← The Josh Hammer Show
Loading summary
Transcript6 lines
- [00:00]
Grainger Announcer
This is the story of the 1. As a maintenance tech at a university, he knows ordering from multiple suppliers takes time away from keeping their arena up and running. That's why he counts on Grainger to get everything he needs, from lighting and H vac parts to plumbing supplies, all in one place. And with fast, dependable delivery, he's stocked and ready for the next tip off. Call 1-800-GRAINGER click granger.com or just stop by Granger for the ones who get it done.
- [00:30]
Josh Hammer
Well, there's been enough whiplash on the Trump foreign policy befitting for a Six Flags amusement park roller coaster ride. So what exactly is the Trump administration doing when it comes to Iran and foreign policy more broadly? I'm Josh Hammer and this is Josh Hammer Show. Folks, hope you had a wonderful Memorial Day weekend. As we said on Thursday show, hope that you took at least a moment or two yesterday on Memorial Day to think about those who've given it all for this wonderful country there. Memorial Day weekend is the unofficial start of summer. It's a great time to fire up the barbecue and to go swimming or to go to the beach or to Watch the Indianapolis 500 if you're like me and you're a big auto racing fan. But it really is a time to appreciate the fall and I hope that you did exactly that. I've been off the grid more or less for a handful of days now. Friday was the Jewish holiday of Shavuot. I'm actually also moving. This is a big week here in the Hammer household. This episode right today of the Josh Hammer show will be the final episode filmed right here in this particular environs where I am. We are moving out of our apartment into a new home that we have just purchased. More on that towards the end of today's show. But for now, just put a footnote that if you hear any unusual noises in the background on today's show, don't be alarmed. There is nothing particularly wrong going on here. It is just the fact that we are literally moving as in today. So big stuff happening here on a personal front. But I want to continue this theme on the show today. On Friday show, we had Lila Rose of Live Action for a long back and forth and a really substantive and meaningful back and forth with Lila when it comes to the state of the pro life movement, where we are, where we still have to go, ultimately getting us to the necessary, the only logical indispensable endpoints of our long struggle, which is abortion, abolition in America. And then on yesterday's show on Monday we had the great Dana Lash, one of this nation's most important Second Amendment advocates, talking about the right to bear arms. What are the philosophical foundations of it? Why is it so important there? So I want to continue on today's show this theme of first principles. I love first principles. I love the fact that this is America 250. And it's a real, it's a great time to think back to what built this country there, what built our movement, the conservative movement. What should we think of as conservatives when it comes to issues like the right to life, when it comes to issues like the right to bear arms? And say I want to talk a little bit about foreign policy, which has obviously been in the news. There's been a lot of back and forth when it comes to Donald Trump and the topic of Iran. Is there going to be a deal? Is it going to be a reinitiation of hostilities? Well, this is a little stressful, frankly for me on a personal level, for the very simple reason, actually that I'm supposed to fly this Saturday evening over to Israel. Actually I'm supposed to be co leading a trip next week. So if there is a war again, I have no idea if that's going to happen. So on a personal level, I'm paying very close attention, of course, for that reason and other reasons as well there. But I want to zoom out and talk a little bit really about foreign policy, first principles. So much of our foreign policy discourse when it comes to Iran, when it comes to China, when it comes to radical Islam, when it comes to really any of the issues facing the United States and the American national interests, so much of our foreign policy discourse gets dumbed down to this utterly ridiculous faux dichotomy to this. You're either X or you're Y. And there's nothing in the middle. There's nowhere in the middle there. I speak of this ridiculous dichotomy between let's call on the one hand, hawks versus doves or on the other hand you have neocons versus isolationists or insert your faux, artificial, artificially contrived foreign policy dichotomy of choice and the big takeaway that I want to instill in you and hopefully by the end of today's show you will understand this is that that is frankly pennantly ridiculous. There is no such thing as a, as a fake two way choice when it comes to American foreign policy. There is no such thing as a one size fits all solution when it comes to how you should view the world and all of the world's various problems. And as those problems pertain to the American national interest now certainly personally, when I was first forming political opinions and this happened at a fairly young age because I've been a political animal for essentially my entire life there. I really started to come of age during the Bush administration, into the Obama administration back when I was growing up in suburban New York City. So I was 12 and a half years old when 911 happened on September 11, 2001. I saw the smoke from the Twin Towers and my God, I knew that radical Islam was evil and that there was evil in this world and that only good can defeat evil. So to be clear, back then at the tender age of 12 to 13, when I really didn't know a whole lot better, I absolutely was, as were many adults in the room, both literally and proverbially, I was a supporter of the Iraq war. I was a supporter of Afghanistan and many foreign conflicts like that. Part of the Bush administration's approach to the so called global war on terror. The issue is that it did not work. The issue is that that foreign policy agenda ended up in tears and failure and in no shortage of blood and treasure as well. Trillions and trillions of dollars ultimately going down the drain when it