Can Cooper keep dodging disaster blame? (03-25-2025--Hour1)

[00:00:04] What's going on? Thank you so much for listening to this podcast. It is heard live every day from noon to 3 on WBT Radio in Charlotte. And if you want exclusive content like invitations to events, the weekly live stream, my daily show prep with all the links, become a patron, go to thepetekalendershow.com. Make sure you hit the subscribe button, get every episode for free, write to your smartphone or tablet. And again, thank you so much for your support.

[00:00:29] All right, it's Tuesday at noon and that means we chat with Andrew Dunn. He is the columnist. He's an op-ed contributor over at the Charlotte Observer. He's the publisher of Longleaf Politics Substack Newsletter. And you can go to the website longleafpol.com. Andrew, as far as I know, Andrew, never been added to a signal group message chat to see the plans to bomb an American enemy. I believe that's accurate. Andrew, welcome. How are you?

[00:00:59] Oh, I'm doing great. Good to be with you. So never added to a signal group chat with intel officials or anything like that that you want to disclose? No, not yet. Not yet. Right. OK. There's still time. There's still time. We shall see. All right. So a couple of things that you've written over the last few days here over at the Charlotte Observer. You wrote that as Governor Roy Cooper built a reputation as a steady hand in times of crisis.

[00:01:28] That image was always more perception than reality. But he never faced the kind of sustained scrutiny that could shatter it. So I guess the first question I would have for you is why did he never face sustained scrutiny, in your opinion? Yeah, well, there's a couple of different reasons.

[00:01:46] I mean, one is that Roy Cooper is a very disciplined politician and he really cultivated his image as kind of the Mr. Rogers type, kind of a steady hand. And, you know, if you see him out in public or any interview he does, he sticks to his message. He's very disciplined. Hard to hard to catch him in an unscripted, unscripted moment.

[00:02:10] But the real reason, I think, is that in every race he's run, he's had a tremendous fundraising advantage. So he's just been able to flood the zone with his own advertising, his own messaging. And his opponents have just never had the money or the resources to prosecute that case against him. But if Cooper were to run for Senate, that would change. How so?

[00:02:37] Well, I mean, presumably he'd face Tom Tillis, sitting U.S. senator, tons and tons of money. Cooper probably would out-raise Tillis a little bit, but the discrepancy would not be nearly as large as what Cooper's used to. So Tillis would have plenty of money to make the case against Cooper of all his failures and disaster response.

[00:03:02] And so the Cooper war chest has, as my understanding, is largely funded by essentially out-of-state interests. And it seems like he built that infrastructure with the HB2 argument against Pat McQuarrie and then just kind of maintained that infrastructure. Is that fair? I think that's fair to say.

[00:03:29] You know, there's a lot, a huge donor network, you know, it started with really the Jim Hunt era. And that really built out the North Carolina donor network. And I think Cooper did a lot to expand that more nationally and bring in your New York, your California donors as well. Yeah. So you say the failures that Cooper sidestepped for years are catching up to him. If he runs for Senate, they won't be easy to ignore.

[00:03:54] Would that require a political press corps that's willing to actually scrutinize Roy Cooper's handling of Hurricane Matthew, Hurricane Florence, Hurricane Helene, and even the COVID pandemic? I think that is part of it. And I think you're going to have a national press corps that's a little more willing to engage with that question than the North Carolina press corps is.

[00:04:21] And some of that is because you've kind of got the Biden administration and Democrats on one side and Cooper on the other kind of pointing fingers at each other on where the blame should fall for failures in disaster response. And, you know, you saw that in the Washington Post article that came out. I think you guys talked about that a little bit, that, you know, the national press corps doesn't want to give Donald Trump any credit whatsoever for doing disaster response well.

[00:04:50] And if the finger has to then go to Roy Cooper, then they're willing to do that. You write later on in the piece that with Cooper out of office, his shield is gone. His own emergency management director recently confirmed what many suspected. The Cooper administration intentionally never appointed a disaster recovery coordinator, which is the very role that FEMA recommends for every state to ensure effective disaster response. Now, do you know why?

