Willie Brock You by Choice Hotels, Econo Lodge and Roadway in Hotels are serving
up double points for every qualifying stay book at choice hotels dot com. Now
here's the man who's been recognized as radio's best, the recipient of not won,
but two prestigious Marconi Awards for his broadcast exodens, the one and only
Bill Cunningham, Sorry, Billy Cunningham, the great American. Welcome this glory
Sunday evening, and I'm honored to have picked up seven or eight more stations,
and we have a great failing some guests coming up later, and I'll
tell you what. I want to focus a little bit on what happened on
Thursday night with the great debate between Dessantis and the horrible Gavin MacLeod. I'm
sorry, the governor, the horrible governor of the great, the poor state
of California, Gavin Newsom. And as a consequence, how does that change
the race? So what I did was go back in time, and so
history often repeats itself. So I want you to think about a couple of
things. Nineteen ninety two election, and then we had the one in twenty
sixteen and the one in twenty twenty, of course, which was I think
a charade. But nonetheless, in nineteen ninety two, you may recall that
there was an old president named George Herbert Walker Bush forty one, who had
great success in nineteen ninety one. He was so popular that shall we say
the regular Democratic Party, that is, Governor Cuomo, Mario Cuomo of New
York was the presumed nominee of the Democrat Party and not some governor from Arkansas,
are you kidding me? But a year out he made the decision,
and his son Chris Cuomo discusses this that it wasn't his time. He couldn't
beat this sitting president who had like a ninety percent approval rating and was unbeaten,
untied, unscored on. Bush forty one, at this point would have
been the fourth Ronald Reagan term, the first one being the third, and
so it was thought, well, the A team is not going to run,
and so Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton ran, picked up some delegates at
a hell of a time in all the primaries, but as a nominee of
the Democrat Party, he faced George Bush, but also faced Ross Perot.
You may recall Ross Perot, the millionaire in today's terms, maybe a billionaire
from Texas, and when it was all said and done. In fact,
in the two times that President Bill Clinton was elected president, in neither race
did he get fifty percent of the votes. In nineteen ninety six against Bob
Doley got forty nine percent. But in nineteen ninety two, Bill Clinton received
forty three percent of the vote and easily won the presidency with some three hundred
and seventy electoral votes and President George Bush only had thirty seven percent and Ross
Perrow had about nineteen percent, and so forty three percent won the presidency for
Bill Clinton because there was a third party candidate who, by the way,
did not win any states, but nonetheless took enough votes away, probably from
Bush but certainly also from Clinton that the American people said, you know what,
we want to go a different direction. And so at that point,
the three hundred and seventy electoral votes was more than enough for Bill Clinton to
win the presidency with forty three percent of the vote. So let's jump ahead
from nineteen ninety two to twenty sixteen, then on to twenty twenty. In
twenty twenty, there's going to be two or three or maybe four other parties
that may jump in with Cornell West and Robert Fitzgerald Kennedy Junior RFK Junior,
which is going to get millions of votes either one of them. But going
back to twenty sixteen, at that point, as I've said many times with
you on many different Sunday nights, there's no question that if the establishment knew
that Donald Trump was going to win the presidency in November of twenty sixteen,
there's no way it would have happened. The smart money said, the polls
indicated that Hillary was a winner, and so when it was all said and
done, Hillary Clinton got forty eight percent of the vote and lost. Donald
Trump got forty six percent of the vote and one. And you might recall
from my previous statement in nineteen nine two, Bill Clinton got forty three percent
of the vote and one, so forty six percent of the vote for the
Trumpster in twenty sixteen, and he won three hundred and four electoral votes out
of five hundred and thirty eight. He won Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania,
Ohio, Georgia, Arizona, an easy victory. Han't gotten forty six percent
of the vote. Four years later, in twenty twenty one of the most
scrutinized elections, and all of us have a foul teeth taste in our mouth
as to what we assume probably happened. But nonetheless, the Trumpster in twenty
twenty received forty seven percent of the vote, which is more than he received
in twenty sixteen as a percentage, and as far as the number of votes,
he received an additional eleven million more votes in twenty twenty than Donald Trump
had in twenty sixteen. However, would they turnout and this is a prophetic
number, six six six. The turnout was sixty six point six percent,
which is a high one. The turnout in twenty twenty was sixty percent turnout
in twenty twenty, and the turnout of nineteen ninety two was fifty eight percent.
So because of the pandemic and because of the efforts of zuck Bucks Zuckerberg
who put in five hundred million dollars to register a whole bunch of new voters,
that Donald Trump greatly increased his popular vote from sixty three million to seventy
four million and lost. And if there were fifty thousand votes switched in three
states, he would have won the presidency. But it didn't happen. So
I'm predicting that number one, you're going to have RFK, and you're going
to have Cornell West representing various tickets and various electorate types that are going to
make sure that the Trumpster can win the presidency this time with about forty three
percent of the vote, which is similar to what happened in nineteen ninety two,
which is the lowest percentage of vote Donald Trump would ever receive in the
three times he would have run for the presidency. Bill Clinton was able to
easily win the presidency with forty three percent of the vote added up. And
I think there is a strong probability that Donald Trump is going to be the
next president of the United States because of the passion. Every time he's indicted
or deposed or charged, or the Democrats want to come after him with something
else, his support among many people like myself increases. It makes me more
likely to vote. And one of the big charades that I hear now is
that the media and the Democrats somehow fear that if Donald Trump wins a second
term, he may weaponize the Department of Justice against his political opponents. One
might ask, what in the hell is going on right now with Biden using
his Department of Justice to go after Donald Trump and the Democrats in New York
City, New York County, in New York State, Letitia James, etc.
Weaponizing the Attorney General's office, and what's happening in Atlanta and which a
popular local Democratic prosecutor wants to nail the Donald again. And so what is
feared by the media when I watch some of the Sunday morning talk shows,
what was feared by the media is that Donald Trump may use the Department of
Justice to go after Joe Biden, Hunter Biden, Barack Hussein, Obama,
Nancy Pelosi, etc. Which is exactly what's happening. Anyway. Fifty percent
of Republicans wants someone other than Trump to be the nominee, and about seventy
percent of Democrats wants someone else to be the nominee. The probability, if
you listen to Wayne Allen Rood and myself Wane's a great American, well,
neither one of us believe that Joe Biden's going to be the nominee of the
Democrat Party. Because by the time the convention rolls around around August twentieth of
next year in Chicago. Every month he's going to be in worse and worse
shape. And so what Gavin Newsom tried to do on Thursday night was to
present the alternative to the Democratic Party. He did so poorly. I think
they may move on from him. And nobody considers Kamala Harris to be even
remotely electable. Maybe it's scretching Whitmer, maybe it's some other maybe it's in
the King Jeffries. I don't know. But Gavin Newsom was so bad and
pout it so loud and made no sense that even the Democrat Party at this
point say, maybe this is not the guy we should use to take over
from Joe Biden. But in either cases, you know that RFK and Cornell
West, neither one of them are going to back down. You know,
facts are stubborn things. And it came out under the leadership of my good
friend and your Sean Hannity about whether or not it is better to live in
Florida or better live in California. My producer, Danny Gleeson is kind of
a Florida kind of a guy. But these, you know, facts are
stubborn things. According to the nonprofit Tax Foundation, which is not Democrat or
Republican. The state and local tax collectors in California collect per person nine one
hundred and seventy four dollars in taxes ninety one hundred dollars, but in the
state of Florida that number is well less than fifty percent of that, which
is four four hundred and five per capita, about half as much total taxes.
And if you talk about the gas tax in California, it is seven
point twenty five percent versus six percent in Florida, which is about twenty percent
lower in Florida. California's corporate income tax rate is eight point eight four percent
and in Florida it's five point five percent for the corporate income tax rate,
which is about sixty percent lower in Florida than California. And the income tax
rate in California is thirteen point three percent. I said thirteen point three percent
in California in Florida. Guess what zero? There is none, So the
argument is lost. Which are the high tax states and which are the low
tax states? For example, Florida has the eleventh lowest tax burden while California
has the fifth highest. And it goes on from there. One of the
most effective things I think rhn Is Santas did was pull out the poop sheet
in which San Francisco puts out a sheetmonstrating what city blocks to avoid because of
excess human excrement and needles and open air drug use. And that was a
chart illustrative of the failure of the Democrat Party in the state of California,
where no one with any sense would desire to move there whatsoever. And so
as far as for all my legion of fans in California, you know exactly
what I'm talking about. It's awful. It's bad. It's not good,
just the opposite. It's terrible. So if my predictions are correct, all
Trump needs in November of next year is to get approximately forty three percent of
the vote, which I think is almost a locke. And as long as
there are two other candidates like a Cornell West or an RFK junior, to
split some of the other vote off, that's all he's going to need.
It'll be a redo of the nineteen ninety two election when the winner got forty
three percent of the vote, which is really unbelievable. But let's talk about
what's coming up later. Tonight, and I worked hard because of everything that's
happening in Israel right now. And I have on of one of George's finest
coming up later MTG. Marjorie Taylor Green has written a book MTG. I
don't know how we've avoided each other all these months and the years, but
she's scheduled to come on later tonight to talk about her life and times and
things of those characters. And she went to University of Georgia, who some
said were treated unfairly earlier. Today the final four is Michigan and Washington and
Texas and Alabama. Georgia is out, so she is scheduled to be with
us later on to talk about her book MTG and what's happening also in the
Capitol also later on, as the Great Congressional Leader Warren Davidson of Ohio.
He has a proposal up that talks about the states calling a constitutional convention.
One of the questions I always ad ask is how come we keep voting for
conservative and Republicans and seemingly it doesn't do us any good at all. That's
somehow the same policies continue irrespective of what we desire, and the solution of
course would be a state ordered constitutional convention, in which when thirty eight states
pass the resolution calling for it, then there'll be another constitutional convention like the
one that happened in Philadelphia in seventeen eighty seven, and the states can then
each state gets one vote. That means New York State or California or Texas
gets one vote, along with Iowa, Ohio, and Wyoming, and so
they can change the constitution because every time I speak to a Republican they say,
look a damn thing we can do because the Senate requires sixty votes,
and damn we don't have sixty votes. Later on, also is Steve Molloy
of junkscience dot com. He's a scientist and meteorologist. You know, right
now Europe is having a terrible global warming problem with eighteen minus eighteen degree temperatures
and a foot of snow. In fact, many of the so called experts
going to the Dubai global Warming Summit have their jets stuck in ice in runways
all over Europe. So he's going to talk about how that's a failure.
