Speaker 1: It's time to get the John Girardi update on world affairs.
Speaker 1: I'm imagining I'm some kind of like pontificating newscaster here,
Speaker 1: like that's my CNN intro or something like that. This
Speaker 1: is the fun part about having a radio show is
Speaker 1: you get to pontificate about things you.
Speaker 2: Have no actual background in. So here we go.
Speaker 1: But nonetheless, I think I have thoughts on it.
Speaker 2: And I think they're somewhat reasonable.
Speaker 1: I want to talk about Israel and what's going on
Speaker 1: right now between Israel and Hesbellah, Israel and Hummas, and
Speaker 1: the posture of the United States, which I've hated from
Speaker 1: the start. The posture of the United States. I think
Speaker 1: President Biden has or whoever is making decisions in the
Speaker 1: name of President Biden in a way that's almost worse
Speaker 1: than Ukraine. Has kind of positioned the United States in
Speaker 1: the worst possible position possible. We are sort of in
Speaker 1: this murky middle of being maximally involved from the perspective
Speaker 1: of angering foreign countries, but minimally involved as far as
Speaker 1: what is happening with our stuff.
Speaker 2: All right, So, just for context, the United.
Speaker 1: States is in a state of proxy war with Hamas.
Speaker 1: It is also sort of by extension, kind of in
Speaker 1: a state of proxy war with Hesbola coming out of
Speaker 1: Lebanon to the north of Israel. So mas is in
Speaker 1: the Gaza Strip to the southwest. Lebanon is to the
Speaker 1: Hesbalah is attacking Israel as a terrorist entity out of
Speaker 1: the country of Lebanon from the north. The United States
Speaker 1: has declared proxy war. I say declared proxy war because
Speaker 1: Congress voted and the President okayed a whole bunch of military.
Speaker 2: Aid to go to Israel.
Speaker 1: They are fighting a war with our money, our stuff.
Speaker 1: We're giving them billions of dollars of military aid. And
Speaker 1: I think when you say we have declared a proxy war,
Speaker 1: it kind of crystallizes things in a way that it
Speaker 1: doesn't when you just say, well, the United States provided funding,
Speaker 1: the United States provided military aid to Israel. No, we
Speaker 1: declared proxy war, That's what it is. Biden likes to brag,
Speaker 1: Harris likes to brag. There, Oh, there's not a single
Speaker 1: American soldier in a war zone right now, which is
Speaker 1: really funny. Harris said something like that during the debate.
Speaker 1: There's not a single American involved in an active war
Speaker 1: zone right now, and some American soldiers in Iraq had
Speaker 1: a kind of viral TikTok or YouTube or some kind
Speaker 1: of video saying, then, what the boop are we doing
Speaker 1: out here.
Speaker 3: Where the they're watching the it's a bunch of soldiers
Speaker 3: in Iraq or somewhere watching the debate hearing Kamala Harris
Speaker 3: say there's not a single American soldier in.
Speaker 2: An active war zone right now.
Speaker 1: And then the guy holding the phone turns to the
Speaker 1: other guys in the platoon, and the guys was saying.
Speaker 2: Then, what the boop are we doing out here now?
Speaker 1: A declaration of proxy war is what I like to
Speaker 1: call it when Congress says we're going to send military
Speaker 1: aid to X, Y and Z, because that's kind of
Speaker 1: what it is. A proxy war is when somebody else
Speaker 1: fights a war for you. During the Cold War, there
Speaker 1: were a lot of proxy wars that were fought in
Speaker 1: many parts of the world where you had some Soviet
Speaker 1: backed actor state, actor, militia, terrorist entity whatever fighting against
Speaker 1: a Western or US backed actor, state, entity, militia, terrorist group, whatever.
Speaker 1: And there were various of these proxy wars that were
Speaker 1: happening all over the world as the East and the
Speaker 1: West were buying for supremacy over the course of the
Speaker 1: Cold War.
Speaker 2: And everyone knew what was going on.
Speaker 1: I think what's been happening a lot since, Okay, Iraq
Speaker 1: and Afghanistan happen.
Speaker 2: They are not hugely successful in a lot of ways.
