Just Two Good Old Boys
We never mean any harm!
Just Two Good Old Boys
Why Trump's handling of the Epstein scandal could destroy the Republican party.
What if Star Trek's utopian Federation is actually a totalitarian socialist regime? This provocative idea kicks off our wide-ranging conversation, examining how Starfleet combines military and governmental power in ways that might make libertarians cringe.
The discussion takes a serious turn as we analyze Trump's handling of the Epstein files, questioning why a president who campaigned on transparency is now dismissing public interest in the case. Could this be Trump's "Nixon moment"? We explore the potential fallout for Republicans in the midterms and speculate about possible motivations behind the resistance to release information.
Our constitutional debate gets heated when we tackle federalism versus centralization. Was the Constitution meant to limit only the federal government, leaving states free to ignore amendments like the Second? Or does this interpretation create an unworkable contradiction? This conversation reveals fundamental differences in how Americans conceptualize their nation's governing structure – as "these United States" or "THE United States."
We take a breather with some tech talk about external drives, RAID configurations, and the evolution of storage technologies, before diving into digital privacy concerns. The contrast between cash advocates and digital payment enthusiasts highlights broader cultural tensions around convenience versus anonymity.
The episode wraps with a candid health update about blood pressure medication side effects and the surprising cognitive benefits of methylene blue supplements. From political theory to personal well-being, this conversation captures the eclectic, thoughtful exchanges that define our podcast.
Join the discussion by messaging us on Twitter or through our podcast link. Your support keeps these conversations going – consider becoming a monthly supporter if you find value in our perspectives!
Communicate with us directly on x.com by joining the Good Old Boys community! https://x.com/i/communities/1887018898605641825
Check out Gene's other podcasts -
podcast.sirgene.com and unrelenting.show
Read Ben's blog and see product links at namedben.com
Can't donate? sub to Gene's GAMING youtube channel (even if you never watch!) Sub Here
Weekend Gaming Livestream atlasrandgaming onTwitch
StarCitizen referral code STAR-YJD6-DKF2
Get EMP protection for your car using our code "sirgene"
.jpg)
Howdy Ben, how are you today?
Speaker 2:Doing well, Gene Yourself.
Speaker 1:Oh, it's interesting times we live in.
Speaker 2:Well, what's going on?
Speaker 1:Well, I don't know if you had a chance to watch it or not. I sent you about a two-hour long video that talked about Star Trek With Eric what?
Speaker 2:With Brett Weinstein.
Speaker 1:No, no, no, Weinstein didn't talk about star trek, but this is a video to talk about.
Speaker 2:I'll start no, I did not watch the stupid video you sent me now you should totally watch it. It is fascinating because he I've said a lot of these things.
Speaker 1:It is totally fascinating. As spock would say, he ties everything together. It was great because I've pointed this out to people before too when they get all tricky on me, it's like oh okay, so you're like a total, you know, socialist, utopian. And they always take offense, of course, because they, you know, they think that's not what star trek is.
Speaker 1:But he actually adds a whole other dimension to this, which is again I think it's in there, just didn't really talk about it before which is that it's it's not just a socialist utopia, it's a totalitarian socialist utopia. So he talks about the differences between civilians and people employed for starfleet, which starfleet, starfleet is a combination of the government and the military, and so it's a lot closer to China than it is to the United States.
Speaker 2:No, because Starfleet, the Federation, no, no, no. You can't argue about it without, would say, is the Federation, is interplanetary governance and government, but each planet has its own government. Yeah, and he's talking about the Earth government in particular, that the turns yeah and the Earth government is separate from the Federation, I would say it's a very interesting observation in it.
Speaker 1:I tend to agree with it more than disagree. And he's like he this is not just casually talking off the top of his head. He's got all the references and specifics of episodes and books and everything else Okay. So canon this is his thesis is that canon demonstrates that Star Trek is in fact a totalitarian socialist utopia.
Speaker 2:Well, we can agree to disagree.
Speaker 1:Well, there's not a matter of disagreeing with facts, dude. You just have to watch it Now. If you want to point out mistakes in what he said, that that's fine. But disagreeing without watching this thing is kind of like saying, well, I don't think trump's actually trying to hide anything about epstein's foibles. I think there's really nothing there that epstein probably never existed. It was probably invented by obama, and everyone's an idiot on the republican side for thinking otherwise. Is that what you're?
Speaker 1:yeah, I don't think that's even the point that was being made there, and I am very interested to see what ends up happening with the epstein stuff uh brett brett's story about epstein on the interview you sent me was pretty interesting and telling as well yep, yeah, and he's told that story years ago, like I, I watched him tell this yeah, he's told it on rogan, but it was just an interesting retelling, given everything yeah, and it went and he told it on his brother's podcast way back when, uh, like during covid, and so this is not something new, that's just oh yeah. Now I remember when I used to hang out with Epstein. This is just a retelling of the same old story that he came up with. But yeah, what do you think?
Speaker 2:that it was created by obama and literally called people on the right that are bringing it up morons yeah, I, I, I really would like to know what he's being told in person and who's telling him what he's lost the.
Speaker 1:I have what is worth so much that you're willing to lose the midterms.
Speaker 2:Well, if you have exploit material on people and you want to use it, that's one possibility, but I but I mean you're going to lose the case.
Speaker 1:What are you like that's the trade out. What are you willing to trade for losing elections in a year and a half? I don't know man. I it like, is it? I don't buy this is this is like he's willing to cover for israel by losing the elections next time.
Speaker 2:I don't buy that well that, or there's enough shit in there that if he releases it and he realizes if he releases it, it's going to tear down the entire us government and probably start world war three.
