Preachy Tesla Drivers

a Tesla. It was on a Tesla. Now, I'm always a little astonished how many people seem to have Tesla's, just given I don't know average household incomes throughout the region. And there's a little part of me, as a struggling middle classer that sort of I'll admit it, experiences a twinge of jealousy when I see when driving around, like what am I not doing right? That I'm not affording this?

And I think I think it's partially because we're saving a lot of money and we don't spend on you know, we don't have I've got my mom's old beat up car and another beat up truck that we use for driving the kids around SUV so we don't have car payments, and that's a good thing. Actually, it's probably in our long term interest that I'm not trying to move money around in such a way that I'm driving a Tesla

with a fairly middle class income. Anyway, regardless, there's always something, I mean, when you're driving around in a seventy thousand dollars car, you're obviously making a little bit of a statement. It's a little bit of a power move. It's a little bit of a hey, check me out. I'm the kind of guy who can drive a Tesla. It's a it's a digmy move. And this was a bright red Tesla or no, no, it was this one. I saw

another one online that I think that was bright red. Anyway, See this Tesla driving around and the decal on the back of it says muck Elon Fusk, so clearly trying to say the F word towards Elon Musk, but trying to do so in a sort of cute sea way where you don't actually have the F word on the back of your car. And this filled me with rage for some reason, the little petty grievances of our every day that sometimes I just feel need to have release gosh,

it was so obnoxious to me. And I've seen this before. Today I stumbled across this a Twitter post from some random dufus with a red Tesla bright red Tesla candy Apple red with a similar decal because you know, they don't want to mess up. They're seventy thousand dollars car that says bought it before we knew how awful he is. In reference to Elon Musk, all right, let's begin this rant. I'm not some great defender of Elon Musk. I don't

think he's the greatest human being in the world. There's a decent segment of people on the right who seemingly like they sort of try to make their job praising Elon Musk, hoping that maybe Elon Musk will notice them or something like that. I see these people on Twitter who basically seem to tweet all the time at Elon Musk, reply to Elon Musks tweets, try to stay in his orbit, talk about how wonderful Elon Musk is. Blah blah, Oh, Elon Musk is doing so much to promote freedom of speech.

Elon Musk is so amazing. Tesla is such an amazing company, oh, oh, Starlink is so amazing, his various space rocket you know companies, whatever space acts whatever, so wonderful, blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah. And I find a lot

of that kind of sickening. I don't know if these people think that the you know being, because Musk is in fact very active on Twitter, given that he bought the thing, maybe they think that somehow remaining within his orbit will allow them to, I don't know, somehow get him to invest in them, or promote them, or somehow

they can make money off of him. I'm not sure exactly what it is, but there seems to be this little Twitter ecosystem surrounding Elon Musk, which I find sort of Yeah, Musk is himself, I would say a moderate Republican. He was probably a moderate Democrat ten years ago, and today he's a moderate Republican. I don't think he's a pro life necessarily, I've certainly not really seen any evidence

of that. He seems to be moving towards a very moderate boomer version of sort of soft right wing politics, where the Trump era is sort of perfect for him. I think Trump is sort of moderated things. When it comes to social conservatism, you can say that's good, or like me, you can say that's bad. Musk is very honestly The Republican Party platform that I was so vigorously criticizing seems like it could have been written by Elon Musk. And Musk is a big time Trump donor at this point,

he's a big Trump backer. So but again, his actual politics are pretty darn moderate. And he's a very smart guy, obviously far smarter than I am in a lot of respects, as far as you know, engineering and computer programming and all the kinds of things that he's been able to accomplish that I have not. So I'm not here to say he's an idiot or something. But he's not like some right wing juggernaut, Nor do I think he's thought super deeply about a lot of conservative policy issues. Basically

long and short. When it comes to politics, Elon Musk is a fairly unremarkable figure. The fact that he bought Twitter and applied his very moderate right wing sensibilities to it as far as content and what kinds of content it would or would not allow, you know, as opposed to the prior Twitter regime which was completely bought sold by the left and was willing to censor you know, the Hunter Biden laptop story and all kinds of other

COVID misinformation so called. All that kind of stuff, I think is a breath of fresh air, and it's kind of an important thing for the American media landscape that Twitter is still the go to social media app for journalism and for news and messaging. You know, when President Biden announced that he was dropping out of the presidential race, he did so with a Twitter post. It wasn't with

a normal White House press release. It wasn't through a press release coordinated to be sent to the news networks. It was through a tweet. But basically, because Musk crossed the left on like three things, three or four things, the left basically communicated him. They basically said, he's persona on Grada. We have nothing to do with him. Horrible evil.