Also later on is Evan Ruark r u Ark of Numbers USA and what is
actually happening on the border, and I want to get into later on with
John Lott about the issue of the argument of Gavin Newsom was that somehow the
Red states are more violent than the Blue states. Now there's parts in the
Red States like Jackson, Mississippi, which drives the numbers of the state of
Mississippi through the roof. But we're going to get the facts from John Lott
of Crimeresearch dot dot org later on to discuss what are the facts, what
are not the facts, and more. But this idea of a constitutional convention
again is in the constitution. It's not radical. In fact, it's shall
we say given as a way to change parts of the constitution. In each
state gets one vote, and by one vote, you could eliminate all kinds
of things. You could add all kinds of things. You could have a
budget deficit requirement that there's no budget deficits every year unless two thirds of the
House and the Senate both agree. You could do things on the southern border.
You could do things with more personal freedom or big tech, whatever it
might be. You do things with evs, which has proven to be a
fraud fact. Later on, Steve Malloy of junk science dot com is going
to spend some time discussing that serious matters. So let's continue. Coming up
later, big show planned tonight, a man coming up with the idea to
actually implement a constitutional convention called by the States. That as Congressman Warren Davidson,
and also later on will be the great Marjorie Taylor Green to discuss her
book. She's been in the Congress about three years and I want to get
her perspective on all issues. She's the most dangerous woman in Washington. So
let's continue, and if a line becomes available eight sixty six six four seven,
seven three three seven. Bill Cunningham, the great American with you every
Sunday night. Let's continue, Let's never stop. Coming up later as Marjorie
Taylor Green with her new book and the direction of Washington, where it's said
it, I cannot think of a philosophy that is more destroyed our majestic cities
than the progressivism, the liberalism, the Marxism of the modern Democrat Party.
They are on the path the well destroying the greatest cities, if not in
the world it certainly America has ever had. And if they continue on this
path, if for whoever, the interchangeable drill bit is next November, and
a Democrat continues as president for four years thereafter, going up into twenty twenty
nine. At a minimum, Imagine the southern border. Imagine our majestic city
is destroyed. Imagine the decapitation of our police force. I support the Blue,
God bless the Blue, but imagine more and more good Americans not wanting
to get involved because of the fear of civil lawsuits and this lack of respect.
Imagine our fantastic public schools, especially in urban and rural areas, that
have seventy five million students at them receiving no functional education. Can the country
long survive and our majestic city survive under the policies of Gavin Newsom, under
the policies of Brandon Johnson, under the policies of the mayor of Atlanta,
or the leadership in Austin, Texas, Or what's happening in San Francisco,
what's happening in Portland, what's happening in Seattle. The answer, of course
is not, we cannot survive. It is critical that this country change direction
beginning in November of next year. And all I'm saying is that you know
it, and I know it. We cannot survive the way things have been
the past four years. So it's continued. The line becomes available eight sixty
six six four seven, seven, three three seven. Coming up next is
demand in charge of a Constitutional Convention. Bill Cunningham with you every summer.
You know, Billy Cunningham, the great American. Of course, we're heading
toward Christmas. Can you say Christmas anymore? I hope so. And Representative
Warren Davidson, who volunteered, went into the military graduate of West Point,
got into some businesses, made a boatload of money, good business leader west
Point Graduate, served in the military, and now he represents Central Ohio,
of course, having taken the seat of Speaker of the House John Bayner about
seven or eight years ago. And Congressman Warren Davidson, Welcome again to the
Bill Cunningham Show. And first of all, I want to get onto the
story out of the Washington Post at a about forty forty members of Congress are
heading for the exits. All kinds of reasons given, mainly it's dysfunction.
Can you talk about since you have business experience, you've led a normal life,
and you've been in the military US graduate of West Point, do you
sense dysfunction in the halls of Congress. Well, look, we know it's
broken. I mean, that's why most people run. Now, I will
admit there are some people that go there because they just want to be there,
and unfortunately a fair number of them seem pretty hell bent on preserving the
status quo. They don't want anything to change. Some of them are leaving
because they went there to try to change things, and they're exasperated. And
that's where the public is. I mean, people I talk to are just
frustrated, and like, count me with the frustrated people. I'm not ready
to throw in the towel. I'm running for reelection. But there are some
people that are like, oh, it's time for some fresh legs. I'm
sick of this nonsense. Yeah. And when I look on when I just
have all the highways and the byways, and of course I'm on the radio
six days a week, there's this sense of we elect Republicans, but nothing
changes. And I suppose smart money says next November, the Senate's going to
become Republican. The House maybe not so, in which case many leaders of
the House want to get out before they have to work for Nancy Pelosi or
a Keem Jeffries, which would be unbelievable. So how would you answer the
cry of normal Americans who say we elect Republicans and nothing changes. Yeah,
I mean, look, that's the frustration. I mean, you know what
happened this year. We passed a lot of things through the House, only
to have the Senate not take them up. And even when we had control
of the Senate, the rules of the Senate say you got to get sixty
votes to move lots of things. So you know, the thing you run
up against is getting stuff through the Senate. And you know, we've passed
a lot of the things that we said we would through the House, we
can't get the Senate to take them up. And that's why the fights over
spending become so critical, because the one thing that can go through on fifty
one votes is a budget reconciliation bill, and you know, we have to
fund the government one way, shape or form. And go back to the
start of the year, Joe Biden said there was there was going to be
a clean debt limit increase. You're just going to raise the debt limit,
and we said, no, we're not. We're going to get some concessions
out of it, and they weren't as big as a lot of us wanted.
I mean, frankly the public not anywhere near as big as we need.
But we got important concessions, like, you know, really a commitment
to spend less money past two thirds of the House, two thirds of the
Senate. Joe Biden signed it. And that's where you look at these crs,
you know, like the one at the end of September and the one
most recently passed head of November seventeenth, Speaker McCarthy on the one, Speaker
Johnson on the other. Either way, they both failed to implement what was
agreed to in May, which is to cut spending, you know. So
that's where people get frustrated, and they should be. So it's the system.
In other words, I tell the American people almost every day we have
a little bit of control of the House, just barely, but there's five
or ten members that lean left. But even if you get something pasted,
Chuck Schumer is not going to let anything come to the floor of the Senate.
So the system is set up to maintain the status quo, and the
status quo is unacceptable. So that's right. And look that's where a lot
of people are like, look, how do we dissolve the government and reform
it? I mean, look, I've never historically supported this idea of a
Convention of States because it's dangerous, but the current system is failing, and
I think a lot of people are like, well, maybe we do need
another constitutional convention where it goes with some of the far left, crazy people
that are out there. I got no idea. That's why I'm scared of
that play. What I will say it really unfortunately, I think one of
the emblematic votes is this idea that we're going to continue building a brand new
headquarters for the FBI in the midst of all the weaponized government. Now reality,
it's not all the agents. A lot of the agent's vast majority of
them probably great people, but the leadership of the FBI has been terrible.
And unless we get that reconciled, there's no way I can vote to give
these guys more money. And unfortunately, seventy Republicans sided with all the Democrats
to say, let's go ahead and do that. Let's go back a little
bit to the Convention of States, because that is frightening. For one reason,
like you have no idea where it goes. But this is an article
put in by the Founding Fathers back in seventeen eighty nine that said, if
I think the numbers three for us, you'll know the number. Say we
want another convention, a constitutional convention, you start from scratch, or you
could have one one article addit or whatever. Explain to the American people the
Convention of States and why some are advocating for that, because right now we're
in total dysfunction. Yeah, so a lot of times people will say the
states could just simply decide that three forces of the states, let's go back
to a convention. They can limit the purpose of it, and it can
only you can only consider these things or that, you know. But the
realia is when the Founding Fathers got together to form the Constitution, they were
really only supposed to amend the articles of Confederation, and so they basically said,
yeah, these are kind of unworkable. Let's just create a new constitution
and as long as three forces of the States ratify it, you know,
then it becomes the constitution. So that's the that's the challenge. You could
you could really wind up with a whole different basis for our Constitution. Our
constitution was created by our founding fathers who recognize that our rights come not from
government but from God. And the government can't be the giver of your rights,
because if they can, they could be the taker away of them.
Our constitution limits the ability of the government to take away rights. But there
are people that want to spin it on its head and make the government a
grant of rights, like, oh, you have a right to housing,
you have a right to toilet paper. I don't know whatever else they want
to have right to. But everything that that involves a gift of someone else's
labor can't possibly be a right, because that would be you would be able
to compel somebody else's labor. So the narrow view of our constitution is is
right. But the problem we see is the bureaucratic state. These unelected,
unaccountable bureaucrats, people like Fauci, people like Chris Ray that don't get fired.
They just continue on. Gary Ginsler at this carries in Exchange Commission,
all kinds of folks that are just running over the country and abusing the power
of the office with very little accountability from the executive branch or the judiciary branch,
and almost none from Congress, and the beauty the convention of States would
be that each state gets one vote. So that means the state of Wyoming,
we get the same vote as to state of California. And so if
you have three of the states, I think the numbers up to thirty five
or thirty six right now to call for that convention. When you do have
the convention, you need thirty eight states, which is three fourths, and
then each state has one vote. We wouldn't that play into the hands of
conservatives because there's more red states and blue states. Yeah, that's that's been
the thinking, is that we've got a shot at saving the country if you
get on that path. I don't know them all the way there, but
I've been more receptive to it in this Congress because, look, we're just
not getting things done that we need to for the American people. And you
know, how, how should it take so much effort to make the Biden
administration simply follow the law? Our laws are fine. If we secured a
border, the border of Trodean certainly saying look, we don't need more people,
we don't need more money, We just need to be freed up to
actually follow the law, and we could actually secure the border. They're being
prevented from following the laws of our country to defend our country. And it
really doesn't get more basic than that than at our border. Well, that
would be a wonderful thing. And in the past I've also I'm just a
slep radio talk show host, but I'm thinking the country right now is seriously
off track. I'm looking at some polling. Of course, polling is an
irrelevant. Legislation is what matters. But according to this, according to a
poll out of the Washington Post, seventy eight percent of the country as a
negative view of the future. One might say, who are the other twenty
two percent? But when you have three forks of the American people say we're
completely off track. We have an out of control bureaucracy the FBI, etc.