comes to America's failed attempts, failed attempts to sculpt Madisoni and Jeff Smithsonian Western style enlightenment to liberal democracies out of the sands of Iraq or the Taliban infested mountainous terrain of Afghanistan. Today Iraq is in some ways simply an Iranian satrapy. It's struggling to regain its independence still some 20 plus years after the downfall of Saddam Hussein and Afghanistan was sent back to the Taliban, was recaptured by the Taliban within days, possibly within hours of Joe Biden's catastrophic withdrawal from Kabul in August 2021. Those, those images of the evacuation, the embassy looking a heck of a lot like the evacuation of Saigon and the fall of Saigon and Hanoi and the terrible end to America's involvement in the Vietnam War some half century ago. So surely that is not the right way to think of foreign policy. But on the other hand, on the other hand, suffice it to say that America cannot think of foreign policy on the other extreme either. The notion that America, which is a grand superpower, the notion that we can simply just duck our head in the sand and just pretend that the world's problems don't exist is ludicrous. I hear a lot of people, a lot of people these days, whether it's Iran, whether it's Cuba then as well, or some other issue there, they will Just pound their chest and say America first, baby, America First. And then they don't actually take that logic to the next step as to what America first means. America first, you see, is somewhat axiomatic. I wrote a comment about this actually two years ago. Everyone is really America first. As I wrote quote, in a literal sense, America first is one of the most anodyne, uncontroversial political slogans in decades. It is, or at least should be axiomatic. It should be self evident that the United States ought to place its own interests first in everything it does, from its trade deals, to its immigration policy, to its diplomacy and foreign policy, to its membership in international institutions and and so on. To pursue an America first foreign policy then is to make decisions through the singular lens of what is best for the US national interest. Such a foreign policy approach is often dubbed realist, but is also just common sense. Indeed, because it is such a basic analytical prism, America first does not necessarily get us very far when it comes to making actual foreign policy decisions. Any sober national interest centered foreign policy should look skeptically at ideological interventionism, whether it takes the form of dogged neoconservatism or starry eyed liberal humanitarianism. Crucially, however, America first should look just as skeptically at ideologically driven foreign policy from the other end of the spectrum, meaning doctrinaire isolationism. So in other words, to have an America first foreign policy actually means to reject both sides of this ridiculous dichotomy that we've set up here means to reject the ideological extremes of neoconservatism or ultra, ultra instinctual hawkishness, or isolationism or ultra ultra instinctual dovishness. More on that in just a moment. But for now folks, I want to tell you just about one of my sponsors for today's show, which is Angel Studios. You know, if you are like me, you probably have a lot of questions to this day about COVID 19. How did it happen and frankly, were we lied to? Just a few weeks ago, actually there was a CIA whistleblower testifying in the United States Congress to the fact that there was a massive cover up, a massive cover up about the origins of COVID 19. Frankly, it seems a lot of folks knew that the lab leak theory was the most likely source of the origins of the virus there. And it was covered up there. Well, there's a brand new investigative documentary out from Angel Studios. It's called thank you Dr. Fauci that examines the public health, scientific accountability and the possibility of indeed one of the biggest coverups in modern political and medical history. Thank you. Dr. Fauci has whistleblower interviews. There are intelligence experts, thousands of pages of documents. And the film challenges viewers to think deeper about the narratives we were told. So if you, like me, are still looking, are still searching for the truth when it comes to COVID 19, then you should go ahead and stream. Thank you, Dr. Fauci. On Angel Join the conversation. You can become an Angel Guild member today. Join@angel.com Hammer Again, that's angel.com Hammer Check out the documentary film. Thank you Dr. Fauci. You are not going to regret it. Angel Studios is a sponsor for today's show. So America first foreign policy, which the Trump administration has largely intuited, really since their first term, means rejecting both of the ideological extremes of neoconservatism on the one hand, and isolationism on the other hand. It means that America is a country and is a realist enterprise. And accordingly, there we are not going to take action on the world stage unless there is a concrete, a concrete connection to the American national interest. Now, the debate happens there somewhere in the murky middle as to just how direct a threat to the American national interest is. For instance, do we need an absolutely imminent threat that there is a 99% chance of likelihood, God forbid, God forbid, that there's going to be a missile attack or a terrorist attack or a 911 style, God forbid, God forbid, mass casualty event tomorrow? Is that really the threshold in order for America to act preemptively to try to forestall such tragedy? Well, I would argue surely not. But that, in short, is something along those lines as to where the actual debate should happen, at least I'm not saying it happens there every day, but that is really where it should happen. There is in trying to derive and to articulate and to conclude some sort of forward looking prospective action and tangible measures when it comes to the connection between the immediacy of the threat and then drawing that connection between what kind of action would be necessary at a certain time in order to forestall that threat. That is what America does on the world stage. That is what we do when it comes to threats like Iran. That is what we do when it comes to threats like Venezuela, as