Mike Huckabee On 2016, The Supreme Court And Same Sex Marriage, And The War Against Radical Islam
Former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee joined me at the start of today’s show to discuss his new book God, Guns, Grits and Gravy and the 2016 race and many6 of the issues it will focus on.
HH: Two years down the road, we might see a new figure there by the name of Mike Huckabee. The former governor of Arkansas is the author of a brand new book, God, Guns, Grits, and Gravy, and he joins me now on State of the Union night. Governor, welcome back, it’s always a pleasure to talk to you.
MH: Thank you, Hugh, great to be back with you.
HH: Governor, the last time I saw you, you were exiting the Fox building with your instrument. And I’m wondering if you ever do give the state of the union, would you consider taking it along and playing a riff up there?
MH: You know, given what we’re probably going to hear tonight, I think it would be better if we substituted the State of the Union for any piece of music, even if it was bad, because I don’t have a lot of optimism about the President’s State of the Union. He’s clearly going to ask for more money, which is the last thing these people need. It’s like thinking that a 16 year old needs more of his daddy’s liquor. It’s just the worst message at the worst time. And I don’t even know why he’s proposing it. He knows the Republicans are not going to give him a $320 billion dollar tax increase.
HH: What do you, when you’ve done the television show for so long, Governor, and you’re very funny. You’ve been a very funny and accurate observer of these last six years. What do you think drives President’s Obama internal engine?
MH: I used to think that he was just a bit naïve about politics. I now believe that he, when he said he wanted to fundamentally transform America, that he really meant that he wanted to transform America into a nation that is no longer a superpower, but just one of the guys, that he really believes in his heart in the redistribution of other people’s earned income, and that he has a complete disdain for so many of the traditional values in this country that have made America a great country, and feels that we have been an imperialistic and brutish kind of superpower.
HH: I’m talking with Mike Huckabee. His new book, God, Guns, Grits and Gravy is linked over at Hughhewitt.com. We have a few segments together, so I don’t have to rush. But I want to begin with a headline, Governor. The New York Post reported today that ISIS jihadists publicly executed 13 teenage boys for watching a soccer match. They machine gunned them in front of their parents. They’re not allowed to reclaim the bodies. Do you think this President gets who these people are?
MH: He clearly does not, Hugh. I mean, this is a President who can’t come to the place, nor can his press secretary, to use the term Islamic terrorist. He still refuses to accept that this is a religiously-motivated group of fanatics who are not intent to create a war because they want to take a piece of land or because they want a certain settlement. These are people who want to kill everybody on Earth who doesn’t agree with their radical positions, and will stop at nothing, because they believe they’re doing the work of God. And the only way you can deal with people like this is you have to kill them before they kill you, because you can’t negotiate with someone who is absolutely convinced that God wants him to kill everybody.
HH: Did the President make a mistake…
MH: And if you’re willing to sacrifice, yeah, if you’re willing to sacrifice your own children to strap a bomb to their belly and blow innocent people up, then you’re just not wired like the rest of the world.
HH: Did the President make a mistake in not going to France?
MH: He did. And if he didn’t go personally, and maybe there were some security concerns for that, but he certainly could have sent Joe Biden. And since it wasn’t a speaking role, we could have at least trusted Joe to go and to be there. He wouldn’t have said anything. Instead, we send John Kerry with this horrible hug that made the Chris Christie hug look like romance, and then turned James Taylor loose singing a song that is the exact opposite of what the U.S. did, you know, you call on my name and we’ll come running, actually, they called on our name and we went running, but the other direction. It was cringe-worthy to watch that, just absolutely horrible.
HH: I agree with you. I do want to bring up, though, on page 54 of the book, and as I was reading God, Guns, Grits and Gravy, I made a few notes that it’s so timely. But you wrote in the climate of free speech, we must assume that people will sometimes say things that hurt other people’s feelings. It should never be acceptable to intentionally injure someone with slurs, stereotypes or slanders, but I find it hard to believe that our culture has created such a sensitive society that every utterance has to be sanitized so as to be sterile, which is to say boring. Did you stand with the Charlie Hebdo people and their use of what is actually quite vulgar and obscene satire, but their right to do it?