Speaker 1: Obviously, Afghanistan has turned out to be a complete flop,
Speaker 1: a complete disaster. The United States is there for years
Speaker 1: and year, decades sort of with no end in sight,
Speaker 1: these forever wars, and the American people clearly, by the
Speaker 1: time that George W. Bush administration was over, the American
Speaker 1: people at all pretty much collectively agreed that, Wow, these
Speaker 1: wars were a mistake. This is a disaster to be
Speaker 1: have the United States directly involved in this stuff. We
Speaker 1: should never do this again. And so what did the
Speaker 1: Neo kan foreign policy blob show.
Speaker 2: Too, Well, they shifted to proxy wars.
Speaker 1: They shifted to having the United States just fund other
Speaker 1: countries to fight wars, just using our dollars, and then
Speaker 1: they could pretend like we're not super involved. But here's
Speaker 1: the thing, other countries aren't dumb. Russia realizes that when
Speaker 1: we give Ukraine one hundred billion dollars, one hundred and
Speaker 1: fifty billion dollars to fight them in their you know,
Speaker 1: and by the way, I'm this is not some like
Speaker 1: pro Russian thing, Unlike some other conservative accounts who were
Speaker 1: getting a bunch of their funding through various channels, ultimately
Speaker 1: from Russian sources. The John Girardi shows not funded by
Speaker 1: the Russians. Putin's a bad guy. His invasion of Ukraine
Speaker 1: was totally unjust, unjustified, unjustifiable evil. It is an unjust
Speaker 1: evil war in the Ukraine's our right to defend their country. However,
Speaker 1: it's a separate question whether it is wise for the
Speaker 1: United States to engage in it. And I feel like
Speaker 1: the Foreign policy Blob thinks that just giving Ukraine tens
Speaker 1: of billions of dollars is this nifty trick where we
Speaker 1: can incapacitate the army of one of our largest geopolitical foes,
Speaker 1: but not somehow be afraid that Russia's going to attack
Speaker 1: us back or hurt us in some way. When meanwhile,
Speaker 1: Russia sees how is Ukraine arming themselves with our stuff?
Speaker 1: They see that the United States is openly advancing a
Speaker 1: policy to incapacitate Russia's military by giving Ukraine a bunch
Speaker 1: of their stuff. They now hate us. They are now
Speaker 1: our mortal enemies. There is no chance of peace that
Speaker 1: there's no chance of anything better than a cold war
Speaker 1: now between US and Russia. There's no chance for a
Speaker 1: thawing of tensions. There's no chance for peaceful coexistence between
Speaker 1: US and Russia. They now hate US because we funded
Speaker 1: their opponent to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars.
Speaker 1: Tens of thousands of Russian soldiers have died on the
Speaker 1: receiving end of US artillery, US stuff, So that has geopolitical.
Speaker 2: Ramifications for the future.
Speaker 1: And I feel like members of Congress vote on funding
Speaker 1: Ukraine as if it's not that big of a vote.
Speaker 1: People remember who voted how on, you know, authorizing the
Speaker 1: use of military force to go into Iraq. People remember
Speaker 1: how congressman and senators voted for going into Afghanistan. Those
Speaker 1: are votes that people remember for the rest of their lives.
Speaker 1: Everyone remembers, Hey, Hillary Clinton was right there voting for
Speaker 1: the war in Iraq. Joe Biden was right there voting
Speaker 1: for the war in Iraq. Barack Obama distinguished himself. Now
Speaker 1: he wasn't in the Senate yet, but he opposed the
Speaker 1: war in Iraq, and that gave him big time Democrat
Speaker 1: Bona Fidees when he was running for a president in
Speaker 1: two thousand and eight. But when we vote to fund people,
Speaker 1: so this is what I'm saying, we vote to fund wars,
Speaker 1: it doesn't feel like as big of a thing. But
Speaker 1: the long term policy ramifications the hardening of enmity against
Speaker 1: us in various parts of the world because they know
Speaker 1: this person we're fighting, we're only fighting them because the
Speaker 1: United States is propping them up. So now we hate
Speaker 1: the United States, and we wonder so why does why
Speaker 1: do all these actors in the Middle East hate us? Well,
Speaker 1: it's because we are funding Israel.
Speaker 2: That's why.