[00:05:16] Have you come across why they decided not to appoint that position? No, I really have no idea. There's no real reason not to. And maybe Will Wray should have been that person. It's a little unclear. But he's saying that it was an intentional decision not to. So I'm really not sure what the thinking was there. Does this present a problem for Josh Stein if he's now, you know, shifting gears?

[00:05:46] He's doing his WNC effort separate from the agency that Roy Cooper set up, the NCORR. Which failed so terribly. So does this kind of does this create some like like opportunity for Republicans to drive a wedge between these two guys and make them it's sort of like the rape kit testing backlog?

[00:06:11] I like that whole issue where Cooper claimed he cleared the backlog and then Stein comes in and promises to clear the backlog again. And it's like, well, well, who's actually responsible for doing that? That's a good question. I think it's possible. And, you know, I would love to know what Cooper and Stein say to each other on this issue behind closed doors. That would be that would be very illuminating. I would be surprised if it drove a huge wedge.

[00:06:38] I think Cooper is a very savvy politician and and more ruthless than people would would understand. So I think he would get it if Stein had to create some distance there. Yeah, I agree with that assessment of Cooper. I think, yeah, like you said, he's got this image of Mr. Rogers and he's a political animal. But that is so what's your assessment then in comparison of Josh Stein?

[00:07:04] Like, is he the same is he cut from the same cloth or you've got another piece that you write about Stein's first budget proposal as governor? And that it seems to indicate maybe a different kind of approach. Yeah, it does. I mean, it really seems like Stein is trying to take a more collaborative approach with Republicans and with the General Assembly. I mean, you you could never call Roy Cooper's approach collaborative.

[00:07:29] I mean, basically, he put his foot in the ground and said this is, you know, and called anybody who opposed him his enemy. You're not seeing that from Stein. We'll see if it lasts. I mean, this is the first year and, you know, there is still somewhat of a honeymoon period with the new governor coming into office. We'll see if Stein ends up changing tax. But for now, at least he's he's trying to play ball.

[00:07:53] Yeah, you mentioned tax policy and education policy is some pretty big areas where it seems like Stein could have taken sort of a left wing maximalist position like Cooper did. But he hasn't. Yeah, that's exactly right. I mean, if you put, you know, the last Cooper budget right now, right down next to the first Stein budget, you know, Cooper was definitely farther to the left,

[00:08:18] which is kind of it's interesting because Stein is viewed as more to the left politically than Cooper is. I think Stein recognizes that and knows that he's vulnerable to that that description. So I think that's one of the big reasons why he's really trying to be intentional and stay to the right of his predecessor. Yeah. So we'll watch that as it. And the other thing is that, like, it's a governor's budget and it's the opposing party controls the legislature.

[00:08:48] So the chance that Stein is going to have his budget adopted are, you know, slim to none and slim just left the room. So, like, is it does it really mean much? No, you're exactly right. I mean, the old joke is that a governor's budget is just a cheap doorstop. And there is a lot of truth to that. However, you know, there is not a veto proof majority in the General Assembly. So presumably Stein's veto could carry some weight.

[00:09:16] I think the General Assembly would prefer to avoid that. So I think they are going to be willing to negotiate somewhat with Stein. And before we let you go, I'll give you a chance here to tout your bracket, not the basketball one, but kind of along the same lines. It's over at Longleafpol.com, where people are voting on all of these different things about North Carolina. And you've got four regions.

[00:09:42] And so now you're down to the to the final four, which is pitting what? S.A. Quam Videri, which is our slogan, right? The state slogan to to be rather than to seem up against college rivalries in one bracket. And then on the other side, you've got the John Locke Foundation, which seems to be a bit of a Cinderella story up against the Republican Revolution. So what what is this? What do you what's the purpose of this? Besides some good fun. But what's the what are you hoping to determine out of this? What do they win?

[00:10:12] Fun is fun is fun is the main purpose. I'm calling it the ultimate North Carolina politics showdown. And kind of the premise is we're going to determine what or who most embodies in North Carolina politics. So, yeah, we're down to the final rounds. And I encourage everybody listening to go to Longleafpol.com and cast their vote. I was kind of surprised the possum drop did so poorly for all of the attention that thing got about 10 years ago. Yeah, big disappointment.