MH: Well, they have a right to do it. I can always be offended by it. I can think that it’s tasteless. But tasteless doesn’t mean that they deserve to be mowed down by bullets over something that they wrote or said. I mean, there are a lot of people that offend me. I’ve looked at some stories that are out about me today, and some of them are just very horrible, I mean, the things that I’m called. And you know what? I just accept that I live in a free country, free speech is alive and well, and people have a right to say horrible things, stupid things, untrue things, and that’s part of the price I pay. The good news is I’m able to live in a country where I can say things. Sometimes, I may regret them, but at least I can say them and nobody’s going to shoot me over it. When people start shooting others over what they say, now we’ve got a problem, and that’s why I think that the Charlie Hebdo murders were so very important to just call attention this is how radical Muslims are. They’re not tolerant. There is no sense of limitations with them. And they believe that if they are offended, that they have a right to kill somebody. That’s just really off the charts.
HH: Now Pope Francis, when he was flying to the Philippines, he made news flying back, and I’ll talk to you about that as well, but when he was flying to the Philippines, he said look, you insult my mother, I’ll punch you in the nose. And a lot of people interpreted that as being less than a rigorous defense of free speech. What did you make of that, Governor Huckabee?
MH: I think he would love to walk that comment back. And in fact, I think it was yesterday that he somewhat did, and tried to make clear that he was not advocating for violence, or saying that well, they got what they deserved, because that would be an incredible thing for him to have intended. I think he was just saying that there are consequences. Free speech is certainly a wonderful thing. But when he said that there are limits to free speech, I know what he said, but I’m not sure I would have said it that way, just because the idea of free speech has to be that unless you injure somebody in a way that you can monetize it, injure somebody in a way that hurts their career, their livelihood, that would ruin a relationship that they might have, you just don’t have a right to not be offended.
HH: I’m talking with Governor Mike Huckabee, recently of the Fox News network. He is now the author of God, Guns, Grits and Gravy. I’ll talk to him about the presidential campaign after the break, but first, we’re focused on the State of the Union. I’ve got to go back to the Pope, though, for a second, Governor. Today on his return trip from Asia, Pope Francis said that Catholics should practice responsible parenthood, and don’t have to breed, “like rabbits.” Are you surprised by that?
MH: A little bit. You know, once again, this pope seems to be pretty plain spoken, and yet I sometimes think he may not yet fully realize the power of his every utterance, and how that it is not taken as an opinion, as he’s just strolling along the street, it’s taken as dogma for the Church and for practicing Catholics. It seems like constantly, there are things he says that for example, he made a comment a few weeks ago that caused many advocates for same sex marriage to think that he had lightened the position of the Church on that. He walked that back and said no, that’s not what he was saying. So I just don’t think he fully comprehends how powerful his position is, and that everything he says is going to be amplified, as they say in the movie Spinal Tap, it’s going to be amplified to 11, not just to 10.
HH: Well, he reminds me actually, in his avuncularity, in the way that you approach politics, but that he’s not a political leader. He’s the leader of the Roman Catholic Church, and there’s a different degree of responsibility. But do you sympathize with the way we his avuncular and rather off the cuff sometimes?
MH: Yeah, I do, because I say a lot of things, that I wanted to be colorful. I want it to be clear. One of the things I tried to do with this book, and last night a political person said to me boy, this is unlike any book I’ve read from a guy who might run for president, because most everybody’s so cautious, so careful, so consultant-driven, pulls the punches, makes sure everything is safe, and totally innocuous. And she said this book is blunt and clear and earthy and vivid. And I said good, that’s what I wanted it to be. I wanted it to be entertaining, I wanted it to be colorful, I wanted it to be vivid, and that it would paint a lot of pictures for people. So I understand that. I talk like that. There are many times when I’ve gotten myself in trouble, because I’ve put my foot in my mouth which I didn’t intend to do. But it was just because I said what was on my mind at the moment. And I do, I try to be careful, but I don’t want to be so careful that I’m a person that is so predictable and so bland that nobody wants to hear anything I say.
HH: Well, I am here to tell the audience that God, Guns, Grits and Gravy is neither predictable nor bland, especially when you have Rules For Reformers, Redneck Remedies, the Difference Between Killing Pigs and Making Sausage. That’s just, that’s one of many chapters so titled. Did you run this past anyone in the political consulting world?
MH: No, the political consultants, I wouldn’t let them near this book. I mean, the editors at St. Martin’s certainly had a chance to look at it and say what, but they were very good. They really made virtually no changes other than some grammatical ones, and nobody tried to touch the content, for which I was grateful.