He crossed them on like three issues, and sometime around like twenty nineteen, twenty twenty or so, Musk became Musk was put into the category of for the left sort of canceled if he will uh, he was persona on Grada. He was outside of the realm of acceptable people to liberals within polite liberal society, where if you say you like him, it is cringe cringeworthy, and you are a bad person for mainstream left if you like him, and he is bad and you are bad if you like him.

But this put liberals into a pickle. This change was happening kind of in twenty nineteen twenty twenty, twenty twenty one, and by that time Musk and Tesla, his car company, had come to dominate the American electric car market. It's the single biggest it's still like the biggest company for producing electric cars. They produce way more electric vehicles than GM and Ford and et cetera. I mean, it's and they've been sort of a real leader technologically and advancing

zero emissions electric automobiles. Now, this leads me to part of what I don't really love about Musk is that I think he's made his empire basically on the back of federal and state subsidies for vironmental stuff, and he's been able to really leverage that. But it is bizarre how all of a sudden, the Biden administration comes in and Musk talks about this all the time, How the Biden administration officials who were promoting electric vehicles and zero

emissions and all all that stuff with the EPA. This Biden team is staffed with these doctrinaire, young millennial liberals who've imbibed this sense that Elon Musk is bad. Elon Musk is bad, and he should be shoved out and he should be cast into the outer darkness where there

is wailing and gnashing of teeth. So Musk has talked a lot about some kind of like electric car summit that the White House convened early during the Biden days, where they did not invite Musk and they did not invite Tesla, and Musk still fumes about it, and he's

obviously correct. I mean, it's insane, like why would he And you know, Biden was talking talking about how Ford is a true leader in electric cars, and Musk made the point that you know, Ford had sold like not even a tenth as many electric vehicles as Tesla had sold. Obviously it's insane, and obviously it was motivated by petty

political distaste for Musk. So as a result, you have all these sort of liberals and this is obviously liberals with money, like this is left wing people with enough money to buy a Tesla, or I guess maybe just lease a Tesla. Whatever, you have to have some money to be driving around in a Tesla. All these liberal people who clearly like Tesla's They like the car, they like how it drives, they like the fact that they're driving a zero missions car, and they can say, ah,

look at me, I'm driving a zero emissions car. Aren't I hip and cool and progressive? You know. Let's ignore, by the way, the sort of deeper questions about whether Tesla cars, whether electric cars are actually better for the environment, whether it actually costs more as far as far as fossil fuel output to make a Tesla over and against a normal gas powered car, or whether are we just offsetting?

Are are we just kind of shifting the environmental harms from America to Africa to the countries in Africa where we have to mine for rare earth minerals. For the batteries, what do we do with the batteries when they're done? How bad is it when you crash a Tesla and the engine explodes and it's a forty hour long fire. It's at fire that takes forty hours to put out. Anyway, I'm not actually one hundred percent convinced that if you buy a Tesla, you're actually doing something that's net positive

for the environment. You're also I mean, where do you think electricity comes from? Has to come from somewhere. In many states, it's coming from burning fossil fuels. So your Tesla has a positive I've seen surveys of this that your Tesla can have a more positive environmental impact if you live in Oregon or Washington State, for example, where most of their power is from hydro power. If that's powering your Tesla, then its impact on emissions is going

to be better than if you live in Oklahoma. If you live in Oklahoma, you're getting your power from coal and oil, you know, natural gas and stuff like that. Your net environment you'd have to drive the Tesla for thirty years before you sort of net out to have a positive environmental impact. But in short, I guess the thing I just can't stand. And again this is prompted by people I see driving around in tesla's but with decals letting you know that they don't like Elon Musk.

I bought it before I knew how awful he is. Muck Elon Fusk. The two of these decals I've seen for people driving around. You know, I don't understand how people have the gall to drive around with a decal like that. You're the one who's invested seventy or eighty thousand dollars in this man, not me, Okay, I have no grand desire to protect Elon Musk. I think him buying Twitter is a good thing. That's the extent to which I'm going to sing Elon Musk's praises. That's it.

He's a moderate Republican, and I think it was a good thing for press freedom that he bought Twitter, that basically we won't have the kind of censorship of our news that we saw during twenty twenty. That's the extent of my praise of him. The idea that this man is so evil that you have so One you want the benefit of driving a fancy schmancy luxury car. Two, you want the public prestige benefit of people thinking you're rich because you're driving around in a fancy schmancy car.