Speaker 1: That's a major reason why for decades and decades and decades,
Speaker 1: because the United States has militarily funded Israel, all these
Speaker 1: countries in the Middle East hate our guts. Now you
Speaker 1: might say, well, fine, let them hate us, but don't
Speaker 1: act surprised when they try to engage in terrorist attacks.
Speaker 1: That is a reality of what it means to give
Speaker 1: military aid, military funding to another country. You enable them
Speaker 1: to be your proxy war fighter. Now, with the current
Speaker 1: situation in Israel, I didn't think it was a great
Speaker 1: idea to send them more military funding.
Speaker 2: My thought is.
Speaker 1: I don't want the United States to be involved in
Speaker 1: whatever is going to happen. I don't want the United
Speaker 1: States to be responsible for whatever's going to happen. I
Speaker 1: think this is a horrible conflict.
Speaker 2: Again.
Speaker 1: Hamas is totally evil and totally unjustified in what they
Speaker 1: did to attack Israel on October seventh of last year.
Speaker 1: Completely utterly evil, horrible. But once we send Israel money,
Speaker 1: then it's our stuff. Now, what the Biden administration seems
Speaker 1: to be doing is sort of trying to stop Israel
Speaker 1: from going too far overboard, but being incapable of doing so.
Speaker 1: It seems that the Israelis have basically said, we're not
Speaker 1: going to listen to you. We're going to conduct our
Speaker 1: military operations the way we want without listening to Joe Biden.
Speaker 1: And on a certain level, I get that a lot
Speaker 1: of American a lot of conservatives, are like, yeah, you go, Israel,
Speaker 1: do what you need to do. I guess I understand
Speaker 1: stand that instinct, because the Biden administration seemingly has no
Speaker 1: clear directives for how it wants It's it's expectations of
Speaker 1: Israel do seem in various ways irrational. Israel can get
Speaker 1: attacked by rockets from Iran, but they're not allowed to respond.
Speaker 1: Israel gets attacked, they do some sort of responsive attack,
Speaker 1: and the United State, well, you're just escalating the situation.
Speaker 1: And okay, well so they're never allowed to respond. Is
Speaker 1: that is that what's going on? They're in this murky
Speaker 1: middle So I guess I understand the conservative instinct to say, yeah, Israel,
Speaker 1: you go, you do what you want. On the other hand, though,
Speaker 1: there's this reality if you're getting military funding from US,
Speaker 1: then the president of the United States should be able
Speaker 1: to dictate the course of things. They should listen to him. Now,
Speaker 1: I acknowledge that Joe Biden's inn idiot and his administration
Speaker 1: is a bunch of morons, and frankly, I think it's
Speaker 1: an open question whether Joe Biden is you know, whether
Speaker 1: he should even be in office or should instead be
Speaker 1: removed via the twenty fifth Amendment because he's so seeniw
Speaker 1: But clearly some kind of political deal was struck to
Speaker 1: allow Kamala Harris to run for president, but Joe Biden
Speaker 1: gets to stay in office, and we have to play
Speaker 1: this game to pretend like Joe Biden is still a
Speaker 1: competent person, still competent enough to be the President of
Speaker 1: the United States for the sake of his ego.
Speaker 2: But I do think.
Speaker 1: That if we're giving them money, then yes, they should
Speaker 1: listen to the American president and do what he says.
Speaker 1: And I guess I just hate this posture that the
Speaker 1: United States is gonna fund other countries' wars, and then
Speaker 1: those countries aren't even gonna listen to what we tell them,
Speaker 1: even when it comes to things like these beeper attack
Speaker 1: infiltrating Hezbola's supply lines so that they got a bunch
Speaker 1: of beepers and walkie talkies that the Israeli probably the
Speaker 1: Mosad had linked up with explosive devices. So you had
Speaker 1: a bunch of these Hesbela officers and stuff who had
Speaker 1: beepers on their hips and wound up blowing their nuts off.
Speaker 1: So the United States saying hey, that wasn't really a
Speaker 1: great idea, probably violates some aspects of international law.
Speaker 2: Although the United States appealing to international laws.
Speaker 1: Kind of a little bit laughable in certain respects. Probably
Speaker 1: according well, international law is kind of a tricky subject.