HH: It’s very different, and we’ll talk more about it after the break.
— – – —
HH: Governor, straight shooter that you are, are you running for president again?
MH: You know, the fact that I quit the Fox show in order to have honest conversations with people, I think, is pretty indicative of where this is headed. I certainly reserve the right to say no if I just don’t get the support that I think is necessary. But I would not have left what was a magnificently wonderful job at the Fox News Channel had it not been for feeling drawn in the direction to run again in ’16.
HH: You know, Governor, I thought you were crazy when you left that job. I mean, it’s just, it’s the perfect job, isn’t it?
MH: It’s a great job, and Roger Ailes is a wonderful person to work for. The atmosphere at Fox is terrific, great bunch of people there. I miss them already. And I had six and a half wonderful years. And one of the things I’m enjoying right now is when somebody comes up and kind of, you know, looks around and whispers and says okay, now that you’re gone, tell me what was it really like working there. And when I say well, let me tell you what it was really like, and I say it was the most wonderful atmosphere in the media you can imagine to work in, because there’s a comradery that is very refreshing, there’s an esprit de corps, there’s a commitment to excellence, there’s a competitive spirit but in a positive way, and there was a loyalty factor. And it was just a terrific experience. It was very, very difficult for me to go into Roger and say look, I’m going to have to pull the plug and try something different here. And he was incredibly supportive and very, very gracious about the whole thing.
HH: People don’t believe me when I tell them this, Sean Hannity is the nicest man in broadcast, and I don’t think he’s unusual in the building, and I don’t work for Fox. I’m not a Fox News consultant. It’s just always a pleasant place to go – Megyn Kelly, Bill O’Reilly, they’re all very nice.
MH: They’re all terrific people, and that’s what I say. You know, if you go backstage and visit with folks, you’ll find that there is just an unusual kind of comradery. And this goes not just to the hosts that people see, but to the people in the makeup room, to the custodial staff that clean the building, to the people who run the cameras and put the microphones on. There’s just, I think, a wonderful atmosphere. I didn’t just leave Fox, I left some very, very close friends.
HH: Okay, you did it in order to run for president, and the space that you’re running in is potentially very crowded, and by that I mean the conservative base of the Republican Party, many of whom are either evangelical or Mass-attending Catholics. And in that space right now are Senator Ted Cruz, Senator Rick Santorum, Governor Scott Walker, Senator Marco Rubio, obviously, you’ve got yourself, you’ve got John Kasich is an Evangelical, Bobby Jindal was appearing in front of 70 pastors last week. How in the world do you say, just to this segment, Governor, and you know what it’s like to focus on a segment, I’m a better choice that all these other fine Evangelically-appealing people over here.
MH: I would never say anything disparaging about those people that you just mentioned, because they’re all good people. And any one of them could be an outstanding president. All of them would be a much better president, exponentially, than the one we have now. So I don’t want to say anything that I’m going to come back to regret later. I would only say that of anybody who’s even thinking about running for president right now, nobody has a longer stint of governing, and also governing in what was at the time I was there, the bluest state in the country. It was the most lopsided legislature, fewer Republicans elected in office than any other state, and it was a challenge. But in that, I learned how to govern. And so to be able to get things done, building relationships with people who don’t like you, and still being able to pass legislation and make things happen, I think America needs somebody who can not only deliver the art of governing, but who can also communicate to ordinary people and make the real challenges of our nation clear and understandable, and to inspire this country to be a great America again, to believe in ourselves. I think that’s what John F. Kennedy did. I think it’s what Ronald Reagan did. And I think frankly, it’s to a large degree what Bill Clinton did, but to inspire Americans to step up and be at their best.
HH: Now the same person, the same argument will come from Governor Rick Perry. And I know you’re not going to say anything bad about Governor Perry. You two are buddies, and I’ve seen that before. But he’s going to come out and say okay, I actually was a governor longer than Mike Huckabee. Does he win as a result of that?
MH: Not singularly, but I mean, that’s a strong position he’s going to be able to have. And you know, I assume he is going to run. He’s had a good record. The difference is he governed in a state that was overwhelmingly of his party. And I think that’s a different dynamic than it is if you’ve got a very divided government, and you have to work with the people that really don’t want to work with you. But he’s definitely going to be a person with a strong message and somebody with the right experience to say I did this for a long time. And I think that’s a valid point on his part.
