Speaker 1: First before we get to our guests, Sarah Westwood, a
Speaker 1: little history lesson for those of you are too young
Speaker 1: or were too stoned at the time to understand what
Speaker 1: was going on. Back during Bill Clinton's first term, the
Speaker 1: Democrats had controlled the house. See, if you're younger, the
Speaker 1: House has been going back and forth now in recent
Speaker 1: years and you kind of feel like it's been that way.
Speaker 1: Back in Bill Clinton's first term in when the Republicans
Speaker 1: were running to try to take the house, the Democrats
Speaker 1: had controlled the House of Representatives for forty years. Forty
Speaker 1: years the demos controlled the house. There was just some
Speaker 1: belief that it just always will be, you know, institution
Speaker 1: run by Democrats. Nuke Gingrich, who wanted to be speaker
Speaker 1: of the House, came up with this contract for America,
Speaker 1: partially based off a Ronald Reagan speech and some stuff
Speaker 1: from the Heritage Foundation, and I had a bunch of
Speaker 1: things in it that things that we promised to do
Speaker 1: if you elect us to run the House of Representatives,
Speaker 1: and it was a pretty good, uh, political I'm wanna
Speaker 1: call it. It's definitely not a stunt in any way whatsoever,
Speaker 1: but maneuver tactic whatever to like really focus people on
Speaker 1: what they would get out of having Republicans Control Congress. Well,
Speaker 1: it looks like the current guy who would like to
Speaker 1: be speaker of the House with the Democrats in charge,
Speaker 1: speaking of the House for the Republicans with Democrats in charge,
Speaker 1: Kevin McCarthy, has put out a piece of paper of
Speaker 1: his own and we're gonna discuss that with Sarah Westwood,
Speaker 1: investigative reporter of The Washington examiner. Uh, Sarah, welcome to
Speaker 1: the Armstrong Gutti show. How are you? I'm good. Thanks
Speaker 1: for having me. I hope the little history lesson wasn't
Speaker 1: too boring for you. Um, how how? What is Kevin
Speaker 1: McCarthy calling his thing? This is called the commitment to America,
Speaker 1: and you're right, it's sort of modeled after this contract
Speaker 1: for America that New Gingrich unveiled, and I think it's
Speaker 1: it's an effort by McCarthy to have a more proactive
Speaker 1: message heading into the bid terms. Right. I mean, I
Speaker 1: think a criticism that you've heard people like Senator Rick
Speaker 1: Scott over on the Senate side level of Republican leadership
Speaker 1: is that we are, you know, against all of these
Speaker 1: things that Democrats are doing. We're running a really oppositional campaign,
Speaker 1: but we don't really have a clear sense of what
Speaker 1: we're for these days, and so this, I think, is
Speaker 1: to give a sharper, clearer direction for voters as to
Speaker 1: what they can expect if they elect Republicans. And you know,
Speaker 1: I think there's there's the potential for it to be
Speaker 1: really smart politics, because you are sort of defining the
Speaker 1: Republican agenda in the in the sharpest way that they
Speaker 1: have so far this election, and that could be helpful
Speaker 1: to some Republicans out there who are still sort of
Speaker 1: struggling to find that message to run on. Sure, you'd say,
Speaker 1: you know, it's like a power point presentation in a
Speaker 1: in a conference room or something. So what is he promising?
Speaker 1: Chicken every pot? What? What? What? What? What are some
Speaker 1: of the whatever you called it, the good things for
Speaker 1: America contract? What's in it? Sure, so one of the
Speaker 1: big ones obviously fighting inflation, UH, public safety. These are
Speaker 1: all sort of organized under like you side, different different
Speaker 1: slide decks, if you will, and economy that's strong is
Speaker 1: one category. A nation that saves, a government that's accountable.
Speaker 1: But also he's waiting into some of the culture war
Speaker 1: issues with this plan that I think Republicans have found
Speaker 1: might be in political circles defined as sort of a
Speaker 1: right wing causes, but are actually really popular with both Americans, like, uh,
Speaker 1: having girls sports be the domain of only girls. I
Speaker 1: didn't know that. I didn't know he's going to go there.
Speaker 1: He is, and so so you know, I think that
Speaker 1: while some of those issues are kind of controversial, they
Speaker 1: are leaning into the most popular of the culture war
Speaker 1: ideas and a lot of that is centered around schools
Speaker 1: and you know, again, I think getting all Republicans on
Speaker 1: the same page, growing the same direction on some of
Speaker 1: these issues where Democrats have been defining the converse station,
Speaker 1: is a really good thing for the party. However, he's
Speaker 1: rolling it out on the same day the early voting
Speaker 1: is already starting in about five or six states today.
Speaker 1: It's the final quarter of the election, and so one
Speaker 1: does have to wonder if this could have been a
Speaker 1: more helpful two Republicans if you'd rolled it out. Yeah,
Speaker 1: that's that's a real that is a real tough one
Speaker 1: with the modern politics and I'm sure both parties are
Speaker 1: trying to figure it out because I mentioned the other day,
Speaker 1: this past Tuesday we're seven weeks from the election seems
Speaker 1: like a long time and Joe pointed out that. Well,
Speaker 1: for some people they're like, you know, they're not even
Speaker 1: seven days from the election. So yeah, well, when do
Speaker 1: you focus your message? Message, when do you make your
Speaker 1: your your final argument? Uh, do you wait for the
Speaker 1: massive people in most places we're going to vote that
Speaker 1: day or yeah, I don't know, that's a tough one. Traditionally,
Speaker 1: right campaigns would wait until after Labor Day to really
Speaker 1: ramp up because that's when voters started paying attention. But now,
Speaker 1: you know, some of these mid touring campaigns started last year.