Speaker 2: It's valid unless it's not.
Speaker 1: Basically anyway, the Israelis detonate all of these walkie talkies
Speaker 1: and all these beepers, and the United States our foreign policy,
Speaker 1: our defense, our Secretary of State is basically left to
Speaker 1: sort of impotently saying, oh, that seems kind of that
Speaker 1: seems kind of excessive, that that seems sort of inflammatory
Speaker 1: to tensions here. It's like, we're not even involved, We're
Speaker 1: not even part of this process when again, we are
Speaker 1: funding Israel's military operations.
Speaker 2: We are funding it.
Speaker 1: And I guess I am angered and frustrated at Yes,
Speaker 1: I'm a little I am frustrated at the Biden administration
Speaker 1: sort of taking this bizarre, murky middle posture of not
Speaker 1: really pursuing peace, giving the Israelis all this military funding
Speaker 1: and enabling them to fight a war, but then not
Speaker 1: really enable them to really win it. Like we're sort
Speaker 1: of in the worst of both worlds, like either either
Speaker 1: aggressively get peace or aggressively pursue complete war. Kamala Harris
Speaker 1: does this all the time, talking out of both sides
Speaker 1: of her mouth.
Speaker 2: But I despise this idea.
Speaker 1: I feel like it's unacceptable, this idea that Israel is
Speaker 1: getting funding from America and then not really listening to
Speaker 1: what we have to say with what they do with
Speaker 1: that funny. I think there's there's a certain aspect of
Speaker 1: that that that is unacceptable and which I think the
Speaker 1: Trump administration would I genuinely think the Trump administration would
Speaker 1: be handling this whole thing.
Speaker 2: A lot better.
Speaker 1: When we return then the very uncomfortable truths that neither
Speaker 1: side wants to acknowledge. Next on the John Girardi Show,
Speaker 1: some uncomfortable truths about Israel's war against Hamas and which
Speaker 1: will likely extend if Israel continue to pursue military action
Speaker 1: against Hezbollah, the terrorists from Lebanon in the north, which
Speaker 1: again they're only pursuing because hes Balah keeps fire, has
Speaker 1: been firing rockets that there is reel ever since October seventh.
Speaker 1: But there's some uncomfortable truths that certainly Kamala Harris does
Speaker 1: not want to deal with, and that I think also
Speaker 1: people on the right don't want to deal with. Kamala
Speaker 1: Harris is both insisting on a piece on a seas fire,
Speaker 1: insisting on a quote two state solution, which I've never
Speaker 1: felt like. The two state solution has been more dead
Speaker 1: than since October seventh. Since October seventh, when again Hamas
Speaker 1: the governing entity for which is both a terrorist organization
Speaker 1: and the governing entity for the Gaza Strip initiated a
Speaker 1: massive terrorist attack to kill a thousand Israelis with whom
Speaker 1: are you going to negotiate a two state solution with
Speaker 1: Hamas terrorists who actively want all of the Israelis dead,
Speaker 1: who want, you know, from the river to the sea,
Speaker 1: Palestine to be free, and that that's like their sworn oath.
Speaker 2: I don't know if it's an oath, but anyway, that
Speaker 2: that's their thing.
Speaker 1: And which, by the way, most of the Palestinians in
Speaker 1: the West Bank, it's not like the Palestinians in the
Speaker 1: West Bank are these moderate enlightened folks. They all thought
Speaker 1: most of the Palestinians in the West Bank thought October
Speaker 1: seventh was pretty cool. So I'm not exactly sure with
Speaker 1: whom Israel can agree to a two state solution that
Speaker 1: when one side doesn't really want a to if one
Speaker 1: of the two sides does not want a two state solution,
Speaker 1: it's not going to happen. If if the Palestinians don't
Speaker 1: want a two state solution, if they just want a
Speaker 1: one state solution, and that state being Palestinian control and
Speaker 1: not the Israelis in control, then it's not gonna happen.
Speaker 1: So Harris keeps sort of saying out of one side
Speaker 1: of her mouth that Hamas needs to be destroyed because
Speaker 1: Hamas is evil terrorists, but that Israel really needs to
Speaker 1: restrain itself. Well, if you want Hamas completely destroyed, then
Speaker 1: Israel can't be restraining itself, and your prospects for a
Speaker 1: two state solution are going out the window.