Nicolas Maduro, the illegitimate leader there in Caracas, found out the hard way back when he was deeply uncooperative when it came to all of the narco terrorists shipping all sorts of fentanyl and other drugs there in the southern Caribbean there, back when he was cooperating with the Chinese and the Russians and all sorts of other terrible actors there. And frankly, it seems like that's what Cuba is going to find out the hard way as well. Raul Castro was just indicted in Miami here in South Florida last week for his crimes against, well, frankly, against humanity, but also against American citizens when it came to the shoot down of an American rescue mission some 30 years ago in 1996. And this is how America thinks about China in many ways as well, some confusion about the recent Trump Xi Jinping summit over in Beijing. But certainly when Donald Trump thinks about China, he's not doing it from an ideological starry eyed romantic lens. He understands that China's a threat. He understands that America is a nation state and that we will act in the world stage to protect and secure our threat. So what does any of this mean? There's been a lot of theory. What does it mean in actual practice when it comes to American foreign policy, especially including the current debate overrun? Well, I will get into that after a short break, folks. We'll be right back.
- [12:38]
Grainger Announcer (Female)
This is the story of the 1. As a procurement manager for a hospital system, she keeps every facility in her network stocked and ready. That's why she counts on Grainger to be her single source for thousands of products, from disinfectants to lighting, air filters and more. And with fast, dependable delivery, Grainger helps her keep every facility stocked, safe and running smoothly. Call 1-800-GRAINGER clickranger.com or just stop by Granger for the ones who get it done.
- [13:11]
Josh Hammer
Welcome back. So we were talking before the break about what America first actually is and what it is not. America first is a very simple rudimentary proposition that when it comes to how to lead the greatest country known to man, the country that we just honored the fallen of yesterday on Memorial Day, when it comes to the United States, that our leaders should act in a way that is America First. But again, that doesn't actually go a very long ways, frankly. If you are not America first, if you are global community first there, then what are you doing actually putting your oath, your hand on the Constitution and taking oath of office in the first place? The entire notion of the American social compact, of American constitutionalism, of the American experiments at large, is premised upon some notion, some fealty, some loyalty to America First. After all, the preamble of the Constitution, one of the most underappreciated texts of the entire Constitution, begins with the famous phrase we the people. It's not we the citizens of the world, we the masses, we the globalists, we the moral universalists. No, it's we the people and that people are Americans, the people who have built this country. So America first as a saying doesn't really go very far. So what does it actually mean necessarily on the world stage? Well, the case that we've started, built and are going to continue to build, build now is that it means that you should act in a hard headed realist fashion in a way that has a logical nexus between the, the imminency of a perceived threat and then an action that corresponds to that particular threat. But crucially, crucially, crucially again America does not act in ideological fashion. This was the fatal error of the Bush administration. This is the fatal, ever, the fatal error of what became known as the global war on terror. Consider actually the Bush administration's second inaugural address. It was really, really, really something there. This is George W. Bush speaking in January of 2005. And this was when he articulated what became known as the Freedom Agenda. If you've ever been to the Bush Presidential Library in Dallas, Texas, you know exactly what I'm talking about. There was a whole exhibit on it. So Bush says here, he says, eventually the call of freedom comes to every mind and every soul. Bush spoke in January 2005. He continued, quote, we go forward with complete confidence in the eventual triumph of freedom. Not because history runs on the wheels of inevitability. It is human choices that move events, not because we consider ourselves a chosen nation. God moves and chooses as he wills. We have confidence because freedom is the permanent hope of mankind. The hunger in dark places, the longing of the soul. This in short is absolute garbage. This is total philosophical gobbledygook. It is simply not true that freedom is the permanent hope of mankind. There are any number of cultures throughout the world such as Shriya Observant Shriya abiding Islamist cultures such as various sub Saharan tribal African warlords. Frankly, when it comes to the ethnic Han supremacy of the Chinese Communist Party as indicated by their soft genocide of the Uyghur Muslims out in Xinjiang province in western China, there are any number of cultures and civilizations that simply do not subscribe. As Bush famously, or infamously I should say, said, that freedom is the permanent hope of mankind. There is no universal longing of the soul for freedom. Rather there is an idiosyncratic Western biblical inheritance premised upon the two great biblical religions of Judaism and Christianity. That is the reason that we sometimes mistakenly believe that our inheritance and our values are universal. But it was that inheritance, for instance, that gave Thomas Jefferson the moral confidence, the moral self confidence to write that we hold some of These truths to be self evident that all men are created equal. He's essentially just taking Genesis 1:27. In Hebrew we would say besel melchim, the divine image imperative, imago DEI in the Latin, this notion of man being made in God's image. That is the Western biblical ecumenical inheritance. And that is what Jefferson was relying on to famously write the Declaration which we celebrate the 250th anniversary of this July 4th. So what is a more sober, a more, more restrained, a more