Speaker 1: I mean this campaign it drags on for a long time.
Speaker 1: People are engaged a lot earlier and uh, and some,
Speaker 1: you know, there's a lot of new rances and some
Speaker 1: of the key races, the primaries were much earlier, and
Speaker 1: so the general election campaigns have been going on for
Speaker 1: months and then in both candidates have had more of
Speaker 1: a chance to define each other. In other ones we
Speaker 1: just got the nominee, you know, in August and so
Speaker 1: like in New Hampshire, for example, and the general election
Speaker 1: is so much more truncated. So one does have to
Speaker 1: wonder if to count for all of those nuances and
Speaker 1: for the states where candidates were chosen in primaries a
Speaker 1: lot earlier. A plan like this might have been more
Speaker 1: helpful a lot earlier. That's the Senator Rick Scott did
Speaker 1: with his plan. That angered a lot of Senate Republicans,
Speaker 1: but he released it much earlier so it would have
Speaker 1: more of an impact and sort of failed in getting
Speaker 1: Republicans to line up behind the agenda. But I think
Speaker 1: the idea was the same. We should enter this mentoral
Speaker 1: election contest now. Well, I understand, I definitely understand the
Speaker 1: argument on the other side because most people don't pay attention.
Speaker 1: The people who don't vote early don't pay attention until it's,
Speaker 1: you know, gets closer to election day, so you can
Speaker 1: roll out your big contract with America's sort of thing.
Speaker 1: But if nobody's paying attention, it's not doing any good.
Speaker 1: So I'm sure over time both parties are going to
Speaker 1: have to figure this out. Of when you when you
Speaker 1: land with your big messages. Sarah Westwood of the Washington Examiner,
Speaker 1: we're talking to her. I gotta jump into the Immigration Story.
Speaker 1: Where are we on that? Is it? Is it continue
Speaker 1: to have legs in Washington D C, or is it
Speaker 1: petering out? Or are there going to be more bus
Speaker 1: loads sent to more blue city and state that are
Speaker 1: sanctuaries to keep it things riled up? What do you know?
Speaker 1: I think so. I mean I think it's in so
Speaker 1: incredibly effective. Uh, you know, I'm sure Greg Abbott is,
Speaker 1: the governor of Texas, is not happy that run to
Speaker 1: sansis since one planeload and gets all the attentions that
Speaker 1: habits spend doing it for months to try to get
Speaker 1: the same message across. Sending bust loads of immigrants Washington,
Speaker 1: D C, in New York City like it the benefit
Speaker 1: and why? This was sort of a gamble from the
Speaker 1: santis because it was controversial. But why it's paying off?
Speaker 1: Is it now? I don't. I don't really see a
Speaker 1: lot of continuing debate about the ethics of sending those
Speaker 1: specific migrants to Martha's vineyards, but the debate has moved
Speaker 1: on and into even mainstream media realms about the word crisis.
Speaker 1: I mean, Democrats had been so resistant to having any
Speaker 1: kind of rational conversation about what to do with all
Speaker 1: the migrants coming over the border. It's sort of hid
Speaker 1: behind this shield of moral superiority, like they appeared to
Speaker 1: be the more welcoming people and that, you know, excluded
Speaker 1: them from having to participate in a conversation about what
Speaker 1: to do. And now that the migrants had actually arrived
Speaker 1: on their doorstep in Washington, D C, in New York City,
Speaker 1: in Martha's vineyards, and they've turned them away, that's sort
Speaker 1: of invalidated the only tool they had in their arsenal
Speaker 1: did not have to deal with this issue, and so
Speaker 1: now they are Democrats facing harder questions. Okay, well, it's
Speaker 1: you don't want them and the border towns can't handle them.
Speaker 1: What should we do? And those conversations overwhelmingly favor Republicans
Speaker 1: and in that way I think this is an enormously
Speaker 1: helpful issue for Republicans in the mid terms. Before I
Speaker 1: let you go, Sarah, I'm I got a bunch of
Speaker 1: TVs on here in the studio. One of them CNN,
Speaker 1: where you used to work, and they're running the video,
Speaker 1: like everybody is, of the the unruly passenger who walks
Speaker 1: up behind the flight attendant and punches him in the
Speaker 1: back of the head. Have you seen that video? I haven't.
Speaker 1: I thought that was a covid thing. Is it back
Speaker 1: plain violence? Play? Yeah, no, this one. So that's the
Speaker 1: reason I brought it up. It's it's pretty, it's pretty unge.
Speaker 1: They'll run up and hit a guy in the back
Speaker 1: of the head when I was facing away from you.
Speaker 1: And come on, if you're gonna fight a flight attendant,
Speaker 1: you gotta Square up. But anyway, do you know what
Speaker 1: it was over? It was over. They didn't have any coffee.
Speaker 1: So I gotta say I don't you know, I don't
Speaker 1: approve of it, but I got out of southwest playing
Speaker 1: the other day, flying out a burbank and so the
Speaker 1: you know, I'm running late, I'm always running and I
Speaker 1: the starbucks line was long and I thought, you know,
Speaker 1: I'm not gonna I'll get coffee on the plane. I
Speaker 1: got on the plane, they shut the doors, they announced
Speaker 1: there's no coffee on this plane. Yeah, I kind of
Speaker 1: want to put something in the back of my head.
Speaker 1: Got To admit it. So many regrets. That was rough.
Speaker 1: Sarah Westwood, thanks for joining us today. You always have
Speaker 1: the information. Appreciate it. Thank you, BET