Three you have given this man, Elon Musk, about seventy thousand dollars of your money, plus the free advertising of driving around in his product. But four, you're so preachy. You're so you're such a virtue signaler that you want other people to know that Elon Musk is bad and that you think he's bad in spite of the fact that you are seventy thousand dollars invested in him. So so you try to both sort of do a rationalization

of yourself but also preaching to other people. Hence you put a decal on your car because you know you don't want to put a bumper sticker on it's such a nice, valuable car. You put a decal on your car to let other people know that you don't like Elon Musk. Boy, I wish people didn't like me that way.

I wish people's form of expressing that they don't like John Girardi is by giving me seventy thousand dollars and running around doing advertising for the John Girardi Show, but with a decal on their shirt that says I don't like John Girardi. I'm sure Elon is using the seventy thousand dollars that someone paid for their Tesla and wiping the tears from his eyes to know that these people driving around in tesla's with decals that say bought it

before we knew how awful he is. You know, I'm sure he's using all seventy thousand dollars of their money to wipe the tears from his eyes. When don't we return more about left wing preachiness and yard sininess and how I feel like a lot of this has really flipped in the last twenty years. That's next on the right on the John Girardi Show. I don't know why I get so infuriated with these. Elon Musk is terrible bumper stickers and decals which I only see on the

back of Tesla's. I've now seen multiple of these where people are driving around in Tesla's and they've got a bumper sticker on decrying Elon Musk and saying what a terrible person Elon Musk is while driving a car that you gave him or his company seventy thousand dollars to buy, and while still advertising for that car by driving it around every day. It drives me insane. And it's like, what level of preachiness and self obsession and self rationalization

do you have to be at to do that? Like again, you have to be like, okay, I really want to drive a rich fancy expensive car. I don't want to get rid of my rich, fancy expensive car because I like it so much, or I invested too much into it or whatever. Although for some of these people, I presume they could, you know, get rid of it and you know, take the financial hit. I don't want to take that much of a financial hit on this tesla

I just bought anyway. So you want to keep driving your rich, fancy expensive car, or to virtue signal about how you care for the environment because it's a Tesla, so you know, zero emissions. You want all of those benefits. But you also want to be preachy to people about the three opinions Elon Musk has that make him socially unacceptable to lefties, about how Elon Musk is bad. So you want to be preachy. And it's also though you're trying to be preachy in a way that's self rationalizing

and self justifying. I guess to your liberal friends or to your co fellow liberals out there, who might see you driving around in a Tesla and think, well, that guy's a phony liberal. Here he is giving Elon Musk ony thousand bucks and driving around in his fancy, rich person car. So you have to signal to those people who you think might be judging you. No, no, no,

I'm one of the good ones. It's so annoying, and I feel like there's this level of preachiness among especially I think, I really think it was the Obama era that did this, because the people who were in college during Obama are now like my age, they're entering their late thirties early forties, are now becoming partners at law firms,

are now becoming managers and directors and businesses. If you were in college during two thousand and eight and you liked Barack Obama and you got really into Barack Obama, there was this level of moralizing preening that you engaged in that made me want to push you off a cliff.

The Obama people, for those of you who were not in college in two thousand and eight and were not following politics, Okayama, the pro Obama people, the kids who are like you know, in the college Democrats club during two thousand and eight when Obama was rising, they were the most obnoxious little pieces that, you know what, whoever

walked the face of the earth. And this preening moralizing of the Obama era is what directly led to the concept of quote cancel culture, where basically these people were so obsessed with their self image as righteous, moral, good, upright, upstanding Obama people, and Obama represented this moral center of America blah blah blah, that basically they wound up shoving it to the outer darkness anything that they thought was

too far contrary to Obama orthodoxy. And I really think it's from those kinds of people, that specific crowd of Obama era college students who are today instituting DEI regimes and are DEI managers. All the millennial staffers between the ages of about you know, thirty two to forty two who are staffing the Biden who are really running the Biden administration right now, these are the people who introduced this level of moralistic preachiness to American politics that they

really replaced the religious right with the religious left. I think the religious right is deader than a doornail at this point, if it was ever very vigorous or alive. I think the religious right is pretty much dead and they've been and the moralizing left is very much vibrant

and alive. And that's where cancel culture comes from. It's where the whole dee I regen comes from, where basically they get this thing that they're very self conscious about not wanting to say something that would make other people critical of them. And it's this constant sort of looking to the left, looking to the right, like, oh, did I say something wrong? I did I say something cancellable? Did I say something that was, you know, racially insensitive?