Burkian conservative view of foreign policy and of America's role in the world and America's role on the world stage? Well, one of my favorite speeches and I've definitely referenced it on the show any number of times, I want to read from it again here because it's highly instructive. One of my favorite speeches on foreign policy and how Americans should think of as it was given 200 plus years ago by a man who would become president shortly thereafter. John Quince Yams. At the time he was just serving as Secretary of State to President James Monroe. This is one of the most famous speeches on foreign policy. It's probably the greatest speech of John Quincy Adams career. It's his 1821 monsters to destroy speech. So he is speaking here about how America ought to view the world here. And he says in relevant portion, quote, wherever the standard of freedom and independence has been or shall be unfurled, there will her heart, her benedictions and her prayers be. Speaking about America. So there will her heart, her benedictions and her prayers be. But she goes not abroad in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well wisher to the freedom and independence of all. She is the champion and vindicator only of her own. So we only vindicate our own conception of liberty. That's the purpose of our rule of law. That is the purpose of the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment of the Civil Rights act of 1964. And on and on and on. But America does not go abroad in search of monsters to destroy again. What does that mean when it comes to American foreign policy today, when it comes to Iran and other issues? Well, I've got some thoughts on that, but for now just a quick word from today's other sponsor, which is the upcoming film release Pressure. So from Focus Features and the producers of Darkest Hour comes the new movie Pressure, the untold true story of D day. In the 72 hours leading up to the largest seaborne invasion in history, General Dwight D. Eisenhower faced an impossible decision that would determine the fate of the war as Allied forces prepare to land, two massive storms converge over Normandy. Behind closed doors with the clock ticking, General Eisenhower must decide send 300,000 men into nature's unforgiving fury or delay and risk losing the war itself. There is no safe option, only consequences. One decision would change the world forever. This Friday experience a powerful and inspiring story of courage, sacrifice and the mission that gave the free world hope. Starring Andrew Scott, Brendan Fraser, Kerry Condon and Damian Lewis. Pressure is filled with thrilling tension from beginning to end and without a doubt it must be seen on the big screen. The untold true story of D day is rated PG13. It's only in theaters this Friday. Special engagements in Dolby and Dolby Cinema as well. Folks, I have seen this film and I cannot recommend it highly enough. I'm a history buff and I learned a lot about the invasion of D Day. So again, the film is Pressure and it is being released on the big screen this Friday. Go ahead and check out the film. So D Day, speaking of D Day, is the quintessential involvement of American just foreign policy involvement overseas, but even in World War II. It is crucially worth noting that the actual reason that America directly got involved in World War II, as opposed to the more subtle under the table Lend Lease agreement that America had with the British for some years prior to our formal entrance there, that's between FDR and Winston Churchill. The ultimate actual reason was because we were attacked. We were attacked at Pearl harbor on what FDR referred to as a day that will live in infamy. December 7, 1941 is an interesting counter historical kind of intellectual inquiry. It is an interesting thought process as to whether or not America actually would have gotten involved in earnest in World War II had Pearl harbor not happened. No one knows the answer. I don't know the answer. You don't know the answer there. Frankly, America knew about the depravities of the Nazi regime in Europe. They knew about the train tracks, they knew about the concentration camps. America certainly knew all about everything that Imperial Japan was doing there with the rape of Nanjing and its full on conquering of large swaths of China and Southeast Asia. Imperial Japan in many ways was just as at times, if not even more savage than the Nazis actually were on the European continent there. So who knows. But the point is that even then, even in what emerged as the most, the most foundational conflict that actually really does evince this true moral dichotomy between good and evil even that even in this true, true dichotomy between literal actual fascism not what Greta Thunberg calls fascism. Not what Kamala Harris calls fascism. No, like actual, actual fascism in this real, real, real standoff between actual evil, actual tyranny, actual fascism and truth, justice and the American way. Even then, even then it actually took Pearl harbor to actually commence and to get the United States to commit in earnest to actually fight this war to the very, very end. There again, America, folks, does not go abroad or we should not go abroad in search of monsters to destroy. When we act, we act because there is a real, real threat to the American national interest. And we do so because we calculate the American national interest in a sober manner. We are not in hock to any kind of overt, fanciful ideology. We're not trying to export democracy like George W. Bush. We are also not saying that we live in a utopian universe where America, the great superpower, can simply duck her head in the sand and be done with the that is what Ron Paul wants. That is what Thomas Massie wants. That's what Tucker Carlson wants. That also is stupid. Frankly. That is just as stupid as what George W. Bush wanted. These are two sides of the same stupidity. The good news is that Donald Trump understands this and generally speaking, has acted on this on the world stage. Well, I will explain what I mean by that. And plenty more to get to. There's also a big primary in Texas night, folks. We got a lot more still to cover on today's show. We'll be right back after a short break. Stay with us.