HH: Now Governor Huckabee, I had Reince Priebus on this show yesterday, and I said to him as a prospective moderator or questioner in one of these debates, I don’t know how I’m going to handle 13, 14, 15 candidates. And he said there’s going to have to be a line drawn, you know, a hurdle to get over. But honestly, I think the Republicans have got like at least a dozen people who will get over any legitimate line, don’t you?
MH: I think that’s very possible. We had that back at the beginning of the 2008 campaign. I think on some of the early debates, there was as many as 13 of us on the stage. Now one thing I would hope, and I’m very optimistic about the way Reince Priebus is bringing what I consider a very refreshing leadership to the process, limiting the number of debates, having some say, not the total say, over who moderates them, moving the debates around to many states, this is a Republican primary. It is not the blood sport to let the media make money and have their ratings gain at the expense of the Republican Party. So Reince is doing the right thing, and I commend him for it. I think everything he’s done so far in relationship to the 2016 race, whether it’s the placement of when the convention is going to be held, moving it up, the idea of better control of the debates, he’s exactly on target with what he’s doing.
HH: And do I take that as an endorsement of my role as a co-moderator, Governor?
MH: I think you would be fine. You know, I think you would be very fair and decent. And you wouldn’t go after individual Republican candidates as if to humiliate and ambush and embarrass them over something. You would be trying to get to the heart of what they stand for, what they believe, what they would do. That’s what voters need to see. They don’t need to be asked to raise your hand if you want to believe in certain religious doctrines. That was one of the dumbest moments I think I ever experienced as a candidate. It was really insulting to me.
HH: Amen. On Page 203 of the book, God, Guns, Grits and Gravy, you write about the tendency of Republicans to throw grenades at each other, and that you watch with sadness when self-proclaimed conservatives, outside groups raise and spend millions of dollars not to defeat the far left, but to blow up and destroy other conservatives that aren’t deemed conservative enough. Can that be avoided this cycle?
MH: Well, it can. I hope it will, but I’m not sure it will, because we have some people who want to use their checkbooks not to defeat true liberals, but just to basically gut and dismember other Republicans and conservatives. Of everybody who’s thinking about running for president, there isn’t a liberal in the bunch. Now some would be more conservative than others maybe on social issues, some more conservative than others on maybe national security, some more so on fiscal issues, if that’s possible. But none of the people being considered are liberal. None of them really are going to be frightening compared to what we’ve had over the past few years. So tell us why your guy should win. Don’t try to eviscerate somebody that you don’t want to have him in a competitive role. And here’s what I watch. I watch…
HH: Governor, let me go to break. I’ll be right back.
— — — –
HH: Governor, when we went to break, we were talking about Republicans’ tendency to blow each other up. Now there’s an issue on the table coming up to 2016 – Common Core. On the one side, you’ve got Governor Bush. He’s been a guest on this show, and he’s defended it eloquently and at length. John Kasich’s been a guest on this show. He’s defended it eloquently and at length. On the other side, you’ve had Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio, guests on this show. They’ve blasted away at Common Core. So this is an issue that’s going to divide the Republicans deeply. Now I assume you’re against it, and you’ve heard from the moms that I’ve heard from that it’s a nightmare at the kitchen table. But how would you advise the Republicans go about discussing this in a forum where it’s going to get heated?
MH: I think Republicans need to remind America that they believe that moms and dads are the ultimate decision makers for their children’s education. It shouldn’t be the government. And if parents choose to home school, if parents choose to put their children in a private school, a Christian school or a public school, and if it is the public school, the public school should be accountable. I have some sympathy for Jeb on the Common Core issue, simply because when it was originally conceived, it was a state-run, locally-generated standards in only two things – math and language arts. Unfortunately, the federal government came in and hijacked it. It is now totally unsupportable. I still have people who say oh, Mike Huckabee’s a Common Core supporter. No, I’m not. I am a supporter of high standards. But Common Core was completely commandeered by the federal government and the Department of Education, turned into an absolute disaster. They started adding things like data collection and adding curriculum decisions which were never supposed to be part of Common Core. And I think it’s one of those few issues that now has united people on the right and left, because I hear liberals hating this as much as conservatives do. So the smart thing to do is the states need to say we’re killing it. We are going to go and implement strong standards, but this idea that we’re going to let the federal government hold a sword over our heads, and we have to do what they ask us to do, that’s got to stop.