[00:10:42] But what can you do? Well, it was seeded properly. No arguments over the 15 seed for the possum drop on that one. So, hey, Andrew Dunn, I appreciate your time. As always, people check out his sub stack, Longleafpol.com. You can also read his work over at the Charlotte Observer. Thanks again. We'll talk with you. Actually, no. Yeah, yeah, yeah. We will. We will talk with you next week. I am here next Tuesday. Sorry. So we'll talk to you next week. Great. Thanks, Andrew. All right.

[00:11:09] If you're listening to this show, you know, I try to keep up with all sorts of current events. And I know you do, too. And you've probably heard me say, get your news from multiple sources. Why? Well, because it's how you detect media bias, which is why I've been so impressed with Ground News. It's an app and it's a website and it combines news from around the world in one place. So you can compare coverage and verify information. You can check it out at check.ground.news slash Pete.

[00:11:37] I put the link in the podcast description, too. I started using Ground News a few months ago and more recently chose to work with them as an affiliate because it lets me see clearly how stories get covered and by whom. The Blind Spot feature shows you which stories get ignored by the left and the right. See for yourself. Check.ground.news slash Pete. Subscribe through that link and you'll get 15% off any subscription. I use the Vantage plan to get unlimited access to every feature.

[00:12:06] Your subscription then not only helps my podcast, but it also supports Ground News as they make the media landscape more transparent. All right. So thanks again to Andrew Dunn. As always, we talk with him on Tuesdays here on WBT. He is, as I mentioned, he's a contributor over at the Charlotte Observer and the Raleigh News and Observer, the McClatchy Papers. He writes op-eds for them. I think it's like once a week, maybe twice a week.

[00:12:32] But he also runs his website, Longleaf Politics, longleafpol.com. And Andrew is a former reporter. He was a comms guy for Lieutenant Governor Dan Forrest. So he's been in the political mix for quite a long time. He had another piece over at his website, a piece called North Carolina's Opportunity to Break Free.

[00:12:59] And he talks about a couple of different things, but specifically Hurricane Helene recovery funds and like how that whole conversation seems to focus on whether Congress is going to approve another pot of money. And then there is the dismantling of the U.S. Department of Education. And he says, Helene shows the problem.

[00:13:25] The dismantling of the Department of Education shows the path forward. And the path forward is... Actually, hang on a second. I actually do have a drum roll. Yeah, here it is. It's much better. Block Grants. Block Grants. Take the money. Give it to the state. Right?

[00:13:53] Rather than, you know, hoping that Congress is able to, you know, do a specified thing for a certain amount of money or whatever, whatever. Like, Block Grants. Rather than using FEMA. Rather than using the Department of Education. He said the General Assembly could push the Trump administration to keep shrinking federal agencies and shift funding to the states in the form of block grants.

[00:14:20] Just like the plan is for education. No more micromanagement and minimal strings attached. He says, The federal government is bloated and stretched thin. And the more we can handle here at home, the stronger we become.

[00:14:49] He talked about how Weatherman's campaign for lieutenant governor. He lost to Rachel Hunt. But he talked about being more self-reliant, self-sufficient as a state. And that is something that we should work towards. I agree with that. Right? The federal government is a creation of the states.

[00:15:08] And so we shouldn't have to send taxpayer money up to D.C., have it washed through the bureaucracy and then doled out through NGOs and programs and all these strings attached to stuff. Because all of that is a process that is far removed from where we live.

[00:15:30] And so block grants will help streamline that and make the states more self-sufficient and build this kind of infrastructure at the state level so we can chart our own course. Here's a great idea. How about making an escape to a really special and secluded getaway in western North Carolina, just a quick drive up the mountain? And Cabins of Asheville is your connection. Whether you're celebrating an anniversary, a honeymoon, maybe you want to plan a memorable proposal, or get family and friends together for a big old reunion.