We have a chief executive officer who's not mentally equipped to do the job.
We have laws that are not enforced by the bureaucracy because they don't want
to enforce them or doesn't fit their viewpoint of what the laws should be.
The country is seriously off track. And so I would hope in the future
there might be an idea to call the convention of Stage get thirty eight states
to say, let's do it. And if that happens, you could limit
it, maybe things such as southern border, such as reforming the entitlements,
such as thirty four trillion dollars and national debt on its way to forty trillion
dollars by twenty thirty, which is only seven years away, and the interest
payments on the national debt now are one trillion dollars plus a year, which
we can't afford. And this meme is going around of this Norman Rockwell painting
of a farmer standing up and saying, why should I pay taxes if we
can simply print more money? And how about that? The writing answer to
that is if dipstits don't matter, then why tax people? Is it just
because you hate people that make money? And there are plenty of people paying
taxes don't make that much, and you layer in all the layers of tax
that we've got. You know, there's another one I saw going around,
What is the income tax? It's a penalty for not being as bold as
your forefathers never tolerated this nonsig no. And if you look, one of
the most important things is bouncing the budget you look at. Everyone knows that
you have to do that right and in theory, Congress knows that, but
every year they increase it. I mean, Willie, we had some of
the most basic spending cuts in the world laid out there, and almost every
single one, you'd have anywhere from twenty to seventy Republicans crossing over with all
the Democrats going, well, you know we can't cut that. Well,
we can't turn this off. Well we can't turn that off. You're going
to turn something off. I mean, you're spending two trillion dollars more than
we bring in in taxes and tariffs and every other way the government makes money.
You have to turn something off. We have a spending problem. Well.
I also would add that story out of the Washington Post that the FBI
had forty confidential informants. These are human assets tracking the Biden family shady business
deals. Beginning in twenty oh nine. They've been at this for like fifteen
years of tracking Joe Biden's monetizing the vice presidency, monetizing being out of office,
and then monetizing the presidency to his family's benefits. He's spent fifty years
in government. He has seaside properties all over the East coast, and seemingly
he's made no more, no more than one hundred and seventy five thousand dollars
a year in office with two homes before he became the president. The presidency,
I think pays four hundred thousand dollars a year. And so you have
a FBI who's giving practological exams to the conservative organizations, including Donald Trump.
They're going after the Federalist Society, going after the NRA, and the FBI
is got his eyeshut about all the criminal misdeeds of Joe Biden at all and
has not ignored. You brought up the new FBI building. Can you explain
how that plays in to the control we want to have over the bureaucracies and
not vice versa. Yeah, I mean they're basically building a separate campus.
They have the proposal is to build a separate campus that's bigger than the Pentagon
for the FBI. I mean, this is domestic in forcing the laws on
our country. We just found out like the FBI was coordinating with Twitter.
You know, Elon Musk bought the crime scene there at Twitter now x and
we saw how the FBI was coordinating big tech, not just Twitter, but
all the big tech companies. We just get subpoenas on Bank of America,
so we saw how the banks are turning over all your records. Just during
the week of Thanksgiving, we saw how AT and T surely others working with
the federal government to log your phone calls and build the network out. This
isn't tracking al Qaeda, this is tracking American citizens. I mean, they're
building a police state and we're going to give them the headquarters in the tech
to further insulate themselves from accountability. The idea that you would cut them a
check to do anything except to reform the place is mind blowing. And look,
regardless, Donald Trump did pick Chris Ray to lead the FBI. He
was supposed to give the public more confident that the FBI was there to serve
the people. But it's not going well, how do we not fire that
guy? At this point, there has to be accountability, and I think
that's where people are so frustrated. And look, there are the vast majority
of Republicans in Congress want all these things. When I go talk to my
constituents, I'm like, look, you know, I'm fighting for it.
The good news is the majority of the Republicans in the House right now are
fighting for the same kinds of things that you and I want done. Unfortunately,
it's not all of us. And that's what we need. We need
enforcements. And so if the people that are wanting to preserve the status quo
are getting exasperated and exhausted and we're wearing them out, or they're just aging
out so they've been there for forty years, great, let the country send
us some reinforcements so we can deliver on the promises we keep making. Lastly,
it needs done. Lastly, Congressman Warren Davidson, why not take departments
of government and move them to Kansas, maybe Minnesota, send them to Ohio,
bring them to Tennessee. Why not disperse all that around the country.
That was one of my first bills. Will he the drain the swamp back?
The title comes from Trump's idea, but the idea is not new,
but it's something I always love this. Look at the Pentagon's got about less
than ten percent of the military there. We got troops deployed all over the
planet. We could scale that back, for sure, but either way,
why not have the Department of Agriculture have lots of their employees based out here
where we grow food. Yes, Yes, have the Department of Interior out
in the west where we own all these western lands. Maybe they'd see it's
okay to cut down some dead trees in the forest instead of letting them be
fueled for forest fires. That have people that grew up there and understand the
issues, and it would cost way less than all the money. The East
coast, Washington, d C. Home to some of the wealthiest counties in
the country, and that's where the average guy in America feels like their paycheck's
getting wrecked and it's being sent to Washington, d C. So that you
can fund an elite that's totally discanted from our country. I hope we can
pass the drain the swamp back, but it hasn't caught on yet. Well,
as you said, as long as the Democrats control the Senate or even
Republicans, you need sixty votes to do anything, and I cannot conceive of
Republicans getting sixty Senate seats. I guess it's possible, but we'll see what
happens. But I know there's many opportunities. And Warren Davidson, you're like
a normal person. I'm glad you're there, but keep preaching. It's an
honor to be there. And I just look at people do keep sending us
more reinforcements, more people that are there to do the right thing. And
I've seen the momentum shift in the house since I've been there, and I
feel like, look, keep sending us reinforcements. We are going to get
this done because we have to. Congressman war david no question we are,
but we're teetering. And if we continue beginning of next year, another four
to eight year run of Gavin Newsom or Kamala Harris, it's done. It's
over, the country's done. We'll be fifty trillion dollars. There'll be a
dead crisis, in which case dollars will be worth nothing, pensions will be
worth nothing. Thing, and you need to wear a barrow full of dollars
to buy a loaf of bread. And we've got to stop the madness.
Warren Davidson, Congressman, once again, thank you for coming on the Bill
Cunningham Show. Always an honor. Thank you, Willie. God bless you
and your listeners, and God bless America, and Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays,
Bill Cunningham, the great American, live with you every Sunday night.
And whenever we think we can change government by voting for politicians to make our
lives better, that's probably a mistake, because the success or failure of your
life is completely within your hands and your family's hands. It can be enhanced,
it can be hurt by government, but not yet can it be destroyed
by government. So when the Republicans tell me, look, we could do
all these great things, do all these good things. However, it takes
sixty votes in the Senate to do anything, and of course they will do
nothing. Given a chance, they'll do absolutely nothing. The status quo is
what Chuck Schumer desires, and he gets it because the House Republicans can pass
what they want to pass. They can impeach Joe Biden, who needs to
be impeached for his criminal misbehaviors of taking bribes directly and indirectly from the nation's
enemies, but the trial would take place in the Senate probably next spring or
summer, and I can't conceive of Democrats getting rid of Joe Biden. The
only way to change that is to change the constitution. I'll's continue with more
coming up. Next will be the great Eric grew Arc of Numbers USA.
Numbers USA about what's happening on the southern border. Go Cunningham with you every
Sunday night, Willie Brook. You by Choice Hotels, Econo Lodge and Roadway
in Hotels are serving up double points for every qualifying stay book at Choice Hotels
dot com. Now here's the man who's been recognized as radio's best, the
recipient of not one, but two prestigious Marconi Awards for his broadcast excellence,
the one and only Bill Cunningham. Bill Cunningham, the great American Eric grew
Ark is with Numbers USA, one of the great private organizations that keep track
of illegal migration in this country and the effect that we have from Tinder to
frow. And after the great debate on Thursday night between the governors of Florida
and California, I'm thinking, boy, California is a sanctuary city. Sanctuary
state. Florida is not. According to Gavin Newsom, California's doing great with
all those sanctuary seekers. And how the great the poop map put together by
Governor DeSantis was the highlight. And think of that great debate. But until
then I also would note that a Halla Handra at MAJORCAS has visited the southern
border a few days ago to get operational updates. As you know, the
southern border is completely closed and all the cities in California are doing a great
job. But Eric Rewark once again from Numbers USA, welcome to the Bill
Cunningham Show. First of all, let's deal with the visit of Homeland Security
Secretary of my Yorkers, who should be impeached. Can you tell us what
happened on the southern border when he visited a few days ago and what operational
updates that he provide. Well, not a whole lot happened besides photo ops.
It is you know, obviously he's comment under a lot of heavy criticism
because he keeps showing up to Congress to testify, and he keeps telling him
that the border is he and they keep pointing out to him, at least
the Republicans do that that's not the case. So this was an opportunity,
and I'll have to say, I don't know. Probably not a lot of
people besides me followed closely DHS and ICE and these other immigration agencies on social
media. But we track that because that's that's what we do. And there's
a big campaign for them to point out how many people that are actually to
turing at the border and how many people they're moving from the interior of the
country, which isn't the case. So this is this is a pr campaign.
You know, obviously there's an election coming up, and so Secretary may
Orcus is trying very hard to give the impression that the border is secure and
that they're managing it. But you know, his argument contradicts himself because he
says the border is secure, but yet he keeps telling Congress that in order
to fully secure the border, they need to pass laws, which he demands.
You know, he's not going to enforce the laws they've already passed.
He wants them to pass the laws that he wants to enforce, and basically
that means just letting everyone in and making them legal. So the Bide administration
has claimed that they've created new legal pathways for certain nationalities Nicaraguan's Cubans, Venezuelans,
and alec of Dorans. They don't have the authority to do this,
but they're parolling them in and they're giving them work permits and claiming that this
is something they have the ability to do. So Mayorkas has given the impression
that everything's you know, hunky dory, that it's under control. But anyone
who is paying attention, and that's you know, and this is across the
board Americans, right, this isn't a partisan issue. Most Americans understand what's
happening at the border because they're seeing it affecting their communities. California, you
know, that's been a long term issue. I saw Governors Santis point out
to Governor News how many people have left California to move to other states.