- [23:12]
Grainger Announcer
If you work in university maintenance, Granger considers you an MVP because your playbook ensures your arena is is always ready for tip off. And Grainger is your trusted partner, offering the products you need all in one place, from H VAC and plumbing supplies to lighting and more. And all delivered with plenty of time left on the clock. So your team always gets the win. Call 1-800-GRAINGER visit grainger.com or just stop by Grainger for the ones who get it done.
- [23:46]
Josh Hammer
Welcome back. So what does all this mean when it comes to. Well, let's take the example of Iran, which has been the big foreign policy story for some three months now. Well, when it comes to Iran, America is fundamentally not seeking to sculpt a Madisonian republic out of Tehran. We're not trying to send in the 101st Airborne to unfurl the rainbow flag and to celebrate whatever that means in the perverse name of the United nations and the European Union and various other global liberal sentimentalities and feelings. No, that's obviously not what American foreign policy is about. It was a disaster, frankly, when we tried that in Iraq and in Afghanistan, it did not end well. And anyone who has not learned those lessons, frankly should not be a participant in American foreign policy. But also someone who has not learned the flip side of the lesson of history when it comes to the real perils and pitfalls of American full on isolationism. Well, that person also probably should not be a participant in our foreign policy conversations because neither of these sorts of individuals are adults in the room. Rather, adults in the room understand that America is a real country with real interests that faces real threats and should act in a realistic way possible to forestall those threats and to neutralize them as pertains to the American national interest and the American way of life. So when it comes to Iran, the realistic thing to do, the America first thing to do with the Trump administration has been doing, the approach is not to try to to build democracy in Tehran. The approach is to neutralize the threat. That has been our stance on this show literally since day one, literally since February 28th when Ali Khamenei, the 37 year ruling tyrant of Iran was taken out in a joint American Israeli operation. That has been our stance ever since then is that you define the mission here as pertains to the American national interest and the American way of life as the neutralization. The goal is the neutralization of Iran as a threat to the United States and to the American interests. Now what that means in theory at this particular juncture are the exact same four things that I have been pounding on this show now for a month and a half now, ever since Trump first announced a ceasefire with the mullahs. There are precisely four things that must happen in order for us to realistically conclude that the job against Iran actually is done. The first is that these three hundred and four moves must be reopened to full on maritime traffic and so forth. Two is that the terrorist Iranian regime has to stop all of its funding, all of its funding to its terrorist proxies throughout the Middle east when it comes to Hamas, Hezbollah, the Houthis, and on and on and on. Three is that its offensive facing ballistic missile program as well as its drone program has to go. As we've noted, this really in theory is where the European powers ought to care, frankly care a lot more than the United States, because the European continent, at least the central and eastern portions of it, is well within the two and a half thousand give or take mile range of missile delivery that we now know that Iran is capable of because they've actually fired that rough distance in attempting to take out the joint American British military facility at Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean there. So that's three. So you have one, the Strait of Hormuz must be reopened to a cessation of Iranian funding to its terrorist proxies throughout the region. Three, the termination or elimination of the ballistic missile and drone programs. Easier said than done for sure on the latter. And then four, the big kahuna. And the real sticking point there in the most recent round of negotiations is indeed the enriched uranium itself. Iran has at least 1,000 pounds of 60% enriched uranium. It's a very short step, the nuclear scientists say, from 60% to 90%. 90% is, is ready to be put on a warhead and shot around the world. The problem when you are dealing with apocalyptic Islamists is that they actually might use a weapon like that. Really, they actually might. You are not dealing here with cold calculating rationalist actors. You're dealing with apocalyptic Islamists who are trying to bring the 12th Imam according to their idiosyncratic Shiite theology and eschatology. They're trying to emanate the 12th Imam in Shiite eschatology there and to get the 72 virgins and all of the above there. So you can't let that happen. And that really has been the big sticking point. But this whole paradigm of doing what is best for the American national interest again does not mean on the one hand that you try to export democracy, but on the other hand it does not mean that you cannot sit back and just let the threat come to you. Iran is acting