[00:15:59] Cabins of Asheville has the ideal spot for you where you can reconnect with your loved ones and the things that truly matter. Nestled within the breathtaking 14,000 acres of the Pisgah National Forest, their cabins offer a serene escape in the heart of the Blue Ridge Mountains. Centrally located between Asheville and the entrance of the Great Smoky Mountain National Park, it's the perfect balance of seclusion and proximity to all the local attractions.

[00:16:24] With hot tubs, fireplaces, air conditioning, smart TVs, Wi-Fi, grills, outdoor tables, and your own private covered porch, choose from 13 cabins, 6 cottages, 2 villas, and a great lodge with 11 king-sized bedrooms. Cabins of Asheville has the ideal spot for you for any occasion. And they have pet-friendly accommodations. Call or text 828-367-7068.

[00:16:49] Or check out all there is to offer at cabinsofashville.com and make memories that'll last a lifetime. Ezra Klein, do you know who that is? Founder of Vox.com. He's a former Washington Post columnist. He was one of the super smart when people were saying smart about everything all the time. Remember that period? It was like, I don't know, about two or three years.

[00:17:17] Probably, I don't know, about a decade ago. Maybe 12 years ago. And everything was referred to as super smart or a smart take. He had a really smart take. Anyway, he, along with Matthew Iglesias and somebody else, I think, they started Vox and this was the, quote, explanatory journalism

[00:17:40] where they would just give you like two sentences and explain it to you in a super smart way, of course. So Ezra Klein, he's still around. And he chatted with Derek Thompson. I guess this was on a podcast or maybe on a website or something. But they chatted in what is, I guess, could be considered an interview. But they also wrote a book together. And so they were talking about it.

[00:18:11] And they made the case for a new approach to progressive politics. This is, no, no, wait, no, no. This is a new approach. So lying is still on the table because that's the old way. That's always been the way with progressivism. But there's a new approach inside of, under the umbrella of lying. So the new approach, they are calling it, yeah, they're calling it abundance.

[00:18:44] Which I guess when it comes to collectivism, there are things that I guess do become abundant, like misery, poverty, authoritarianism, fear. I guess there is an abundance of those things. So, okay. But anyway, they're calling it abundance. That's the title of their upcoming book. But according to John Sexton at HotAir.com,

[00:19:10] it could be called other things, including basic competence. Basic competence. Basic competence. Okay. Because what has been, from the very beginning of progressivism, go back, you know, a hundred years, Woodrow Wilson and the rise of the whole progressive movement, you know, eugenics and all of that stuff, Margaret Sanger, Planned Parenthood, like all of these things were predicated on what? I mean, yes, racism.

[00:19:39] But still, besides that, like from an operational standpoint, the belief here was that they would have super smart experts that would be able to properly and most efficiently manage all the things. From the economy, all the way down to healthcare and everything in between. Right? Like they could manage all of these things because they're the experts.

[00:20:09] It's this technocratic class, right? That was sort of the foundation of the progressive movement, that they would, they would be able to govern us all due to their, their big brains. So what has happened though? What do, what do they have to show for it? After a century of progressivism, what do they have to show for it in its modern form, which is the Democrat party? Well, in,

[00:20:37] in places that are controlled exclusively by Democrats, are they being run well? Right? That is where you should see the proof. No, you should see the proof that their cities that they have under their control and have for, you know, three generations, four generations now, um, that these cities should be virtually utopian. No, Derek Thompson,

[00:21:06] he said in talking about this book abundance, he said that the progressives have lost track of what the goal should have been, which as John Sexton called it basic competence. And Thompson offers up the example of the apartment building, the apartment building. It's been around for a very, very, very, very, very, very long time.

[00:21:33] Like there are apartment buildings going back thousands of years. This is not a new technology. Okay. But somehow they can't seem to build them anymore in San Francisco, Los Angeles, and many other Democrat run cities. Did they just forget? No, they just got overloaded with regulations and nimbyism, not in my backyard. Nimby,

[00:22:02] not in my backyard. Thompson said, I think we went from a world where liberalism was a liberalism of building between the thirties and the sixties. We saw this type of building, right? And then there was a turn in the 1960s and seventies. And for the last half century, liberalism has too often meant a liberalism of blocking, blocking things, preventing things from occurring.