Speaker 2: If Hamas is destroyed, Let's remember it.
Speaker 1: Israel withdrew all of its Israelis, all of its settlers,
Speaker 1: everything out of the Gaza Strip. In two thousand and six,
Speaker 1: they gave up control of the Gaza Strip and said,
Speaker 1: all right, Palestinians can control it. The Palestinians immediately had
Speaker 1: an election in two thousand and six where they elected
Speaker 1: Hamas a terrorist organization. The guys from Hamas kicked out
Speaker 1: militarily the other political party, and they completely now control
Speaker 1: and dominate the Gaza Strip. So they're the Now. They
Speaker 1: proceeded not to have another election for the next Here
Speaker 1: we are eighteen years later.
Speaker 2: But that's that's the situation. I don't know whom.
Speaker 1: There's nobody else to negotiate a two state solution with
Speaker 1: at least with regards to the Gaza strip. So Kamala
Speaker 1: Harris has some uncomfortable truths she refuses to grapple with.
Speaker 1: She's talking out of two sides of her mouth about
Speaker 1: that Israel needs to have a ceasefire, but we need
Speaker 1: to hold Hamas accountable. Those two things are irreconcilable. Israel
Speaker 1: can't stop fighting and still hold Hamas accountable. Hamasa needs
Speaker 1: to be eliminated and Israel needs to pursue a ceasefire.
Speaker 2: The two things are irreconcilable.
Speaker 1: Now, on the other side, I think conservatives in America
Speaker 1: who are the pro Israeli side, needs to acknowledge some
Speaker 1: stuff basically, and a lot of this is Hamas's fault
Speaker 1: in a sense, because Hamas are bunch of evil, horrible
Speaker 1: monsters who have a whole different conception of civilian versus
Speaker 1: military and civilian casualties versus military casualties than we do
Speaker 1: coming from our Western formed consciences. Our Western mindset when
Speaker 1: it comes to war is that there's a distinction between
Speaker 1: civilian and military casualties, that military casualties are acceptable during
Speaker 1: the exercise of a just war, civilian casualties are not,
Speaker 1: and that Civilian casualties have to be mitigated as much
Speaker 1: as as possible. Civilian collateral damage has to be mitigated
Speaker 1: as much as humanly possible. The principle of double effect
Speaker 1: has to always be respected. But Hamas doesn't care about that. Seemingly,
Speaker 1: Hesbulah in the North does not care about that. They
Speaker 1: think that they don't make a big distinction between civilian
Speaker 1: and military casualties. They actually are on purpose putting their
Speaker 1: civilians at risk because they know they can win an
Speaker 1: national p or victory if more of their civilians die,
Speaker 1: so they can say what how evil Israel is and
Speaker 1: can thereby starve Israel of international support. They think of
Speaker 1: civilian deaths as something that is advancing their goals, and
Speaker 1: it's all sort of part of this sort of twisted
Speaker 1: Islamic Shria ideology. So they don't respect the traditional Western
Speaker 1: distinctions between military and civilian. In fact, they understand it,
Speaker 1: and they manipulate it by deliberately their civilians in harm's
Speaker 1: way as human shields.
Speaker 2: I think conservatives don't want to acknowledge that maybe there's
Speaker 2: no way to actually eliminate Hamas. Will you hear conservatives
Speaker 2: say Israel needs to fight until HAMAS is completely destroyed.
Speaker 2: And there's a part of me that thinks that's like saying,
Speaker 2: you know, imagine if, like if someone said, we're not
Speaker 2: going to rest until Republicans are completely destroyed, how would
Speaker 2: you propose to do that?
Speaker 1: To eliminate Republicans? You can kill Donald Trump, and you
Speaker 1: can eliminate the.
Speaker 2: Lock up in jail. Let's say, lock up in jail.
Speaker 1: You could lock up in jail Donald Trump and Mitch
Speaker 1: McConnell and Mike Johnson and every Republican elected official. You
Speaker 1: haven't eliminated Republicans, though. I think it's the same way.