against the United States. They've been acting as the United States for 47 freaking years, literally since their first action in Tehran in 1979 was to storm the US embassy and to commence a 444 day hostage crisis that ultimately terminated and ended the Jimmy Carter presidency. Bringing us Morning in America with Ronald Reagan in January of 1981. They've been attacking and killing Americans ever since that time. There is literally a Pakistani national currently sitting in jail. He's already been convicted in federal court in New York City of attempting to assassinate Donj Trump on behalf of the IRG Senate, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. They've been trying to go after John Bolton, Mike Pompeo and plenty other many other dissidents, Iran dissidents and high ranking American officials on our shores. It cannot go on any longer there. So if there's a deal to be had, in theory, I say great. But color me extraordinarily skeptical because as I Put on X on Sunday. The fundamental problem when you're trying to broker a deal with apocalyptic Islamists remains the stubborn fact that you are still dealing and still trying to broker a deal with apocalyptic Islamists. Again, the good news, I think, is that Donald Trump really understands America first at a much higher and more sophisticated and more instinctually viscery collect level than a lot of his. A lot of his would be purported allies who pound their chest and say America First. What they really just mean is this cartoonish, hyper ideological conception of Ron Paul, esque, America only and America retrieved from the world. That's not how Trump that's not how Trump thinks about foreign policy. He thinks about foreign policy much like the John Quincy Adams monsters to destroy speech, which frankly is how I view foreign policy as well. And the United States and I would argue the world are really all the more better off for all of the above. So there are other things happening in the news, of course, there, although I really do enjoy these first principles, deep dives. And one thing that's happening is the primary in Texas tonight. This has been a really, really, really expensive, expensive primary. It's been expensive runoff in general over just the past couple months there. So you have Ken Paxton, who is the scandal ridden, I think he'd be the first to admit that he's scandal ridden, the attorney general of Texas who is now in a runoff trying to knock off the multi term incumbent US Senator from Texas, John Corn. So John Corn has been a fixture in Texas public life for decades. He actually was a justice on the Texas Supreme Court before he was a US Senator from Texas. Texas has partisan judicial elections. He was elected to the Supreme Court as a Republican there, in fact. Funny kind of nerdy, but funny anecdote. I remember actually my torts class in my first year of law school back in 2013, 2014 at the University of Chicago Law School. I literally remember reading a torts opinion from Justice John Cornyn, an opinion that he wrote around 97, 98 late 1990s prior to leaving the courts run for the seventh there. So Corn has been a fixture in Texas public life for decades and decades and decades. Ken Paxton has been the attorney general for years. He has had scandals, both both legal and financial scandals and personal scandals when it comes to his wife and divorce there. It's not the best choice to be honest with you, because on the one hand you obviously prefer that you don't get that you don't get a nominee who is so tied up in scandal. On the other hand, John Cornyn Absolutely, positively stinks. Trust me, folks, I used to live in Texas. I'm sure that there are folks out there in the audience both listening and watching, who live in Texas as well. I watched John Corn's votes firsthand. The guy absolutely stinks. He is a total squish when it comes to the Second Amendment. Speaking of our conversation yesterday with Dana Lash, John Corn stinks on guns. John Corn stinks when it comes to immigration and the border. He has never been reliable when it comes to amnesty. He's just soft. He's a software Chamber of Commerce Republican. It's kind of Republican, frankly, that predominates in certain types of Southern states. Virginia and Texas being the biggest examples there. Corny, frankly, is not with the people. Now, my general stance on politics is very similar to the Bill Buckley stance. Bill Buckley, the founder of National Review, who, whatever his quibbles or foibles may or may not have been, had a very, very well articulated standard years ago when he famously posited, and he argued that the way to vote in a primary you're conservative is to vote for the most conservative candidates who can win a general election. Now it looks like that's going to be Ken Paxton. Ken Paxton is currently favored by Kalshee and the prediction markets as having something like a 95% chance of winning due to the Trump endorsement. That really rattled Cornyn and his Senate colleagues there. I think that Paxton would win this race. A lot of folks saying that Talrico, who is this absolute moron who's going to be the Democrat nominee. There's he is the guy who says that God supports abortion because of Jesus virgin birth. He says that God is multi gendered. It makes you want to vomit. It's just so outrageously stupid. I don't buy for a