HH: So if Governor Bush continues to defend Common Core, as he has, as a good idea, that we can get the federal government’s hands off it, how are you going to respond to that in a debate setting, or even on an everyday trail setting?
MH: It’ll probably come up, but the fact is a president’s going to have very little to do with education at the state level, because it’s still a state issue. Now the fact we have a Department of Education is somewhat troubling, and I know every president since Ronald Reagan has said they’re going to try to get rid of it. Nobody ever has. But the one thing it ought to do is to be nothing more than a center for best practices so that education ideas that truly are effective and work, it can be a clearing house to help people implement them in their own state if they decided to and chose to. What it should not be is a big pot of money dangled over the heads of governors and have them told that if you’ll play the ballgame our way, we’ll give you some money. That’s an issue that really ought to stop not just in the Department of Education, but throughout all of the federal government.
HH: Now Governor, in God, Guns, Grits and Gravy, you talk about same sex marriage. And just this week, it was announced, actually on Friday, that the Supreme Court will hear the argument in the case, and we’ll probably have a decision by the end of June. I understood you to make a statement, but I want you to speak for yourself on this, that if the Republican Party is wrong on this, you’re not in the Republican Party anymore. What you clarify for me what you were saying, because I wasn’t at the Values Voters Summit when it was said.
MH: Yeah, it was actually in a radio interview that I did with Tim Wildmon. And I was speaking somewhat rhetorically, but my point was if the Republican Party decides that it no longer is going to support traditional marriage, then they start losing people like me, that I’ll be done. Now am I going to walk away and not run as a Republican? No, I mean, unless they totally go off the left field. But there does come a point at which I think we have to take a stand. I may be lonely, I may be the only one, but I’m going to stand absolutely faithful to the issue of marriage not because it’s a politically expedient thing to do, because it isn’t. I’m going to do it because I believe it is the right position, it’s the Biblical position, it’s the historical position. I believe like Barack Obama said he believed back in 2008, that it’s an issue that has been settled by the Bible, and God is in the mix. Now one of three things – either Barack Obama was lying in 2008, he’s been lying now since he’s changed his view, or the Bible got rewritten, and he was the only one who got the new version. So I’m just going to have to say that I haven’t been given the role of editor. And I’m not angry about it. One thing I am angry about, though, Hugh, is this notion of judicial supremacy, where if the courts make a decision, I hear governors and even some aspirants to the presidency say well, that’s settled, and it’s the law of the land. No, it isn’t the law of the land. Constitutionally, the courts cannot make a law. They can interpret one. And then the legislature has to create enabling legislation, and the executive has to sign it, and has to enforce it.
HH: I’ll be right back. One more segment with Governor Mike Huckabee.
— – – — –
HH: So Governor, just to put a cap on that, if the Supreme Court rules 5-4 that every state must allow two people of the same sex to get married, what’s your position on the campaign trail going to be about what governors ought to do in the aftermath of that ruling, and what presidential candidates in the Republican Party ought to say about it?
MH: Well, if the federal Supreme Court rules that same sex marriage is protected under the 14th Amendment, you still have to have Congress and the President act to agree with it, because one branch of government does not overrule the other two. This idea that a judge makes a ruling on Friday afternoon, and Saturday morning same sex marriage licenses are being given out, that’s utter nonsense, because there’s not been any agreement with the other two branches of government, so I just want people to go back to their 9th grade civics class, and remember there are three branches equal, and that all three of them have to be in concert in order for something to become law. And the courts can’t make a law, and they don’t have the power to enforce a law.
HH: Would you counsel civil disobedience to county clerks?
MH: Well, the point is states would be in a position that their legislatures would have to go into session. They would have to create legislation that the governor would sign. If they don’t, then there is not same sex marriage in that state. Now if the federal courts say well, you’re going to have to do it, well, then you have a confrontation. At that point, somebody has to decide is the Court right? If it is, then the legislation will be passed. It’s not unlike we’ve seen other legislation. In my own state, when we had school funding legislation that had to be passed, the courts ruled, but we didn’t start sending out checks the next day. We called a special session, we negotiated through it. The courts didn’t tell us what the formula had to look like. They just told us the one we had wasn’t Constitutional. In that case, I agree with them. They were right. We fixed it.