That's what we call secondary migration. And one of the push factors making people
leave California is the rapid rise of the population due to the influx of immigration.
And obviously they have the largest illegal immigrant population in the United States.
And the goal I think is political, which is when I talked to my
friends in Nevada and other states, that anyone who gets a driver's license,
legal or a legal resident can get an application to vote. It's automatically sent
to you. Then ballots are sent out. But one thing that didn't happen
in the Great Debate, which I think should have, is that the stay
in Mexico policy is the key to controlling the border. That is, if
you have to apply for refugee or status and you can only apply in Mexico,
Suddenly what Trump was doing came into focus. So just from a policy
perspective, what were the two or three things that Trump did that shut down
the southern border that Biden refuses to do. Well? The remain in Mexico
policy was instrumental. And you know, people when people think back about it
the Trump administration, they think about, you know, tough border security and
enforcement, and that was that was the case at the end of President Trump's
term. But what happened is that was a response to a surge that occurred
during the earlier part of his term. You know, he came in,
he was talking about building a wall and getting tough, and we saw initial
drop in illegal crossings. But once and this is this is the case always,
the cartels, you know, the smugglers and the traffickers, they wait
to see what new policies are put in place, and they realized that the
tough talk wasn't actually being implemented in policy. And there was various reasons for
that. But then they realized that you could still bring people over to the
border, and they would get into the United States. And that's when the
Trump administration put in these policies, which which were very effective. Remain in
Mexico. But most people who were coming to the border are claiming asylum credible
fear. You know, they say, if you return me to my home
country, I'm going to be persecuted, right, and then they're let into
the country. What the Trump administration said, okay, we will process you
know, no matter whether you come to the United States legally or across the
border without permission, you still have the right under US law to claim asylum.
Right, go through the process, right, But that doesn't mean you're
supposed to be released into the United States. And so the Trump administrator said,
you will wait to Mexico will process your acclaim. But most people who
are coming out, almost all the people who are now coming to the border,
don't have legitimate asylum claims. And if they know that they're going to
have to remain on the Mexican side of the border, most are going to
not even make the journey. And those who do, you know, they
don't want to wait around, and they're going to go home because they're not
here because they're being persecuted to hear, because they want to enter the United
States. Most of them want work, they want to join family who are
already here, they want benefits. You know, there's a big magnet drawing
them in. But if you can make if you deny the easy access into
the United States, into the interior, they're not going to show up.
And that was the main thing that Trump did. They also, you know,
COVID obviously had a big effect on a border across Title forty two,
which the Biden administration lifted, which basically prevented anyone from coming across the border,
or if they did, they could be immediately returned. So that was
lifted, and now we have a policy, you know, we get you
know, the other side say, is it not an open border, And
that's true in the sense that not every single person showing up gets in,
but almost everyone showing up eventually can get in to the United States. And
so there's a turnstyle you just have to go. The Bide administration would like
you to go through the turnstyle, but they also would like basically everyone to
go through that into the United States, whether or not they have a legal
authority to be or legal authorization to be in the United States. The Biden
administration is doing their best to get in. As far as the millions I
live in Cincinnati, if you take Ohio, Kentucky, Indiana, there's about
twenty two million people that live in Ohio, Kentucky, Indiana. We like
to think it's the heart that beats the entire country. Maybe I'm wrong,
but Ohioan's Hoosiers Kentuckians. About twenty two million live here. And what are
the numbers. Let's assume that in the first four years of the Biden administration
illegals entering the country. Give me that number. And then if we continue
those policies four more years, let's say Biden gets re elected, I kind
of I'm somewhat certain that he's not going to be the nominee. The guy
mentally is disintegrating. But nonetheless, if his policies continue, if we go
through an eight year period of these open border type policies, in my orcus,
will we get to the number of approximately twenty to thirty million illegals,
which is the population of Ohio, Kentucky, Indiana combined. Is that possible?
That certainly is possible, And you know, numbers usa are. You
know, we're not out there trying to you know, be fire breathers or
say, you know, we never want to exaggerate the problem, but on
the other side, you don't want to under play what's going on here.
And very well could see ten million people coming in illegally during the Biden's first
term. We do know. And the problem with giving out numbers is the
Biden administration is not very forthcoming with releasing these numbers. But and the other
problem is we just don't know, you know. There's that old saying,
we don't know what we don't know. So there are the people that have
been released into the United States by the Biden administration. There are people who
we know have gotten in who have not been apprehended or encountered by border patrol.
That's about one point seven million at this point. But those are what's
known. They're called known god aways, right, But the unknown godaways we
know are at least equal to that, and they could be several times higher.
And so that's that's the real question mark. Right now, we can
say roughly probably about five to six million people have gotten into the country one
way or the other illegally right under the Biden administration, so we could reach
that ten million mark by the end of his first term, which is really,
when you think about it, just unfathomable. And again, the Biden
administration is taking the position that we aren't going to secure the border and there's
nothing you can do about it. Now, there is something Congress can do
about it. And HR two, which passed the House back in May,
is something that would remain in Mexico, make it permanent. It would raise
the credible bar fear. It would sorry credible fear bar, would raise that
so that you actually have to demonstrate you have a credible fear before you're allowed
to apply for asylum. It would fund detention space so that people who actually
are apprehended are detained instead of released. It put more border patrol agents on
the border as opposed to what we're doing now is pulling them off and processing
people into the United States. So that's a very important bill. That and
just this week there was a press conference with several Senators in the Freedom House
Freedom Caucus where they are arguing that whatever funding or whatever must pass bill.
But whether it be sending money to Ukraine or to Israel, whatever you might
think of those separate issues. You cannot You have to have border security first
and foremost right. That's not an negotiable, negotiable issue. It has to
be something we prioritize. It's not at the bottom of the list, it's
not off the list. It is at the very top of the list when
it comes to things that Congress must address. And so HR two, that's
what we keep telling people. Tell you're a member of Congress, pass HR
two. That will go a long way to solving this crisis. Now,
Eric grew Ark of numbers USA dot com, you have a great video up
with Senator Harry Reid says birthright, citizenship courages illegal migration and twenty oh seven
when I and you have a clip here of President and then Senator Obama talking
about how evil it is for people to come to the border illegally and then
to come into the country. You have Chuck Schumer sounding like Donald Trump when
it comes to legal migration. In twenty oh five, Hillary Clinton, Bill
Clinton, Chuck Schumer, Barack Hussein, Obama, Harry Reid, We're all
on the side of Numbers USA when it comes to illegal migration. Something happened?
What occurred? Something? Yeah, what occurred? That made the Democrats
completely flip and demand open borders, fentanyl, human trafficking. What happened to
the Democrats? And you're right, and you're right that we the Democrat at
least what we would say the centrist Democrats were very much on the side of
numbers USA not that long ago. I mean President Obama was a candidate.
I mean he spoke very forcibly about make sure we control the border and stem
the flow of the legal immigration. If I remember correctly the video that you're
referencing of Senator Reid, he said, what same country would have this kind
of policy? Well, it's this one. But something happened politically. They
had to decide, we're losing the working class. Therefore we have to substitute
the voters with another group. It may not turn out to be that way,
but was it strictly political? Did money flow across hands? Always follow
the money? Why did every major Democrat flip and refuse to control the border.
What happened? Well, I think the main cause of that was the
abandonment of the democratic leadership of the work of working class Americans. Right.
They decided that they were going to cater to the business interests who are demanding
more foreign workers coming in, and they assumed that could maintain their base,
right, the support among working class Americans. Now we're starting to see that's
not been the case. Trump obviously made great inroads with white working class voters,
but if you look at New York City, you look at Chicago,
you look at other cities run by Democrats, the voters there are up in
arms, and black Americans are starting to speak out. I mean, Mayor
Adams said, this will ruin, This just will destroy New York City,
this migrant crisis. They're cutting budgets, school budgets, for police, for
firemen. Chicago is giving out nine thousand dollars two migrants for housing costs,
right while they're cutting benefits and assistance to residents of that city. And so
whether or not the Democratic Party can maintain that support among their base with these
policies, that remains to be seen. But we you know, we never
know if we've reached the tipping point until after we've reached that. But this
certainly seems like we may we may be at that that point where we're starting
to see bipartisan uh movement to change these policies where it's not well We're going
to vote for the Democrat because he's a Democrat, no matter what happens with
immigration, you know. And and and that's a double edged sword, right
because, uh, the optimistic view is, well, things have gotten so
bad, you know that we can actually affect change. But the other side
of that is things have gotten so bad, right, yeah, And it
really, it really is a crisis. And again you can't downplay what's going
on. But there is the opportunity for a real movement. And the fact
that Congress, you know, in February, DHS funding comes up, right,
and so in January we also have other budgets, So Congress, no
one wants to shut it down for political reasons. You can't live Democrats are
gonna have to ar you can't live in airports, you can't live in police
stations. Should right now, they had temperatures in the teens. People are
going to die. And the Black Residence of Chicago, who put the clown
in charge of the mayor's office, is even there saying we can't take this
anymore. Imagine if that was doubled or tripled in the next couple of years.
You can't live in the San Diego International airport. You can't live on
the streets in many of our cities because of the cold weather coming despite all
the man made global warming taking place. And at some point we're going to
come to our senses, hopefully not before it's too late. And once again,
numbers USA dot Com is wonderful and Eric drew Ark, a lot of
work lies that in twenty twenty four, and you're kind of blowing the whistle.
And what happens next year if we continue politically these policies, what's going
to happen to our major majestic cities are slotting into a poop directory in which
you have to be careful to walk over the poop to get the work,
and the city is going to collapse. And we can't continue on this path.
And Eric drew Ark, Merry Christmas, Happy New Year, and thank
you for coming on the Bill Cunningham Show. And please let's do it again.
Thank you, Eric, that was my pleasure. Thank you God bless
Let's continue with more if a line becomes available, which it never does eight
sixty six six four seven seven three three seven these policies have incorporated with them
and within them the availability of ruining our majestic cities and causing them to be
nothing but shells of their former self. It's all caused by policy and policy
changes, and we must stop. Let's continue. Bill Cunningham with you every
Sunday night. Billy Cunningham, the Great American. I'd love to hear from
people from Numbers, USA, like Eric Ruar. Imagine being a man or
a woman, and there's only two genders. There's only two sexes, by
the way, working on the Southern border, and that we've en on Ali
Bradley of News Nation, Sean Compton's great cable news outfit to talk about physically
what she's observing every day along the Arizona part of the southern border. It
is beyond ridiculous. Only happening in America nowhere else. Goes to policy failures.