second that Paxton's gonna lose this race. They've been saying Texas is gonna go blue for years and years and years. I've heard this so many times, folks. Trump won Texas by 13.5 points in 2024, a much bigger margin than 2020 or 2016. I have not seen anything remotely close to sufficient evidence indicating that this race will be close there. Therefore, if you're listening or watching, I say vote Campaxon. Hold your nose to be sure. The man is not an ethical paragon, but go ahead and vote Campassin. Tonight in Texas, folks, one final commercial break. We'll be right back with some closing thoughts on the other side. Welcome back. Look, I wish that we lived in a world where all of our elected officials, every candidate for office was a true ethical paragon, a paragon of virt. Someone who was up there as an indispensable moral bedrock. I wish that all of our political figures could, could cite the Bible with biblical literacy, indeed biblical fluency, like Abraham Lincoln, a man who imbued all of his public rhetoric, his speeches and so forth, with invocations, incitations to Scripture. I wish that were the case there. Really, I really do. There. But I think of another bit of timeless wisdom from Scripture when it comes to this, this, this primary runoff in Texas tonight, which is put not thy trust in princes. Politics is dirty. Again, I wish that we lived in an era where you had such great rich choices, such that you really could vote for people whether they were Protestant, Catholic, Jewish, whatever, who were sincere about their convictions, about their moral lifestyle, who never cheated on their spouses, who never committed any kind of wrongdoings when it comes to their tax returns. That there. But that's just not the country that we live in there. And this is the choice in Texas. And again, if I were in Texas there, I would hold my nose and vote for Ken Paxton. I, I would. John Corn is, is just, is just insufficient for Texas. We can, we, we can do. Texas can do a lot better than John Corn. I've been saying this since I lived in Texas, frankly, since even before then. There is Ken passing perfect. No, he's not. But he would be a better voter for Donald Trump's agenda. He will be a better vote when it comes to the conservative cause more generally than John Corn. Of that I have very, very, very little doubt. Very. I mean, essentially no doubt there. Therefore, I would vote for Ken Paxton. I think it pretty much is that simple. Again, the Bill Buckley advice is to vote for the most conservative candidate who can win a general. I don't buy for a second that James 3 gender telorico or tofu Tellerico as at first some people refer to. I don't think for a second this guy has a chance of winning in Texas. He's a quintessential beta and I think that he is going to lose whether it's Ken Paxton or John Corn. And frankly, the polling is not a whole lot better for Corn against Talarico than it is for Paxton there. It's very similar there. So I say vote for Ken Paxton. Folks, if you are listening or watching this show from Texas. So there was a horrific tragedy that happened this past Thursday that I want to briefly touch on as well. I mentioned the outset that to me, Memorial Day weekend every year is partially about the Indianapolis 500. I've been a huge auto racing fan, frankly for my entire life. Actually, the Sunday of Memorial Day is really the crown jewel of auto racing. On the calendar year you have the Indy 500, which is the most famous auto race in the United states. You have NASCAR's longest race on the calendar, the Coca Cola 600. Every so often you have someone who tries to do the double. You do the 500 miles in Indianapolis, hop in a helicopter, go to Charlotte, North Carolina for the Coca Cola 600 there and then historically speaking, it was usually the most prestigious race on the Formula One calendar as well. Used to be, historically, the Monaco Grand Prix was the same day as the Indy 500. Actually did not happen. This year. The F1 guys were up in Canada for the Canadian Grand Prix in Montreal. Monaco will be next on the calendar. I'm not entirely sure why they switched this year, but anyway, I say all that because there was a horrific, horrific tragedy when it came to the world of NASCAR this past Thursday. I was truly shocked. Shortly before I had to turn my phone off for the Jewish holiday of Shavuot, I was truly shocked when I saw that Kyle Busch, a two time NASCAR Cup Series champion, unexpectedly and tragically passed away at the age of 41. Just utterly tragic stuff. That is way, way, way, way, way, way, way too young to die in America in the year 2026. Apparently it was severe pneumonia that progressed into sepsis. And it is just one of those reminders, as if we needed any more of them, but yet another of those reminders that any single day really could be your last. Every, every single day could be your last. Even if you are a two time NASCAR cup series champion, even if you are at the top of the world, you have billions and billions of dollars. Let's say you're Elon Musk, whoever, Jeff Bezos. You just don't know. Because while we are made in the image of God, we are not God himself. The psalmist had this one right. Psalms chapter 82 is a, is a psalm that observant Jews actually say every Tuesday morning. So we actually said this in synagogue just this morning. Psalms