness of that. And so you got to decide which one of those issues count. You can't do everything is the most important thing. You don't have the political capital for that. And not every issue is an A issue. You don't swing at every pitch, so you don't swing at every pitch. Right. We have a couple minutes. So I know if you're trying to take questions.

A (46:16)

No, no, I'm going to power through a couple more and then get you out of here. You're gonna have to come back for a part Two, though. I'm gonna hold you to that. I'm.

B (46:24)

I'm lucky I get to schedule it.

A (46:26)

You can schedule whenever you want to. I'm lucky to have two great brothers. I'm incredibly close with the three. The three Emanuel brothers are as accomplished as a trio gets. Um, do you guys, like. Do you have. Do you. Do you guys. Do you guys speak all the time? Do you have roles you play in each other's lives? Are you toughest critics, your best, your biggest champions?

B (46:45)

You're probably critics, but I actually just missed two. Not miss. I told our. He and I are playing phone tag today. We haven't connected, but, you know, we talk very regularly. Our. You know, we're as competitive with each other as you. As if you're running against somebody for public office. That said, you attack one of us, you're dead to all three of us. So just. You want to take on Ari, that's fine. But know that there's two others coming behind. Now, I'll be the first to whack Ari, but that's inside the family. Outside the family, that's a different deal. And we're, you know, we're competitive, and we're competitive, what we do, but we're also honest with each other.

A (47:25)

For some reason. I feel like Zeke is going to be the toughest. I don't know why he feels like. I don't know why. I just feel like he's the silent. The silent but deadly type. But his new book is great, by the way.

B (47:37)

I tease him all the time about, you know, Zeke. Zeke's bedside manner is, you know, you're going to die. Could be three weeks, four or three months. I don't know. But you're going to die. Okay. That's his idea of, like, being helpful. So.

A (47:49)

Okay, last two questions. You talk about reading all the time. You gave your. Your kids assignments every summer. You guys read books. What are the three books that all Americans must read?

B (47:59)

That's. That. That. No. Let's see. Well, they should. I don't know if there's a book, but they should all read the Declaration of Independence. That's number one, I think, in literature. Now, I'm a Faulkner fan, but I don't think that's for everybody. So you say Moby Dick was kind of is an essential American piece of literature. And then something. On this, there's a lot of differences, but on the Civil War, I would say anything about Abraham Lincoln, but you're making me narrow down a body of work across the 250 years but link, I mean anything about Lincoln in his 10 years presidency, but having read about 40 books myself, I can't pick one. But those are the top. I would something out of a literature willow. Catherine Hawthorne for I'm going to buy I'm biased Faulkner, but but definitely are given what's going on our founding document, the Declaration of Independence. Those are the three.

A (49:10)

Okay, last question. I'm a big proponent of action items. I like people to listen to what we're talking about and then go do something. So if you were, what. What are you telling people when you speak right now? Whether it's to this audience or to just your speeches, like, what do people need to be doing? I always say it' like one little thing. Cory Booker says, don't let your inability to do everything stop you from doing something. Like, what's that one thing?

B (49:33)

Find a point in your life and give one year back to this great country. Everybody on this podcast, whatever, whoever's listening, we won the lottery. We're Americans, greatest country in the world. Give something back. Don't tell me what rights you have because every one of those rights comes with a responsibility to the greater good. You're all fortunate. We're all fortunate. We're in a very top sphere of life. Give something to this country that has given you so much.

A (50:05)

Okay, I thank you.

B (50:07)

It could be tutoring, it could be cleaning up a river. I don't care. It doesn't have to be a life thing, but it has to be some part of your life.

A (50:14)

Okay, thank you very much. Rahm. I'm not gonna call you the name you told me to call you, but thank you for your time and thank you for everything you're doing and keep it up and keep pushing people. And I look forward to eating with you in Chicag.

B (50:27)

All right, Manny's good for your heart.

A (50:28)

Manny's. There it is. Okay, bye.

B (50:30)

See you, buddy.

A (50:31)

Bye. Thanks for tuning in to this week's episode of Lunch with Jamie. As always, be sure to subscribe to my newsletter@jamieslist.com for my thoughts on all things food, pop culture, politics, and more. And remember to join these online conversations and ask my guests questions in real time. Sign up to get a paid subscriber. You can listen on Apple podcasts, Spotify or Audible and be sure to leave a review. Thanks and see you next time.