[00:22:31] John Sexton then highlights a fellow by the name of Rui Teixeira. And if that name rings a bell, it's because he was the guy that told Democrats that demographics is destiny, right? He, Teixeira is a Democrat who long time ago wrote a book predicting that demographics meant Democrats had the future firmly in hand. As the country became less white, it would also become less Republican. But in the past few years,

[00:23:01] he has now been warning his party that democracy is not destiny and that the party was setting themselves up to lose by moving too far left on too many issues. And so Teixeira looks at this, um, at this book, abundance, and he acknowledges that the authors, Ezra Klein and Derek Thompson, that they may be onto something. But,

[00:23:31] Teixeira is not convinced Democrats are willing to change to become the party of abundance. Again, Democrats are not willing to change, which is, that's on brand, right? Blocking it. They're just blocking, like, this is why we, we joke like progressivism is not progressive. It's not, I mean, all it is, is progressive control. That's it. It's it. But when you talk about advancing a society, it actually does not do that. It's very regressive.

[00:24:00] As a matter of fact, it would mean like if the Democrats were to try to shift their thinking into, and their focus into becoming the party of abundance, it would mean that you would have to basically take a sledgehammer to the party's current foundation. All right. So spring is here, a time of renewal and celebrations. You got graduations, weddings, anniversaries, and the special days for mom and dad.

[00:24:29] Your family's making memories that are going to last a lifetime. But let me ask you, are all of those treasured moments from days gone by, are they hidden away on old VCR tapes, eight millimeter films, photos, slides? Are they preserved? Because over time, these precious memories can fade and deteriorate, losing the magic of yesterday. At Creative Video, they help you protect what matters most. Their expert team digitizes your cherished family moments and transfers them onto a USB drive,

[00:24:57] freezing them in time so they can be enjoyed for generations to come. I urge you, do not wait until it's too late. This spring, celebrate your past. Visit Creative Video today, and let them preserve your legacy with the love and care that it deserves. Creative Video, preserving family memories since 1997. Located in Mint Hill, just off 485. Mail orders are accepted too. Get all the details at createavideo.com. So, Rui Teixeira, the guy who said demographics is destiny,

[00:25:27] and then was like, oh, no, no, you guys are going too far left, though. And now you're losing all of these people, right, to Democrats. Well, the Democrats are losing them to Republicans, I should say. He was telling that to Democrats. But he is not convinced Democrats are willing to change to become the party of abundance, as Ezra Klein and Derek Thompson are recommending. Because that would mean uprooting much of their party's current foundation.

[00:25:53] The NGOs and activist groups that are anti-development and anti-capitalism. That's the problem the Democrat Party has. He says, Teixeira says, The culprit is a Democratic Party that puts ideology and special interests ahead of good governance. It is committed to ensuring that development is not socially harmful in any way,

[00:26:20] and does not transgress the interests of any, quote-unquote, stakeholders. In reality, that amounts to a promise that nothing will get done. And the result is endless paperwork and litigation by those very stakeholders. Or, more accurately, interest groups. Interest groups that claim to represent the stakeholders.

[00:26:46] This includes countless environmental and social justice NGOs, non-government organizations, or nonprofits, if you will. It includes local NIMBY groups, and, of course, the army of lawyers who make their living from this sort of thing. Costs ballooned, and projects are delayed. They're realizing this, I mean, a lot of people already have, out in California, as they're trying to rebuild from their wildfires, right?

[00:27:16] And what do progressives have to say about fixing this issue? That's right, nothing. Their ideology, the groups, the nonprofit industrial complex, and the priorities of liberal, educated voters, to whom so many Democrat politicians are beholden, all make it close to impossible for the party to tackle this kind of a problem,

[00:27:45] or to even make an effort at embracing parts of this so-called abundance agenda. All right? The environmental roadblocks to building things are a core part of the Democrat Party now. I heard it today. They were at this Senate Intelligence Committee hearing where they were going over the Signal group chat that Jeffrey Goldberg was in on and before the bombing of the Houthis and all that.