Did I say something that was culturally insensitive? Or And because you don't want to be perceived as a bad person, you then nail people who do say the bad thing to such an extent to shove them into the outer darkness. So that's where we get absurd displays, like someone driving around in a Tesla having given Elon Musk seventy thousand bucks and a bunch of free advertising, but feeling the need to put a bumper sticker on the back of the car that says I don't like Elon Musk, as

if that will absolve you of your sins. It's like, I have to be moralizing and preachy, but I don't want to actually sacrifice the privileges attendant with my high income, my status symbol, my nice card that I like that's cool, all right. When we return, there's this big story out of Georgia that Kamala Harris is trying to use to promote abortion. We'll talk about it next on the John

Girardi Show. There are a couple of stories that Kamala Harris is promoting that I think this politically maybe signal that Harris is not doing so well. This stuff was promoted by Pro Publica. Pro Publica is a super left wing outlet that is funded by a lot of Democrat You know, if this was on the right, it would be called dark money, but it's one of these nonprofit entities that's really trying to promote various kinds of political

things but doing so without endorsing candidates. And there's a lot of it on the left, there's a lot of it on the right. Pro Publica is one of these outlets that does this. There are two trying to attain extremely left wing political ends, but they have the cover of nonprofit status. Pro public has been behind the massive push to delegitimize the Supreme Court by promoting bogus story after bogus story after bogus story about Supreme Court justices

being corrupted. All the stories about Clarence Thomas, all the stories about it's always the conservative members of the court who we highlight for, you know, accepting trips or things like that, all the same things that Ruth Bader Ginsburg did time and time again. But it wasn't bad when

she did it for some reason anyway. So Pro Publica is a super left wing outlet, and because they're nonprofit for some reason, the media winds up getting stories from Pro Publica and then running with them, which would be as silly as like, well, it would be as obviously biased as if I at Right to Life of Central California published a bunch of articles and expected the Fresno Bee just to run with my with my writing, with

my reporting, with my publishing. Obviously, I don't expect that Rights Life of Central California is a really you know, one sided when it comes to the abortion debate. I mean, I guess I'm not expecting a neutral news out now. If I expose something that's genuinely newsy, you know, maybe a media outlet should take it into consideration, But I don't expect them to uncritically take my work and just

amplify it. That's basically what the media does with Pro publica who is far more left wing than I'd say Right to Life of Central California is right wing. Now, what's happened in Georgia is that two women have died from taking the abortion pill. Two women have died from taking the abortion pill, and the argument is being made that they died because of georgia law outlawing abortion, and that that's evil and that it's Donald Trump's fault because

Donald Trump overturned rob Wade and Georgia passed. Georgie actually had passed before the overturning of Roby Wade, a law banning abortion after fetal heartbeat can be detected. Now, in both of these cases, the thing that killed these women was not Georgia's law. It was the abortion pills. Okay, George's laws, in large part don't involve prosecuting women for abortions. George's laws don't prevent doctors from doing follow up care for a woman who's undergone an abortion pill procedure. But

these women basically got abortion pills through different means. One woman got the abortion pills. To this thing that democrats have been or people in the pro choice community have been super supportive of which is basically California based companies that ship abortion pills to states where abortion is illegal, and they source their abortion pills from China and India. You know, so you know they're super safe. Not they

don't know that they're super safe. There's there's some real quality control questions that are left hanging here with instructions for women to basically self diagnose whether they are pregnant, how far along in the pregnancy they are, and to sort of walk them through how to do a at home abortion basically. Now, I should probably explain beforehand the abortion pill process is the most common way that abortions happen in America. Let me explain that. And I'm not

talking about the morning after pill. This is not the morning after pill. The morning after pill is a drug called Levona or gestral. It chiefly functions as a contraceptive. There's some arguments that it could make the lining of the uterine wall hostile to an embryo implanting, but the main function of the morning after pill is to prevent ovulating, prevent the release of an egg. Okay, so it's genuinely contraceptive. That's the morning after pill. The abortion pill is a

different drug called mifa pristone. You need a prescription for it. You don't need a prescription in California for you don't need a prescription for the Morning after pill. Do need a prescription for the abortion pill mifa pristone. You take mifa pristone up to ten weeks into a pregnancy in order to basically have the embryo or fetus be cut off from to have the embry or fetus detached from the uterine wall, be cut off from his or her

food supply. The baby dies in the womb, and then a second drug called missaprostl, which is a often used to induce labor, woman takes a second drug called mister prostyl to expel the child from her body. Now one of the big health risks to the abortion pill, and this is a bigger risk the later on you are in pregnancy. And again the FDA only approves the abortion pill up to ten weeks into pregnancy. You know by which time the baby's got heartbeat, brain activity, arms, legs, head, torso,