And the two things that would change it fundamentally are two policies in effect
when Donald Trump was in office. Number One, you must make any claim
for asylum not in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, or Columbus, Ohio, or Austin,
Texas. You're gonna have to make those claims. Guess what In Mexico.
You have to stay in Mexico. You can't come here and the second
thing is to complete the southern border wall so that using drones and other modern
means, you can actually direct the forces to the place where they're most needed.
That would stop the rapes, stop the robberies, stop the murders,
and likely stop the importation of tons of fentanel in this country, killing over
one hundred thousand Americans every year. That is totally ridiculous. Let's continue with
more. Coming up, actually, Steve molloy of junk Signs dot com to
talk about the cold wave and the snow hitting all over Europe right now.
In fact, a lot of those going to the climate change summit in the
Middle East have their plane stuck to the tarmac. It's so cool. Let's
continue with more. Bill Cunningham with you every summer, you know, all
right, Bill Cunningham, the great American. Of course, as we speak,
there's a big conference underway in Dubai in which the rich and famous have
got together and their five star hotels and their private golf streams going to preach
to the rest of us about how evil carbon use is of fuels that make
middle class lives livable. Steve Molloy is his senior Energy and fellow and former
Trump EPA team is available to discuss, of course, all these energy matters.
He also has a great website which deals with all the mistakes of the
climate lies of the past. And I spoke to Steve briefly off the air
and we talked about maybe we're making headway on the topic, but some say
maybe we're not. And Steven molloy, welcome again to the Bill Cunningham Show.
Junk Science is a great website. So what would you anticipate is going
to come out of this is a big powwow in Dubai with mister Ketchup,
John Kerry and these other elites that are going to tell us how evil natural
gas is. Well, Bill, thanks for having me. It's always great
to talk to you. Well, this is the twenty eighth un Climbate conference
called the COP twenty eight. And you know, since climate idiocy began in
nineteen eighty eight, and since these cops have started in nineteen ninety five,
global emissions have increased fifty percent. Now that's okay with me. I think
emissions are good, but they don't. So they get together to meet every
year, and you know, a couple times they have signed treaties and they
have promised to give money, but they've accomplished negatives, not even zero just
you know, for the from for their own agenda, they've they've been negative
in accomplishments. So and this year, uh, you know, the the
the forest has I guess peaked out because the president of the conference is the
CEO of the Abu Dhabi National Oil Company. And if that's not funny enough
for you, he's been using you know, his presidency, his his cop
presidency to sell Abu Dhabi oil. Wonderful, wonderful. Follow the money,
Steve, follow the money. Yeah, no, it's it's really great.
I mean I'm all for him, Uh, selling more oil and gas.
You know, the world needs more oil and gas is what we run on.
Nothing happens in our in our society without oil and gas and coal.
We need all these things. So bully for him. But you know,
so I'm not quite sure why he feels the need to promote climate idiocy at
the same time to pretend he's doing something to change the weather or the climate
or the environment or whatever. It's not happening. It's just it's all a
farce. You know. After the great debate on Thursday Night involving the governors
of Florida and California. And there were so many great points made by Sean
Hannity in that great debate who's a good personal friend? And one thing that
came out of it is is that it appears that maybe the thing is turning
just a little bit. I look at Connecticut. The governor of Connecticut,
a guy named Lamont, who had the same requirements of California up by twenty
thirty six, every vehicle must be electric. They're changing that. I see
that the Ford CEO has lost about four point one billion dollars on electric vehicles.
Everyone they sell cost about thirty one thousand dollars of a loss. That
even when the government bribes people to buy him, people aren't buying him because
he can't resell, and that tow trucks can't pick them up. There's no
way of the power grid. I point out in your article that you say
the US is spending about seven point five billion dollars to build tens of thousands
of electrical vehicle chargers all over Hell's a f acre and that's not working either.
So explain how this whole, this whole farce, this hoax of electric
powered vehicles is falling apart. Well, so this is electric vehicles are going
to go down in textbooks as a classic case of failed industrial government. Industrial
policies sailed central planning. The government thought it could just order evs and it
would work. And of course, you know, evs are more expensive,
they're more inconvenient. You need a whole different infrastructure than we have now.
There's really no upside to them. And manufacturers have basically been blackmailed by the
government into making these things. And as you pointed out, you know,
last month, Ford lost thirty six thousand dollars on every EV sold. Uh
and and so you know, the only way even Tesla, the only way
Tesla can even claim to make a profit is well, number one because it's
subsidies, but number two because a lot of their production is in China.
And to give you an idea of how important that is to Tesla's bottom line.
You know, the average UAW worker, you know, four GM worker
makes about, you know, in the eighties, eighty eighty thousand dollars or
so. The average Tesla worker, most of whom are in China, make
less than half of that. You know, in your order thirty six thousand
dollars, So dud no wonder Tesla you know is doing better than Ford and
GM, but only because you know they're they're abusing Chinese workers. So uh
but but but there's just nothing. You know, consumers don't don't want these
things. You know, wealthy people might buy them as a second vehicle or
sort of a you know, virtue signaling piece, or maybe some toy because
you know, some of these really hot evs can go from zero sixty and
you know, like three seconds or something like that. But it's just not
a serious more dependent on communist China because every EV depends on communist China.
Just for example, the processed graphite that goes into every EV battery, one
hundred percent of that comes from communist China and that is not going to change
anytime soon. Well, what have been two or three major predictions of the
John Kerry crowd that have proven to be completely false? Oh well, they
predicted that the Arctic would be ice free in the summers by twenty thirteen.
You know, this year the hottest summer ever. You know, there's plenty
of ice, you know, millions of square kilometers of ice. No problem,
they have what have they predicted. They have. They have predicted all
their all their climate models have predicted much warmer temperatures than are occurring. Boy,
you know, they've predicted that there would be increases in wildfires and hurricanes
and all sorts of natural disasters. None of those have ever come through.
There's no trended natural disasters that correlates with either emissions or the slight warming we've
seen. So just everything that they've ever predicted has been a bust. But
you know they you know, the first thing they did was capture all the
institutions. They captured the media, they captured the government. They they're funded
by all these rent seekers, so the truth doesn't really anymore. I mean,
this is their agenda, and come hell or high water, they're going
to push it because they've captured everything that could possibly question it. In fact,
you have to follow the money in all scandals, and the government doesn't
fund studies through their university friends that demonstrate that if temperatures raised one or two
degrees over the next seventy years, that might be a positive thing. It's
not a negative, it's a positive. So when the government funds something,
you get more of it. When you tax it, you get less of
it, and there's no they've incorporated within the minds of our youths. We
say, for those between the ages of twenty and forty, that climate crisis
is real, that we're going to have much more hurricanes. By the way,
the hurricane season ended a couple of days ago, and we've had I
think zero or one hurricanes that struck the United States of America. And wasn't
that a non story this year? Yeah, the hurricanes have been a non
story in the US. And you know, we're at the point where if
there's a gust of wind someplace in the South Atlantic in the summer, we
count that as a storm. Well, you know, names totally crazy.
I want to hit the point that you mentioned about the government paying for studies.
You know, the art of war, all battles are won before they're
fought. Well, with government funded science, all science is determined before it's
funded. So the government only gives money to people who are going to produce
the answers it wants. And that's what climate science has been. There's been
no honest evaluation of climate science funded by the government ever. And in fact,
now when you fund these studies, you get lots of them, and
right now the democrats, and these aren't the democrats of history. These are
the left wing Democrats have their friends in and out of universities and other study
groups that simply are paid garbage in, garbage out, And that when you
teach something for twenty years, people are apt to believe it. And so
the overcoming of the orientation and the indoctrination of kids through college has got to
be a goal of some to bring light and not so much heat to the
art. I also see in one of your columns about about getting rid of
flatulent animals that somehow the bovines, the cows, the pigs, the sheep,
and the lambs and the chickens are an environmental disaster. In fact,
there the left is now saying, quit eating hamburgers and don't have chicken because
of what's required. And explain how I have to give up a big mac.
Explain that number nine. Explain why I can't eat hamburgers anymore because cats
have too much flatulence. I think John Carey has too much flatulence. That's
a different story. But explain what the left wants to do their hamburgers.
Well, so the vegans have adopted the climate movement, and the theory is
that livestock produce when they belch and far, they produce methane and methane and
they claim is a greenhouse gas and warms the planet. And of course,
you know it's sort of a laboratory setting. Yes, methane has greenhouse gas
properties, but of course in the atmosphere, which is a lot more complicated,
it has absolutely no no warming potential at all. Nonetheless, facts don't
matter. They are using this to, you know, push the anti meat
agenda. And of course there are the rent seekers in the you know,
fake meat business, and they've all gotten together and are pushing this anti meat
agenda. Now, keep in mind, al Gore has it that he in
fact is not giving up Cheeseburgers's the line he has drawn. Now, green
meat is not something I find physically. You know, you have to eat
it with your eyes before you eat it with your mouth, and then think
about green processed meat. It's not something I'm attracted to. Yeah. No,
And there are all these companies out there that are trying to figure out
how to feed us insects and seed pets. Insects nothing taste cockroach. I've
always said that give me some cockroach, but some ketchup on it. That's
a big thing in California, isn't it. You got to eat insects and
cockroaches. Yeah, no, it's very crazy. Yeah, give me a
cockroach to go get it. It's un And you wrote a book of years
ago called Green Hell, How environmentalists plan to control your life and what you
can do to stop them. One thing I've noticed is that supposedly in twenty
twenty six that we're going to have governors who are going to have kill switches
on cars. And another thing is the thermostats. So many thermostats today are
smart thermostats, and it's going to be like in the winter time the highest
you can bring the temperature is sixty five and in the summertime the low as
you can go seventy five. And the government's goal is to kill your car,
control the heat inside your home, know your role, and shut your
mouth. There was a movie called Soiling Green years ago in which we processed
dead bodies in the meat and people didn't know they were eating your grandmother.