[00:28:15] One of the Democrat senators, I forget who it was, maybe Bennett from Colorado, he's like, oh, you put out your annual assessment of threats, and climate change wasn't on there for the first time in 11 years, and what's up with that? Did you order that removed? Who ordered the removal? Who ordered the code red? And Gabbard's like, we did an assessment on the most pressing threats to the American people and the country. That was our threat assessment,

[00:28:45] and it did not include climate change. But this is such a part of the Democrat Party now. They've raised now, what, two generations predicting imminent death of everybody. And the fact that we are all still alive, even after net neutrality, right, when everybody died, but the fact that we're all still alive doesn't prove that their hypothesis is incorrect.

[00:29:14] For some reason, this does nothing to dissuade people about the catastrophism that they are in the grips of. Teixeira goes on to say, Democrats cannot achieve electoral dominance as long as they remain crippled by a fetish for putting coalition management over a real desire for power. Democrats remain stuck trying to please all of their interest groups while watching voters of all races desert them

[00:29:44] over the very stances that these groups impose on the party. What is he saying there? He's saying what I've been saying, which is, I think I say it better, but I am a professional communicator, so that tracks. All he's saying is that the party has been captured by leftists, and it can't get itself back towards the center. It just can't do it because the party is captured.

[00:30:14] Achieving a supermajority means declaring independence from liberal and progressive interest groups that prevent Democrats from thinking clearly about how to win. He says, collectively, these groups impose the rigid mores and vocabulary of college-educated elites. Cisgender anyone? That puts a hard ceiling on Democrats' appeal and fatally wounds them in the places

[00:30:44] they need to win, not just to take back the White House, but to even have a prayer in the U.S. Senate. Again, they're captured by the most radical leftists in their coalition. So, John Sexton over at hotair.com, he says, you have a lack of competence and woke extremism, which are both driving people out of the Democrat Party, and the party seems unable

[00:31:13] to do anything about it. Case in point, Chuck Schumer. Right? We just saw it happen with Chuck Schumer. He refused to shut down the government in what would have been a pointless act of defiance. So, what was he essentially choosing? Competency over posturing. And now, he's being attacked inside his own party, which you really hate to say it. Meanwhile, you got Bernie Sanders

[00:31:43] and AOC barnstorming the country, speaking to adoring crowds. The far left cost Democrats the last election, and now they're presenting themselves as the only path forward. That's not change. They're doubling down on stupid, which is a bold strategy, Cotton. We'll see if it works for them. Along those same lines, this story out of the Washington Free Beacon. Remember this guy,

[00:32:13] Mahmoud Khalil? Columbia University protest leader got picked up by ICE. They're trying to deport him. I think back to Syria. He apparently lied on his visa application. He hid his work for the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees, or UNWA. When he applied for his green card, he didn't tell them that he worked for UNWA. UNWA, whatever. Khalil worked

[00:32:43] for the terror-tied agency at the very time of the October 7th massacre in Israel. He concealed the job while applying for permanent residency last March. That alone justifies his deportation, say prosecutors. A Department of Homeland Security document that was filed in court states that Khalil, a Columbia graduate student and a spokesman for the notorious anti-Semitic group Columbia University apartheid divest, quote, failed to disclose

[00:33:12] his positions as a UNRWA political affairs officer. He also omitted a second position with the Syria office at the British embassy in Beirut. Oh, did I forget those things? Oh, sorry. I... It just completely slipped my mind. He's a Syrian native, but he's an Algerian national. He married an American citizen,

[00:33:41] and he's been challenging his impending deportation, saying that it's a violation of his First Amendment right to free speech. However, when applying for a green card, if you conceal group memberships that would threaten their residency status, then you are considered to be guilty of fraud. But for the leftists who have captured the Democrat Party, none of that matters. The only thing that matters

[00:34:10] is his ability to activate the shock troops. That's his benefit to the party, and so he must be protected. All right, that'll do it for this episode. Thank you so much for listening. I could not do the show without your support and the support of the businesses that advertise on the podcast, so if you'd like, please support them too and tell them you heard it here. You can also become a patron at my Patreon page or go to thepcalendorshow.com. Again, thank you so much for listening,

[00:34:40] and don't break anything while I'm gone.