Speaker 1: It's not like HAMAS has like a very strict roster
Speaker 1: of membership. These are all the HAMAS fighters and nobody
Speaker 1: else is really involved. It doesn't really work like that.
Speaker 1: Unless you're gonna say we're gonna have massive, massive casualties,
Speaker 1: you're not really gonna eliminate HAMAS.
Speaker 2: I don't know how you realistically do that anyway.
Speaker 1: I don't think conservatives want to grapple with this. When
Speaker 1: we return Robert F. Kennedy's Affair and some Thoughts about
Speaker 1: Life and Affairs next on The John Girardi Show.
Speaker 2: So we were reading the lurid details of it.
Speaker 1: Seems like the details are always lurid when it comes
Speaker 1: to Kennedy's Robert F. Kennedy is now embroiled in a
Speaker 1: bit of a scandal. There's a political reporter named Olivia
Speaker 1: Nutzi who was getting a little creasy, and Kennedy and
Speaker 1: her engaged in some kind of weird sexting affair, and
Speaker 1: Kennedy sort of has leaked or given to reporters sort
Speaker 1: of his side of the story, and there were some
Speaker 1: reporters reporting on it that basically, oh, you know, Kennedy
Speaker 1: kept trying to block her, and then she would reach
Speaker 1: out and other means, say hey, can you unblock me?
Speaker 1: I have something actually really important to tell you. And
Speaker 1: then she kept sending him Lewde pictures of herself that
Speaker 1: were more and more pornographic until then, and Kennedy found
Speaker 1: it difficult to resist, just like, all right, come on,
Speaker 1: oh oh this temptress. I find it oh too difficult
Speaker 1: to resist. Okay, Yeah, as if, as if poor John
Speaker 1: Kennedy was ensnared by her magic wiles, like you know,
Speaker 1: like Odysseus being caught on the island with the nymph
Speaker 1: and her magic binding him to the island, and there
Speaker 1: was nothing he could do, nothing that poor John Kennedy
Speaker 1: could pause, that poor Robert Kennedy could do other than
Speaker 1: start sexting her back. Okay, married man Robert Kennedy. And
Speaker 1: the whole thing got me thinking about marriage and my
Speaker 1: own marriage, and the kinds of things that people do
Speaker 1: and rationalize. And first I think, I want to it
Speaker 1: makes me want to talk about marriage. I mean thinking
Speaker 1: about this a lot. Holly and I have been kind
Speaker 1: of a mentor couple for a couple in our parish
Speaker 1: who are getting married, two young people in their twenties
Speaker 1: just getting started out. And I've talked with other young people,
Speaker 1: other folks in their twenties who think about getting married,
Speaker 1: dating seriously, decide to break up in some respects, and
Speaker 1: a couple of thoughts I want to talk about with marriage.
Speaker 1: One of the things I dislike around kind of the
Speaker 1: conventional wisdom with marriage is people saying marriage is hard,
Speaker 1: marriage is so difficult, it's so much work, you gotta
Speaker 1: put so much work in it, and you gotta really Oh,
Speaker 1: marriage is such a burden, guys, And marriage is very tough.
Speaker 2: But then that there's some you know, good at the
Speaker 2: end of the rainbow, and this.
Speaker 1: Is a very common refrain that you hear, And.
Speaker 4: There's part of me that's kind of like, don't I
Speaker 4: don't know that that's true, or it isn't it hasn't
Speaker 4: been true for me, or maybe it is true, but
Speaker 4: maybe in a somewhat different way.
Speaker 2: Is marriage difficult.
Speaker 1: I'm not denying that many marriages are, and that people
Speaker 1: have to overcome their flaws. You know, any marriage involves
Speaker 1: the mole of two unlikes together. Okay, No two people
Speaker 1: are perfectly fitting puzzle pieces as far as personality.
Speaker 2: Not talking about physical stuff.