Is that where this is headed? Well? Right? So the government is
behind these kill switches in cars, and also smart meters. Now, smart
meters have been sold people as a way you can monitor your electricity use and
reduce emissions. No, smart meters are a way for the government to shut
down your appliances when they want. You know, we have all these quote
unquote smart appliances, and with smart meters, the government, through the utility,
can can shut them off whenever they want. With the kill switches.
It's the same thing. It's being sold to us as a means of you
know, preventing drunk driving. Of course, who doesn't want to do that.
But of course, you know the technology, I doubt they can ever
have that technology you actually make it work. But anyways, their goal is
to get that technology into cars so that you know, through the satellites,
through just the way you get your GPS information, they're going to kill your
car whenever they want. Now they don't want to drive, and you're not
gonna be able to start it. Is that real? In twenty twenty six,
the government can kill your car if you're driving too many miles, they'll
say you can't drive anymore. Tony Benner, You're done, you can't drive
anymore. Is that real? What do you mean? Of course, it's
in the legislation. Thomas Massey from Kentucky tried to, you know, the
last spending bill, tried to insert an amendment to get the government out of
that. But of course you know it's sailed because you know, everybody in
Congress is all for the government, even Republicans, And so you know,
the government is going to be funding research on how to install this technology in
every car. You can bet that it's going to be mandated in every car.
And once they can figure out, you know what Bill Cunningham, what
car Bill Cunningham is in, they're going to turn it off. I'm in
a Chevy Blazer. I guess they can turn me off anytime they want.
How much longer? You know, every you and I Steve Molloy are against
pollution. I don't like stinky air. I don't like unclean water. The
country right now, the water in the air is as clean as it's been
for the last one hundred years. And every year that goes by, he
gets more clean. But that's not good enough, is it. No,
Because it's not about clean air. It's about control. You mentioned my book
Green Hell. They want to control every aspect of your life. They want
to tell you what to eat, what kind of electricity you can use,
where you can live, what you can drive, what you should invest in,
what kind of toilet you can have, what kind of water fiction,
what kind of toilet paper? I mean, there's just no aspect of your
life that is too personal for them to control. They you know, there
are eight billion people on the planet. They want less because you know,
first off, totalitarians can't control eight billion people, but they can control two
billion people, and that's where they want to go. Ultimately. Well,
between all the abortion on demand and also eating cockroaches and also maybe grandmother down
the road sarline green style, I can see where we're headed. Steve Malloyd,
I began this interview with is their hope? And I have a sense
there's hope because of what the Connecticut Governor's doing because people aren't buying evs.
Do you have any any hope this can be turned around? I do.
I think the wheels are falling off the whole thing with the electric cars,
you know, leading the way. I think that, you know, the
longer we go by, more time that passes, the more the climate hoax
is exposed. Now there's kind of a race here. We have to the
hoax has to be exposed in time for people to vote out the idiots who
are trying to control us with it. Well, that's the goal, hope.
Can you imagine if next November we have a Kamala Harris or a deranged
mentally Joe Biden still in power for four more years after that, isn't there
a point of no return? It may be time for revolution? Saying because
I know what Jefferson said about revolutions every now and then, but he might
have been so jump science dot com and I see all the books that you've
written, are the articles that you've written, and you were an advisor.
I have a great picture of you with APA Administer Scott Prude under the Trump
years, and there was hope. And let's let's keep hope alive. That's
all we have. And once again see malloy. Merry Christmas and happy New
Year to you and yours, and let's keep it going. Merry Christmas to
you, be careful, Merry Christmas. Let's continue with more and if a
line becomes available. Eight sixty six six four seven seven three three seven,
Bill cunning and the Great American with you and all great Americans every Sunday Night
are a hoax. They will never accomplish as they set out to be to
get rid of carbon based fuels, which will be with us for the next
twenty thirty to forty years or longer until someone creates di lithium crystals from star
Trek and maybe change all energy production or hydrogen I'm not sure, or more
nuclear power plants or whatever it might be. But all the electricity is now
produced by fossil fuels. And to get rid of these vehicles is a joke.
To tow them as a joke. Talk to a tow truck driver about
what is required to tow one of these vehicles. It is a joke.
And so also the price the average middle classroom mat and cannot afford. My
producer, Danny Gleeson cannot afford, an ev they are too expensive. When
the wheels hit the street, they go down in value about twenty to thirty
thousand dollars. And the government's got to bribe you in order to buy one
by giving you tax credits of one type or another. And we can't afford
it. Plus, according to Sean Hannity, they have more mechanical process Let's
continue with more coming up next is the great John Lott. Go Cunningham with
you every Sunday. You know, Willie ad the ball rough you by Choice
Hotels, a Counter, Lodge and Roadway and Hotels are serving up double points
for every qualifying stay book at Choice Hotels dot com. Now here's the man
who's been recognized as radio's best, the recipient of not one but two prestigious
Marconi Awards for his broadcast excellence, the one and only Bill Cunningham, My
Billy Cunningham, the great American. Of course, many of us who are
political junkies spent some time on Thursday night watching the great debate between the governors
of Florida and California. One of the things that struck me, and when
he said this, all I could think about was John Lott of Crime Research
dot Org. And that is that he's again the Democrats are saying that there's
a much worse crime rate in red states and even red cities, which I
know is false, which I know is not the case. So joining you
and I now is John Lott and John Lott. Welcome again to the Bill
Cunningham Show. And John, I don't know if you saw the debate itself,
between Gavin Newsom and Ron DeSantis. But one of the points made by
the Santas is that, you know, Florida is relatively safe in California is
not. You have the numbers. Who's right and who's wrong. I mean,
it's not even close. I mean, the violent crime rate in California
is like twice the violent crime rate in Florida, you know, and it's
pretty obvious why California has a worse violent crime rate than Florida had. Now
they want to go and focus on murders, which are much closer between the
places. But you know, it's yeah, and Gavin Newsom is kind of
responsible for making this claim earlier this year. The states that voted for Trump
in two thousand had a higher murder rate than the states that voted for Bien.
And that's true in twenty twenty in twenty twenty one, the reverse was
true. You actually had the states that voted for Biden had a higher murder
rate, and that data was already out at the beginning of this year.
They knew that, and yet they ignored it, and all the fact checkers
out there kind of ignored it. But look, there's a more fundamental problem,
and that is crime. It's almost always a local issue. When you
go and you have policing, no member police are going to hire. Who
do you think decides that? It's the local governments that decide that. Who
do you think determines a lot of the policing policies or virtually all of them.
It's a politicians that determine that. Who do you think makes decisions have
prosecutions? It's locally elected district attorneys. Judges are overwhelmingly elected locally across the
country. So when you're talking about who's going to be arrested and whether they're
going to be arrested, and whether you're talking about whether people are going to
be prosecuted and charged with crimes, and when you're talking about sentencing, those
are all decisions that are being made locally. And so you know, what
you find is that across the whole country, the counties that voted for Biden
have a much higher crime rate, much higher murder rate than the counties that
voted for Trump. And that's true whether you break it down by the Biden
States or the Trump States, and both the Biden and the Trump States,
it's the Biden counties have higher murder rates than the Trump counties, and that's
in the twenty twenty data where the Democratic states have a lower murder rate.
The reason why the Trump states have a high murder rate then was because of
these counties that are there, these Democratic counties. I mean, it's not
difficult to go and see what's going on there. And I'm looking at your
website, crimeresearch dot Org, which is a great it's got this map the
United States of America and one of the factors, and there's many factors in
what causes crime. There's a very small number causing disproportion and impact causing food
deserts. The inability of people to walk around a night in Chicago is well
known. But you have a concealed carry permit report that is all fifty states,
and it just looks on the surface that if you're a blue city in
a blue state like all of California, Illinois, New York, et cetera,
that concealed carry permit holders are small in comparison to states like Iowa,
Kentucky, in the Anna, Ohio, and Florida. And so that's a
part of it. But the other part is is a functioning public education system.
The other part of it is moms and dads living together, caring about
their offspring. The other part of this thing is judges. My wife spent
twenty five years on the bench, and I think she was a conservative.
But nonetheless, what conservative judges, conservative prosecutors have one approach to crime.
Liberals have a different approach that has failed. And so what do you say?
Because I watch you testifying the Congress, I love your articles, I
watch your stuff, and it's hard to break through what the media considers to
be important when it comes to crime. I'd like to see John Lott on
set with David Muir of ABC News. I'd like to see you with Lesterer
Holt. I like to see you talk about why it's important they have concealed
carry permit holders and the half million to one million crimes every year not committed
because of somebody a good guy with a gun. I'd like to see that.
But that's not happened yet. I doubt it's ever going to happen,
and so is one of the solutions, one of many to holding down the
crime rate is to allow more and more Americans to have properly concealed permits and
or open carry constitutionally and also allows someone who's an allegation of domestic violence and
allegation to be able to protect themselves. Please inform the American people. Yeah,
I mean, look, everything you've said I agree with. There are
lots of factors that affect crime rates, everything from single parent families to you
know, not making it risky for criminals to commit crime. And you can
make it risky for criminals to commit crime in many different ways. You can
make it from a higher rest rates and conviction rates and longer person sentences,
but you can also make it riskier for criminals to commit crime by allowing victims
to be able to go and defend themselves. And if my research convinces me
of anything, it's the most vulnerable people in our society who benefit the most
from having guns for protection, people who are relatively weaker physically, women,
the elderly, and also people who are the most likely victims of violent crime.
That overwhelmingly tends to be poor blacks who live in high crime urban areas.
So it's not just you know, the irony is when you look at
heavily democratic states, whether it be California or New York or Illinois, the
people that they let get permits are basically wealthy people who live in the suburbs,
and that's fine, but they're not the ones who are facing much crime.
I mean, you could have one hundred percent of the population with a
concealed carry permit in a county, but if there's zero crime, you know
that would occur there, You're not going to see any reduction in crime.
You have to have the people who are carrying be the ones who live in
the high crime urban areas. And so in a place like Illinois where it
costs over four hundred dollars or so to go through the process to get a
concealed carried permit, who do you think is going to get a permit when
you're charging that much? In California and New York, we're up until recently,
you had to provide a good reason to some Democratic official for why you
should be able to carry. The Democratic officials only seem to think that wealthy
whites who are wealth politically connected were the ones that had good reasons to build
to get permits. We had the data on all the concealed carried permit holders
in Los Angeles County a few years ago. They had like three hundred and
forty one concealed carried permit holders. In an adult population of eight and a
half million people, only seven percent of the permit holders were women, Only
five percent were black, only six and a half percent were Hispanics. You
know, nationwide, you're talking about thirty percent of permit holders are women.