chapter 82. And the final lines of Psalm 82 are as follows. I said, you are angelic creatures, and all of you are angels of the most high. Indeed, as man you will die, and as one of the princes you will fall. Arise, O God, judge the earth, for you inherit all the nations. As one of the princes you will fall. Because again, we are mortals. And as mortals is incumbent upon us to live every day, as if you just don't know if another day is going to come. So as Jews, for instance, we begin every single morning the very first words that come out of our mouths while we're still laying in bed. It's a sentence beginning, it's a statement of gratitude that you are thanking God for waking us out of the evening sleep and giving us another day here on this earth. Traditional Jewish teaching is that your soul goes up to the heavens and the angels tend for it. I'm kind of cutting the chase here. It's a little more complicated, but the angels tend to it during the sleeping hours and then your souls return to you when you wake up. Your soul is essentially on loan, essentially on loan to the heavens, the angels and so forth there while you are sleeping. And therefore it is a big blessing every time that you wake up in the morning. I think that's a very healthy way to live. No matter what your worldview is, no matter what your religious convictions or requirements are one way or the other, you really should begin every day by thanking God for what you have there and just not knowing what more is to come. And folks, I've been feeling particularly grateful this week. As I mentioned at the outset, today's a big day. Today's a big day in the Hammer household. This is the last episode of the Josh Hammer show that's going to be filmed here in our current location. We are going to be moving, we being the Hammer family into a brand new home. My wife and I have just done the whole first time home purchaser thing. It's a lot of work, let me tell you. It's a lot of money, let me tell you. But we are just really, really, really deeply excited there. Our daughter is now, is now 17 and a half months and we're just really excited to see her flourish in her new home in her new neighborhood. And it's going to be be all sorts of blessings and everything from here there. Not without a bit of a wound to the financial accounts, but that is just how it's done in. It's just how it's done today. But it's been really emotional. It's been quite emotional just experiencing these final few days, this final week or two in this current place where we're living, where I'm living now. It's really been a great home for me for, for some three and a half, give or take years now. This is the place where I am right now, my final day recording the show here. This is where I was when I got engaged to My now wife. This is where I was living when I got married to my wife. This is where I was when we had our first child. This is where I was when I published my first book. This is behind my shoulder. This is where I was when my show, this show that you're listening watch to became not just an audio show, but a video show where we signed this partnership agreement between Newsweek and Salem Media to have the show join the Salem Podcast Network and air on the Salem News Channel. This home's been very good to me, but our next home, I know, will be really, really, really good to me as well. And I'm a firm believer in onward and upward. And we're just really, really excited for our new home. And I can't help but think about just, just how seemingly rare it is in today's day and age for folks to be as blessed, to borrow a left coded word, dare I say even privilege, to be in a situation like this where we are taking out a mortgage on a very nice sized home and moving in, growing family, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. Congress, actually, for what it's worth, Congress is looking at a new bill. So there's a bipartisan home affordability bill that passed the House just this past Wednesday. It passed by a huge margin, actually. 396 and 13. Essentially what they're trying to do there is they're, they're trying to say that any group that owns more than 3, 350 houses, so, so, so corporate entities, blacks, et cetera, will not be allowed to buy more single family homes. I think this is shrewd and prudential legislation for whatever it is worth. These are corporate landlords. This to me is populism at its finest there. And I definitely would have supported that kind of measure if I were in the house. I'm sure that many of the absolutist free marketeers at Thomas Massey's are pulling out their hair. But frankly, that's the difference between living in academia and in ideology. Land versus living in reality. So for now, my wish is just that more people in the millennial generation, which is me, more zoomers and Gen Z will be able indeed to choose to purchase a home if they so choose. There. It's been a lot of work and it is bittersweet, sweeter than bitter for sure, but it's definitely emotional there and onwards and upwards here on the Hammer household. The next time that I speak to you and look into the camera, I will be doing so from our brand new home, which is just so, so exciting, folks. Hope you enjoyed today's show. Have a great rest of your evening. Josh Hammer signing off. We'll be right back from our new home tomorrow.