HH: There’s an echo in that, though, Governor. Last night, because it was Martin Luther King day yesterday, I went and saw Selma. And the great judge, Frank Johnson, issued an order that allowed the marchers to march. And George Wallace had to get out of the way, and it’s a dramatic confrontation. There is issue here of the Supremacy Clause. Now I might not like, and I’m praying that Anthony Kennedy decides this the right way, that states have a right to define for themselves marriage. But if it goes the other way, don’t we have to follow what the Supreme Court says immediately, or aren’t we in contempt of the federal Constitution as we understand the Supremacy Clause?
MH: But if the legislation in that state, if the law in that state does not already have a mechanism to support same sex marriage, the legislation and only the legislature can create the law that says a marriage license can be given to two men or to two women. And I think there’s going to be immediate cases filed where a person will say well, I’d like to marry two women, or I’d like to marry two men for a woman. And who’s to stop that? It’s going to be a tricky thing, but you know, when people say the law is now the law of the land and it’s settled, well, 1973, the Court ruled on Roe V. Wade, and I think it’s anything but settled. And it’s anything but something that has ended because the courts made the ruling. I think it was a terrible ruling they made in 1973. And I hope this Court realizes that this is not a decision that should be made by the judicial branch. It should be made by the legislative branch, the representatives of the people.
HH: Now Governor, I want to conclude, God, Guns, Grits and Gravy has got a lot of culture in it, got a lot of discussion of reality TV, a lot of terrific stuff that people should go and read. It is not that in depth on foreign affairs, because that just wasn’t what was concerning you. It’s not an oversight on your part. It just wasn’t center. On foreign affairs, what do you consider to be the greater threat right now – Hezbollah, Iran or ISIS/al Qaeda?
MH: They’re all branches from the same tree trunk, and I think we have to look at this in an integrated way. And rather than start separating it and saying well, ISIS is the worst, or Iran is the worst, we need to see that Islamic fascism and radical Islamic terrorism, it is our common enemy. And any form of it is deadly dangerous to Americans.
HH: But of those two, we have to sort of pick sides at least in such a battlefield as the Syrian conflict. Which one would keep you awake longer at night, because they are at each other’s throats at the same time that they’re at our throats.
MH: Well, I think in that case, if you’re going to have to say which is the one that poses the most immediate threat to America’s security, it would be Iran, because they are a nation-state. They’re not just a rag-tag bunch of killers. And because of the fact that they have borders, boundaries, they have an army, and they’re rapidly developing a nuclear device, that they are just crazy enough to turn loose on Israel and the United States, that has to be probably the greatest fear that anybody ought to go to bed having.
HH: Now you’re, one of your legacies in Arkansas was a Republican state, and Tom Cotton is a weekly guest on this show. And Senator Cotton has said he’s going to support the passage of new Iranian sanctions, and he believes there are the votes to override a presidential veto. Do you urge every Republican to support that, Governor Huckabee?
MH: Absolutely, I do. I think that the lifting of the sanctions was a terrible mistake. It’s given breathing room for the Iranians to continue their nuclear program. We had them in a much better position to stop the nuclear program when they were economically hemorrhaging as a result of the sanctions. What we have done is basically turned ourselves into the soft uncle who says yeah, maybe what you’re doing is not good, but you know, you parents aren’t here, so go ahead and do it until they come back.
HH: All right, Governor, last question, and it’s a two-parter. How well do you know Hillary Clinton? And can you beat her in a one on one run for the White House?
MH: I probably know her better than anybody else who’s thinking about running for president on the Republican side, and yes I do think I could beat her, because I believe that she is going to be a person whose perception is very out of touch with common, hard-working, middle class American people. When she says that she left office dead broke, and barely could afford the mortgages on her three houses, I just think people look at that and they roll their eyes and they say really? Come on. So when she says businesses and corporations don’t create jobs? When the policies that she was a part of in the Obama administration, including the cover-up of Benghazi, I think it’s going to be hard for her to make the sale to the American people.
HH: So Governor, I hope when you’re in California, you’ll stop by the studio. Congratulations. I look forward to many more conversations in 2015, and to God, Guns, Grits and Gravy being on the bestseller list for a long time. Thank you for joining me.
MH: Thank you, Hugh, great to talk to you.
End of interview.