Speaker 1: I'm just talking about personality, attitude, expectations, temperaments. You know
Speaker 1: that this side of heaven, there's basically it's hard to
Speaker 1: find two people perfectly SYMPATICA. Everyone's going to have some friction,
Speaker 1: everyone's going to have some tension. I'm not saying that
Speaker 1: in my marriage, for example, that we're one hundred percent
Speaker 1: perfectly fitting puzzle pieces. As far as personalities and temperaments
Speaker 1: and expectations. You know, I still do things that annoy
Speaker 1: my wife. You know, I'm not saying that we're perfect
Speaker 1: by any stretch, But I think if you enter marriage
Speaker 1: with the right expectations and you find someone you really
Speaker 1: like a lot, and you like that person for you're
Speaker 1: thinking about the right kinds of things. I don't think
Speaker 1: marriage is hard or should be necessarily. I think life
Speaker 1: is hard. Life is hard. Raising children can be difficult
Speaker 1: and tedious and monotonous and takes a lot of energy
Speaker 1: from you. Know, if you've got a sort of traditional
Speaker 1: stay at home parent and working parent, it puts pressure
Speaker 1: on the working parent that is often difficult and tedious
Speaker 1: and makes them more worried about what's going on with
Speaker 1: their job and more unable to take risks with their employment.
Speaker 1: For the stay at home parent, it's very tedious and
Speaker 1: difficult and involves a lot of labor with small, irrational people.
Speaker 1: But that's life being hard, and the beauty of marriage
Speaker 1: is being able to go through it with another person
Speaker 1: that you love. I think difficulties in marriage the worst
Speaker 1: kinds of difficulties in marriage. Looking at you, Robert Kennedy Jr.
Speaker 1: I think comes from people who haven't taken the effort
Speaker 1: to really develop moral virtues. Some thirty year old sexting
Speaker 1: me whom I barely know. Let me tell you something
Speaker 1: is not going to result in a marriage wrecking side relationship.
Speaker 1: It's just not okay. That is not going to be
Speaker 1: for me, some kind of deep temptation. My wife and
Speaker 1: I often sit around and joke with each other. How
Speaker 1: do people like find the time? How do people have
Speaker 1: the time and energy to have affairs? Like like we
Speaker 1: were holly at the end of the day, Like just
Speaker 1: at the end of the day, like wrangling five kids.
Speaker 2: I'm at the end of my day. I've worked and
Speaker 2: you know, stressed out about this that or work.
Speaker 1: And we're sitting there like where do people find the time?
Speaker 1: So it's like like where do people find the time
Speaker 1: or the energy of the motivation? Like you're the also
Speaker 1: and also like we're literally look at each other.
Speaker 2: You're like the one.
Speaker 1: Person I want to talk with about all this stuff.
Speaker 2: Why would I want to talk to anybody else?
Speaker 1: I think, though, what happens sometimes is people get married.
Speaker 2: At a time when they're not.
Speaker 1: They haven't really developed a lot of moral virtues. I
Speaker 1: think with men often, I think the widespread proliferation of
Speaker 1: pornography I think results in men having certain kinds of
Speaker 1: expectations and attitudes around lust and sex, where if you
Speaker 1: have a completely unregulated appetite when it comes to the
Speaker 1: ordering of sexual desire. And I think with the proliferation
Speaker 1: of pornography, I think this happens to more and more men.
Speaker 1: So here's Robert Kennedy Junior being sixty one years some
Speaker 1: sixty one year old guy. All of a sudden, some
Speaker 1: thirty one or however old he is, I think he's
Speaker 1: in his sixties. Some thirty one year old chick starts
Speaker 1: texting him pictures of her boobs or something, and.
Speaker 2: All a comply, I can't resist. Why.
Speaker 1: Well, probably because he hasn't really developed any kind of
Speaker 1: Christian virtue of chastity, any kind of virtue of chastity,
Speaker 1: or of regulating sexual desire, even within the context, within
Speaker 1: the context of his marriage. Like I'm just saying, like
Speaker 1: that kind of thing for someone with a decent level
Speaker 1: of maturity is just not a temptation. You know, when
Speaker 1: I get some girl in a bikini follows me on Twitter,
Speaker 1: I understand that's not a human being.
Speaker 2: That's a bot. Okay, that's like a Russian.
Speaker 1: Oh, this person with four hundred, you know, following a
Speaker 1: certain number of people who's never tweeted once with you know,
Speaker 1: four hundred followers who are all you know, horny looking
Speaker 1: dudes in their forties.