Is it just that the women who live in Los Angeles County don't have to
worry about being stalked or threatened with crime that blacks in Los Angeles County or
Hispanics who have permits outside of California where they didn't need to get approval from
some local Democratic official, had much higher permit rates. Is it just that
they blacks and Hispanics in Los Angeles don't face crime. I mean, it's
just not a serious issue. It's just that for some reason, the powers
that be didn't think that they had good reasons to be able to go and
protect themselves. They didn't think, oh, hardly anybody did, other than
people who gave large political contributions and were politically connected to for the sheriff,
and you know, John Lytton, those facts are stubborn things that say,
it looks to me like the Democratic Party does not act in a way to
protect its own voters, which is allowing Democratic voters in high crime areas to
have a streamlined procedure to be able to get a weapon and to protect themselves.
Democratic politicians should be encouraging that, not discouraging it, because they're the
ones affected by it, but the media doesn't cover it that way. Are
Democrats wising up to what's happening to them? Do you think? I hope
so. I mean, you see, I mean, if you look over
the last ten years, there's been a sea change in terms of who gets
permits. And this is one of the things we put point out in our
reports that we put out. Over the last ten years, the permit rate
for blacks has increased about two hundred and twenty percent faster than for whites.
For women, it's increased about one hundred and eleven percent faster than for men.
And so, you know, you begin to see. I think that
these groups begin to understand that how much they benefit from being able to go
and have guns. You've seen their survey data out there. NBC News just
came out with the survey that shows that over half of American households own a
gun. I think that actually underrepresents the total that's there, and we could
talk about why that's the case. But among the fastest group of people getting
bhind guns are blacks yea. And my own guess is right now, if
you could go and break it down by religion, you'd find that a lot
of traditionally democratic Jews are going out getting guns for protection, as they should,
and also Muslims. There's three boys that were shot and Vermont. One
of them so anounced earlier today, is paralyzed from the chest down. And
there was a mentally ill person who wanted to kill I would imagine Palestinians,
and they had no way to defend themselves against his lunatic and he shot the
three boys, one of whom has permanent disabling injuries that may not have happened
if they had possession of a firearm. I don't know what the laws are
in New Hampshire and Vermont. I imagine there's somewhat somewhat free and easy,
but I'm not sure, but there's a proclivity against guns. Guns are inanimate
metal objects, but the media covers it as if you're possessing fentanyl or something
wrong or something bad, and it just seems to me, Yeah, well,
look, guns make it easier for bad things to happen, there's no
doubt about that, but they also make it easier for people to protect themsels
also prevent bad things from happening. And what we see is that one of
the things we show and the report is that permit holders are incredibly lawbody and
you're talking about people. If you compare it to police. For example,
permit holders are convicted of firearms related crimes that one twelfth the rate that police
are convicted of firearms related violations, and police aren't rarely convicted. Police are
convicted about one twentieth the rate of the general population. So that means permit
holders are convicted about one two hundred and fortieth the rate of the general population
is the time fraction. So you know, are there banned people with guns?
Yeah, but the problem is with so many gun control laws is that
you're primarily taking guns away from the people who obey the laws. The reason
why every place in the world that's either banned all guns or all handguns has
seen an increase in murder rates every single time, it's basically because it's the
most law abiding, good citizens who obey the ban and turn in their guns.
I mean, and this applies to other types of gun control laws,
not just dance. Now you have a column up about three weeks ago at
the Wall Street Journal John Lotton, how to handle domestic violence and gun rights.
Well, one of the articles of the radical left is these red flag
laws. And if someone charges somebody with a piece of paper saying he violated
my rights domestically, all of a sudden, all your weapons can be gone
in many states, and you may not get them back for a long time.
You're left uncapable of defending yourself. But if you would ask most people
about domestic violence or beating up I guess your wife, should that person lose
the possession of their guns? The public would probably say yes, but they're
terribly misinformed. Tell us why, right, Well, it's actually there's the
reason for the Wall Street Journal piece was there was a hearing before the Supreme
Court dealing with this guy called Rahemi, who is a really bad dude.
I mean, the guy is a drug dealer. He's committed many felonies,
but he just wasn't prosecuted for those. In twenty twenty, he beat up
a girlfriend of his and she got a domestic violence protection order which took away
his guns. But that's a civil process. So here's the distension that is,
he can either convict this guy of being a felon, which they should
have done many times over, and in that case you have beyond reasonable doubt
in terms of whether or not the person is guilty of the crime. But
when you're talking about a civil type decision, you don't even necessarily have to
have a hearing. The people aren't represented by lawyers that are there. You
can hire a lawyer yourself, but not everybody is going to be willing to
pay ten thousand dollars go into that type of hearing. But then it's just
what they call the preponderance of the evidence, which is just like slightly different
than a coin flip. So you have two people who are making different charges,
and if the judge it's like fifty point one percent likely to believe one
person versus forty nine point nine percent to believe the other, then you know
that's sufficient. It's just is it slightly more than one side from the other.
And the problem is you're going to have mistakes that they're going to be
occurring much more likely there in terms of taking away people's rights if they can't
even have a hearing. And Raheemi didn't have a hearing in this case.
He didn't have wasn't represented by a lawyer, and so there are all sorts
of issues that come up in terms of errors that can occur there. And
so you know, and that's the case before the Supreme Court right now.
The Buying administration pushed the Supreme Court to go and hear this case because Rahemi
is such a bad guy that everybody nobody wants were he me to have a
gun? No, the question is how do you take away his gun?
You take it away by actually prosecuting him for some of the or even one
of the felonies that he was committing. The violent felonies, you know,
where he's firing guns at people or you know, beating up other people.
They could have gone after him many times when you at the prosecutor in the
Dallas area wasn't going to after him. No, well that's Dallas, that's
Dallas, Dallas, Dallas, Austin. Terrible but John Lott once again,
Merry Christmas. Crime Research dot Org. Lots of articles, lots of stuff.
The most law abiding people in the world are those where the concealed carry
permit, or someone legally in possession of a gun in a constitutional carry state.
John Lott, we got to go. Thanks for accepting my call this
glorious Sunday night, and once again, man, you and yours have wonderful
holidays and merry Christmas. Well, thank you, and thank you for beating
their bill. You make right back at you, John Lott, Thank you.
I let's continue with more. Bill Cunningham with you every Sunday night.
I Billy Cunningham, the great American and John Lott spent time in the Trump
Department Adjustice doing research on crime issues. Among the American people, the one
with the lowest incidents of crime are those who have concealed carry permits or legally
carry in a constitutional carry state like Kentucky or Indiana. That is the group
of people that governments should encourage to become armed and to defend themselves and others
because they're law abiding citizen. And I would encourage every black female within the
sound of my voice and the hundreds of thousands who listen to me every Sunday
night to seriously conceal that are purchasing a weapon getting a permit, especially if
you live in a high crime area in which your life and limb is routinely
at risk of damage or death. And I would hope, I would hope
that blue cities and blue states would encourage African Americans and those victimized by so
much crime to actually to actually get that done, because it is critical.
One's right to live involves the right not to be frequently burglarized, have carjackings,
shootings, and rapes and things of that character. And it's critical critical
as an American and a high crime area to know how to protect yourself because
with nine to one one calls and the collapse of so much law enforcement,
all they do is come and take a report. Let us continue. Bill
Cunningham, the Great American, with you every Sunday By Billy Cunningham, the
Great American. Of course, the experts are telling me, after some of
the recent debacles of our current president, the regime headed up by Joe Biden,
that the great to California governor is going to be the next president of
the United States, that Governor Newsom has the right stuff, comes from the
largest state, and that the Democrats tell us what a great job he's done
in California. So Gavin Newsom is going to take the oath of office in
January of twenty twenty five, and all is going to be well with the
world, thank god. We if someone has some information for those who don't
live in California, have gone through the nightmare it's called the California catastrophe and
how to reform our broken system by John Cox, he's written extensively about Gavin
Newsom, what's happening in California and John Cox, Welcome to the Bill Cunningham
Show. And first of all, give the American people an over you Bill,
no problem. Give the American people an overview of what living in California
spend like under Gavin Newsom. Well, unless you're in the top one percent,
Bill, it is really really difficult. Frankly, I live in California
because of the weather, and frankly a lot of people do. But you
know, the politicians can't screw up the weather, but they really screwed up
just about everything else. Famously, California has the highest number of homeless.
It's got a housing shortage, a water shortage, and energy shortage, all
of which are caused by mismanagement and government. Frankly, our education system,
we spend one hundred billion dollars a year on that's most that's higher than most
state budgets, and the results rival Mississippi for some of the worst in the
nation. We've got wildfires threatening us all the time. Our roads are an
absolute disaster. Crime is on the rise. I mean, you almost couldn't
name one aspect of life here except you can get an abortion on every street
corner just about. And the legislature leaves the nation in enacting gun control,
which hasn't had much of an impact on our crime rate. So you name
it. We've got major difficulties here, but you wouldn't know them from the
way the media treats our govern our taxes through the roof. Also, so
many go to Nevada and Arizona, Utah. Let's deal with homelessness. When
the communist dictator, the mass murderers Ujhapain, came to visit San Francisco at
the invite of Gavin or Newsom, all the homeless evaporated, the needles were
cleaned up, the poop was gone. Where did the homeless go? Yeah,
what happens a peace on this gosh? You know they got rid of
them somehow. I mean, you never know what motivation does to people,
right, Bill. I mean, they knew that the city of San Francisco
is going to be highlighted to the world, frankly with this conference, and
so they actually did something. They actually moved the tens cities out. Now,
obviously they didn't deal with the problem permanently, because you still have these
people who, let's face that, most of them are drug addicted or alcohol
addicted, which is very sad. It's not passion, Bill, to leave
someone who was addicted like that to live on the sidewalks. It's not compassionate
to them, and it certainly isn't compassionate to the rest of us or to
the businesses they have to try to exist in that situation. You know,
it's kind of funny, Bill. The major newspapers in California, which usually
love Gavin Newsom because he is so pro abortion and so pro gun control,
they actually criticized him. They actually published editorial pieces that basically said, what
are you doing? You could deal with the problem, but you didn't do
anything about it until the world came to San Francisco's doorstep. And you know,
it just shows you the level of mismanagement, the level of neglect on
the part of these officials. And my book bill is designed to awaken people
around the country to this mismanagement, and you know, make it clear that
electing Gavin Newsom will make this country far worse than even Joe Biden could make
it. You know, I live in Ohio. I'm a Midwesterner. To
think that a Chinese communist mass murderer gets better treatment in California than an average
citizen is disgusting. But I guess even in California, if you're Gavin Newsom,
you think that's par for the course because the Democrats are promoting him as
the substitution for Joe Biden, which I think is likely to happen. Let's
talk about water and wildfires, which in Ohio and because of the Great Lakes,
water is not an issue. Because of the Ohio River, we have
more water, fresh water we could ever used. I often say I've often
asked presidents I as President Trump this, why can't we build pipelines from Ohio
from the Mississippi River all the way out to Nevada or out to California.