et cetera. Basically, that gets more and more dangerous. There are more and more complications the later you are into pregnancy, and one of the big risks of the abortion pill process is what's called an incomplete abortion. It's right there on the FDA label. That can happen up to five to eight percent of the time when people use the

abortion pill. And just for context for you, sixty three percent of the one million abortions that happen every year in America are now taking place via the abortion pill. So if five percent of that six hundred and thirty thousand results in an incomplete abortion, meaning not everything was expelled from the woman's body, sent to the baby, whatever. And if everything is not expelled, you have big time

risks to the mom's health. There can be infection, and in the worst case scenario, the mother can die of sepsis. So we're talking over thirty one thousand women per year are having incomplete abortions, and at least thirty one thousand women's probably more than that are having incomplete abortions and have to go to the er to get treated for this. Now,

that's what happened to both of these women. One of these women was having twins, she took the abortion pill, she didn't get treatment, follow up treatment soon enough, she wound up dying. Both of these women basically died from incomplete abortions that resulted in the incomplete abortions. They didn't get treatment quickly enough, even though treatment would have been legal, even though there was nothing wrong with them getting treatment sooner.

George's abortion law doesn't prevent that. What seemed to happen with the one woman was given these abortion pills by a doctor who didn't really care for her afterwards, who didn't really follow up with her. And this is one of the things that, by the way, one of the things that liberals have done is reduce the health and

safety standards around the abortion pill. It used to be that you needed a preliminary appointment, an appointment where you received the abortion pill, and you needed a fire follow up appointment. But Barack Obama eliminated the requirement for the follow up appointment. Joe Biden eliminated the need for any appointment. You can just get the abortion pill prescribed to you after a talamedicine visit and then have it shipped to

your house. So in both of these cases, what the woman needed was what's called a DNC, a dilation and cure tage. Now, a dilation and curateage is a procedure that can be done to perform an abortion, where basically you you basically go into a woman's uterus, you remove the unborn child via a suction machine, and you use a curet to sort of ensure that the interior lining of the woman's uterus is clear, that there's nothing remaining,

the placenta, whatever remaining within the woman's uterus. Now that can be done for someone who has experienced a miscarriage, Okay, and that that is a totally legitimate healthcare treatment. Why if a child has already died in the womb through a miscarriage, not an intentional abortion, but a non intentional Sometimes miscarriages are called in the medical language spontaneous abortion,

which adds a layer of confusion to this. But it's not an intentional This is not an abortion in the sense of directly intentionally trying to end the life of the unborn child. The child has died through a miscarriage, a DNC can be used to remove the body of the child whatever other material is located inside the uterus in order to prevent any infection from happening. So that's an important healthcare procedure, and a DNC procedure is legal in joy for a child who has died. Both these

women could have gotten dncs in Georgia. Dncs are not illegal in Georgia. A DNC to kill a living child is illegal in Georgia after six weeks, but not follow up care. So basically, this media narrative for these stories, it's blaming Georgia's state law which didn't forbid the after care treatment that these women needed after their abortions. It's blaming them for these women dying. It's not blaming the

abortion pill, which has this complication. It's not blaming liberals who eliminated the follow the requirement for follow up care after an abortion pill process. Basically, what these docs have decided is just fine, is just letting these women loose out. Just go to the er, just go to the ear. No, I'm not going to schedule a follow up appointment with you, even though five to eight percent of you are going to have and incomplete abortion. We know this, it's on

the label. So when we return why I think this might be a sign of left wing desperation. Next on the John Girardi Show, this Georgia abortion story is idiotic. It's putting all the blame on George's abortion laws, which did not prevent providing the kind of care that these two women needed who died after they're after taking the abortion pill. It focuses none of the blame on the

abortion pill itself. It focuses none of the blame on the Democrat efforts to provide abortion pills through illegal, shady, clandestine means, using Chinese and Indian sourced abortion pills to ship it the abortion pill into states where it's illegal. No, none of the blame is on them. It's all on

Georgia for restricting abortion. So it's idiotic. None of the blame on Democrats who don't want required follow up treatment for women who've gone through the abortion pill process, even though five to eight percent of them are going to

have serious complications that require a follow up surgery. And it makes me think they must be getting kind of desperate if they're going to this, if they're trying to dip deeper into the well of abortion by using these kind of stories that are not really pushing a very false narrative. I'd say to go to a pro publica story which pro public is a super left wing entity that has been pushing this story and just amplifying it. It must mean I wonder if this means they're kind

of desperate. I wonder if Trump is doing a little better than maybe you were thinking. That'll do it, John Gilady Show, See you next time on Power Talk