Speaker 2: Yeah, this is not a real human being. This is
Speaker 2: a bot. This is how I say, all right, let's
Speaker 2: block that.
Speaker 1: Okay, I guess it just leads me to conclude I
Speaker 1: think a marriage. Marriage is hard. It can be hard.
Speaker 1: I think for people who get into marriage without maturing
Speaker 1: themselves first. And I don't mean just age. I mean
Speaker 1: as far as regulating their desires around sex, regulating their emotions,
Speaker 1: and not like being a robot, but like being normally virtuous,
Speaker 1: which involves saying no to a lot of base desires.
Speaker 2: I mean sometimes people will, usually idiotic dudes, they'll.
Speaker 1: Say, well, you know what, if men have all this
Speaker 1: sexual monogamy, is not really natural because men naturally want
Speaker 1: to have sex with a lot of people. Okay, I
Speaker 1: naturally want to eat the whole bag of oreos. It's
Speaker 1: not good for me though. It's not what my body
Speaker 1: is ordered towards eating. I want to eat a whole
Speaker 1: bag of oreos every time, but it's clearly unnatural for
Speaker 1: me to do so. It is clearly not ordered towards
Speaker 1: the good of my human nature. It makes me fat,
Speaker 1: it gets you know, all the bad health impacts of
Speaker 1: eating a bag of oreos. So just to say, well,
Speaker 1: he's a man sexual desire, that's BS, that's BS. If
Speaker 1: you're going into marriage like that, then yeah, marriage is
Speaker 1: going to be difficult if you're going to just continue
Speaker 1: to be serially unfaithful in thought, word, or deed.
Speaker 2: But if you work on yourself or allow God to
Speaker 2: work on you. From a Christian context, marriage can be
Speaker 2: a lot easier. And not only easier, I guess I
Speaker 2: would say I don't think marriage is hard at all.
Speaker 2: This is my counter thing.
Speaker 1: Everyone's oh, marriage is so hard, you gotta work it.
Speaker 1: I don't think marriage is hard at all. I think
Speaker 1: marriage is easy. I think life is difficult and marriage
Speaker 1: is the single greatest, most beautiful joy producing aid to life.
Speaker 1: Seeing my dad go through cancer and pass away, that's hard,
Speaker 1: you know, it wasn't hard about it. Having my wife
Speaker 1: right next to me, holding my hand and crying with
Speaker 1: me and loving me, and my kids loving me.
Speaker 2: That was easy.
Speaker 1: That was the consoling part of it. So no, I
Speaker 1: think there are these little pious things we say where
Speaker 1: marriage is hard. I think marriage lived well, going into
Speaker 1: it the right way, living it out, or maybe you
Speaker 1: got into it the wrong way, but you of course
Speaker 1: correct and you start doing things the right way. I
Speaker 1: think marriage is easy. Life is hard, but I think
Speaker 1: marriage can be really beautiful. It involves a lot of
Speaker 1: a lot of saying no to yourself, but I don't
Speaker 1: think marriage is that hard. When we return, why most
Speaker 1: modern appliances suck next on the John Girardi Show, Just
Speaker 1: a quick thought as we're ending, I read this whole
Speaker 1: tweet thread that was really interesting about why modern appliances suck,
Speaker 1: and it's basically because of all the various different green
Speaker 1: initiatives for different appliances like washers, dryers, dishwashers, et cetera.
Speaker 1: It's led to less quality in various kinds of household appliances.
Speaker 1: They then also try to add in a bunch of
Speaker 1: electronic features that are totally unnecessary for the chief directive
Speaker 1: of clean. You know, have this dry or dry, have
Speaker 1: this dishwasher dishwash. My wife and I hate our dishwashers
Speaker 1: so much. We just despise it. We just bought it
Speaker 1: like a couple of years ago. It already sucks. It
Speaker 1: constantly gets clogged, it doesn't actually chop up food like
Speaker 1: it said it would chop up food, and dispose of food.
Speaker 2: It is worthless.
Speaker 1: Basically, I hate all household appliances, and probably tomorrow I'll
Speaker 1: go on a longer rant about this.
Speaker 2: That'll do it. John Dio already show see you next
Speaker 2: time on Power Talk