We have more water going by Cincinnati, billions of gallons every second we could
never use and They've tried to do that, but they can't do it because
of eminent domain, and it would be a fifteen hundred mile pipeline. We
have thousands of miles of pipeline, but we can't get some of the simple
of that done. Why is water right now? I'm told there's a new
lake somewhere in Death Valley, and I'm told right now there's plenty of water,
but they can't put it in the reservoirs because of ecological concerns. Can
you explain it's mismanagement? Bill? I mean, the California water projects start
in the fifties and turn what were areas that were deserts basically into burdens agricultural
paradises. I mean, California's agriculture is second to none in the world.
We have two growing seasons here. But they've missed management. They haven't built
a new reservoir built in fifty years now. Think about that for a second.
Fifty years ago, California's population was maybe fifteen million or something like that.
Today it's forty and they haven't built a reservoir. I think Newsom finally
finally allowed a permit to go through for a reservoir but we get plenty of
ring. We got a ton of ring in snow last year and it's washed
into the Pacific Ocean. And that's what happened five years ago. Now,
you know, we go through cycles in California. Obviously there's some years we
don't get much rain at all, and that was the reason they decided to
build the California Water Project. Originally, it's a series of canals and reservoirs
that were very well engineered. But they've let it go to seed. They
haven't expanded it even as the population's gone up. And that is just mismanagement.
And you know what it's related to, Bill, It's related to the
rise and power of special interest groups and Sacramento and what do I mean?
You've got environmental lobbyists who just will not allow anything to be done. And
why because they raise all this money from people scaring them half to death.
You know, the delta smelt the little fish here there is going to be
extinctive. We don't you know, if you don't give us, you know,
a thousand dollars to you know, lobby legislators, Well guess what they
raise all this money, they've got to spend it, and they then use
it to kill any effort to manage the water system here. And it's the
same thing with wildfires. They don't let anybody manage the forest because touching the
forest could mean disasters. And obviously they raise money off of those kinds of
things, and they have to get something for the money they raise. And
you know, unfortunately Sacramento is basically owned by these kinds of interest groups and
Gavin Newsom is the leader of the band in that regard. Let's talk about
the public education system, which is complete collapse. The if you're a mother
or a father, you got three kids and you want to send them to
Los Angeles schools, of the San Francisco schools somewhere, all of that character
what kind of education you receive under Governor Gavin Newsom. Well, Gavin Newsom
has turned the schools over to the unions. And why because again it's all
about money. The California Teachers Association has three hundred thousand members at one thousand
dollars a piece, that's three hundred million dollars a year, and they use
a lot of it to help politicians like Gavin Newsom, and they basically control
the system. It's so interesting Bill. I don't know if you saw it,
but last weekend the New York Times finally wrote an editorial that said that's
shutting down the schools during the pandemic was a bad idea. I mean,
I will fell off sheerl when I read that. Oh my lord, wow.
And that's what Gavin Newsom. Gavin Newsom shut down the schools during the
pandemic. He gave into the union and why again because they financed his campaigns
and the kids suffer and we're not going to know the full extent of this
something and this educational deficit for maybe decades now, and it really hurts.
So we have to do something about a government for sale. I want to
make a point, by the way, Bill, that my book is not
just about the problems that Devinism is engendered in California. It's about a solution.
I have a solution that would take the special interest money out of politics
that would return good policy. It's called Here the People. It's all through
the book. It's very popular with voters that we've done focus groups and they
love it. It gets money out, It gets the special interest money out.
And Gavin Newsome is a prime example of a politician who runs his state
according to what these special interest groups want. And what they want is often
what they benefit from, but the rest of us suffer with. And this
is a problem in our politics all through the country. And this book,
I think is going to hopefully be very popular with people who want to do
something about our broken democracy. Name of the book is Newsome Nightmare by John
Cox. One issue that middle class. We have a vibrant middle class in
most of the Midwest. Homes costs between two and three hundred thousand dollars.
Most of the suburban public school districts function. There's little or no crime outside
of the urban areas. As far as family formation, the great majority of
parents show up at parent teacher conferences with an intac family ready to go.
We have large functional parts. A middle class American man or a woman can
live a relatively good life in large parts of Kentucky, Pennsylvania, Ohio.
Is that true in California? Oh? God no. There was just a
poll gun that said that sixty percent of the people in the Bay Area would
leave if they could think about that for a second, that most people here
actually would like to leave to some degree. You know, it's just so
expensive to live here. The housing shortages are just incredible. Bill, The
cost of living is out of control, and Devin Newsom makes it worse every
day. Just recently, I don't know if you were aware of this,
but he enacted a twenty dour minimum wage for fast food workers. So they're
picking out industries like that. Why because those industries, you know, and
the unions who want to organize those industries are paying for this kind of legislation.
Well, a twenty hour minimum wave sounds great, and it may be
necessary because the cost of living so great out here, but that is going
to by itself increase the cost of living all the way down the line with
his buddies from the legislatures just keeps increasing the cost of living with these handouts
to their favored groups. And again, you know, the average person can
live a good life, as you said, in Pennsylvania, Ohio, because
you've got a legislature that doesn't do this stuff. But ours is totally owned
by these interest groups. And that's the reason that California is so it's so
mismanaged and so difficult to live in. If a man or a woman,
what weather, the weather's great, But if a man or a woman wants
to live in a middle class area. What does a house cost? I
have some family members who just bought a house for two hundred and sixty thousand
dollars and a place called Deer Park, a suburb of Cincinnati. Good schools,
good police, flat wall. It's about two hundred and sixty thousand.
Spend twenty grand, get a painting carpet under three hundred thousand. You're ready
to go. What's a typical home middle class Americans? What does it cost?
In California? You're looking at five to six to eight hundred dollars a
foot, So you're looking at a two thousand square foot house at six hundred
hours the foot is a million two bill a million two and it's a million
two a million and yeah, I mean if you're a young person just starting
out, it's it's almost impossible to afford a house with that kind of a
cost. And by the way, the real estate taxes out here aren't cheap.
You know, they make a big deal sometimes about you know what taxes
are like. But you know, our taxes are limited to one percent.
But one percent of a million two bill is twelve thousand dollars a year.
That's a lot of go to a family hours a month just for real estate
taxes. I mean, you know, you have to be making two three
hundred thousand hours a year in California to afford even a minimum lifestyle. And
obviously that's not the case in Ohio or Pennsylvania, or at most anyplace else
the tame in john Cox. You're not talking about a place on the Pacific
Ocean. We're not talking about a place in a gated community with a golf
course. No, no, no, this is inland. Frankly, most
people in California live an hour and a half two hours away from where they
work because a lot of the businesses are located near the coast. But you
can't afford a place near the coast, so you're driving an hour and a
half each way. Think about that, and not only that, bill,
the cost of gasoline in California is six hours a gallon right now. It's
almost twice what you're paying in Ohio. Why because of special blends and special
blends, by the way, environmental blends that have almost zero impact on the
world's pollution. You know, these politicians out here make a big deal about
how oh my god, California is leading the world on this. California's pollution
bill is less than one percent of the world's pollution. And these differences,
that little differences in gasoline blends make a difference of maybe one tenth of one
tenth of one percent of that. So you're meanwhile, China and India are
putting up cold fire power plants like nobody's business. But these politicians out here
make it seem like they're saving the whole world. It's a real problem.
And again, it's a real problem trying to make a go of life in
the Golden State. Well, we got a run. But Gavin Newso,
the governor has in the nation the worst made him as president? Oh my
god, can you imagine him taking California principles to the entire nation. With
homelessness and out of housing difficulties, no water, public skills that suck,
you can't get an education ramp, and crime taxes through the roof gasoline six
dollars a gallon. That's the guy that's got to become the next president.
He's done great work. What happens in California, what happened to christ That's
the guy we got to put in charge. That is a joke. That's
that is a joke. And you know what also is a joke is our
Congress Bill. And I want to emphasize that people can go to hearthepeople dot
Org. I am in this book talking about a way to reform our Congress.
It's what we should be doing in California. It's what we should be
doing all across the nation. We should we should get the media and get
the big money out of politics. Here the people does that by subdividing every
congressional district into one hundred little tiny districts, and the one hundred people who
were elected in these little tiny, you know, community districts, they select
the congressman to go to Washington. Good. The upshot of this is you
get the money out. The only reason that our politicians are owned by these
special interests because they have to spend millions to get elected. And we got
to get rid of that now. Name of the book is Newsom's Nightmare,
written by John Cox. I wish you and yours nothing but the best.
And John, once again, thank you for coming on the Bill Cunningham Show.
Thank you, John, thank you, Bill. Get it. Let's
continue with more Bill cunning in the Great American Live with you every Sunday Night,
Billy cunning in the Great American, thank you for listening to this glorious
Sunday night. And if I was Gavin Newsom, I don't debate Ron to
Santus anymore. That was a heavy why fight. I would have been stopped.
That was sad. You can't defend the inofensible. You can't defend poop
sheets, you can't defend massive lawlessness, you can't defend massive homelessness, you
can't defend a completely dysfunctional public education system. None of that works. And
so I hope more and more of the American people figure what the Democratic Blue
Party is doing for you, doing at you and against you, and not
for you. Thanks for listening. We'll do it again next Sunday night.
Bill Cunningham, the Great American, with you every Sunday Night,