Speaker 1:So maybe, I don't know that's what needs to happen then if the us government is based on child pedophilia, hey hey, 100, burn it all I'm not saying you're on that side, I'm just saying it's. It's a crazy, crazy thing. Cause it. He can't be oblivious to what this is doing to the midterms.
Speaker 2:Hmm, I don't know man. It feels like he might be.
Speaker 1:I mean, he's not going to get go for reelection again, so he doesn't care. But this is going to sabotage, you know, certainly his VP and everybody that's in Congress right now that went along with him on passing this big bill. So I don't know, man. I totally think and I've said this for months now that I think there's quite a few senators that ended up going to Epstein's Island, so they've got personal reasons. So I never expect the Senate to do anything that would help bring any of this to light, because it would likely get a few of them kicked out of office.
Speaker 2:Well, you know. What's really interesting now, though, is Ro Khanna's bill that Thomas Massey has signed on to.
Speaker 1:What's in there?
Speaker 2:It's basically to force the any evidence out, but it's not going to go to the senate.
Speaker 1:I mean the senate will never do it. Uh, why? They've already said as much. There's 60 people in the senate that have said that they're not going to, they're not going to support that bill.
Speaker 1:60 it will be so they added language to remove and redact, you know faces of people, stuff like that to go through, and you know not harm the, not harm the victims, etc, etc but that's the other frustration with this right is the gaslighting that's being done by trump and others, but certainly by trump in this case, because every time that the some reporter asked about the bill, or the bill uh asked about epstein the response is instantly we don't want to bring the names and faces of the victims up. Nobody, literally nobody, has asked for that, not a single person. Everybody has said the only names we want are the perpetrators, not the victims. So Trump's position is that, originally, what Pam Bondii told us is that there are no perpetrators except for Epstein.
Speaker 2:It was Epstein.
Speaker 1:I just don't buy and thousands of underage teenage girls Thousands They've said thousands, they haven't backtracked thousands but there are no perpetrators. Nobody went to the island, it was all. And then Trump, after that original, now he's been doubling down by saying that this is just a hoax that was created by Obama. Now he talks about how nobody cares about this, when literally it is the number one topic on X for the last week and of people that consider themselves MAGA. The people on X that are conservative are all part of the MAGA coalition, at least for now, and I think that's falling apart quickly.
Speaker 2:You know one thing that I think there's one scenario where I think this gets saved.
Speaker 1:We start a war.
Speaker 2:Huh.
Speaker 1:We start a war and then it's a non-issue.
Speaker 2:Yeah, no, I'm not even talking about that. All right, so the one way this could be OK was if Trump is downplaying this, doing this like this, and then in a few months comes out and says, well, we couldn't release it then because we were making sure and investigating these people, these horrible, horrible people, many of them in Congress. We've arrested them, they're going to be going to jail for a very long time, and I do terrible trump, but you know, and then here's the evidence and release it like if he did that, even against republicans, everyone will be arrested if he did that, that would totally redeem it I agree, if q is right, that would be something yeah, I don't think that's going to happen.
Speaker 1:I just don't believe q's right. Yeah, so I've actually posted kind of a a dark humored joke saying you know, I think I finally understand people that have been talking about trump playing 4d chess and 5d chess.
Speaker 1:I think trump's actually been playing 10d chess this whole time, and the 10d chest involves the fact that for 60 years he voted as a democrat and then he finally got to finish his democrat support by taking over the republican party and destroying it once and for all from the inside you know I'm somewhat okay with that I mean it's.
Speaker 1:It's supposed to be dark humor, because I don't think that's actually the case, but it's it's humor, because you could see how. You know that could be kind of the case, because what he's been doing for the last week, ever since bondi came out and said there's nothing here, is doubling down and tripling down and which they have so many different ways out of this, like tim has been.
Speaker 2:They've had plenty, you know, pointing out like, just say there's an ongoing investigation. Right, we can't, we would, we'd like to do this, but we found some stuff in there that we've got to continue to investigate and that excuse would easily last to pass the whole thing out.
Speaker 1:And then they discovered something that makes somebody look horrible, and Trump's not ready to quit his presidency yet.
Speaker 2:Do you think it's Trump's stuff on the list? That is the issue here.
Speaker 1:I don't think Trump's a pedophile, but I think it's very likely that Trump, without thinking about it, did something that enabled Epstein to traffic kids through Mar-a-Lago.
Speaker 2:Hmm, through mar-a-lago, hmm, yeah, but if he realized it and then said okay, no, and this is why he was banned, that doesn't you know? That I don't know.
Speaker 1:I don't know. I'm just trying to do occam's razor. I'm like what is it? There's only two likely explanations in my mind. One is trump has something to do with it I don't know the specifics or or two, the US government, officially, in its capacity, has something to do with it. So we cannot disclose to the American people, given that Trump frankly ran on opening up the CIA and the FBI's books and showing everybody all the misdeeds we were supposed to have found out about who killed JFK. That never happened. Frankly, neither did we find anything else new that wasn't already previously known about RFK or about Martin Luther King. Like all the documents released were still all redacted and, as people have pointed out in the weeks after they released, all of these have previously been released. There's nothing new that came out.
Speaker 2:The JFK files doesn't seem to be that way. There's 80,000 some odd pages, and it's really crappy copies that can't easily be OCR'd. So, I don't know that we can trust any. Ai analysis of this. I think it's going to take years for people to actually read through it. Yeah, that's what Grok says. Cool, I don't give a shit about what Grok says.
Speaker 1:I'm telling you what some JFK experts have said what have you seen, grok?
Speaker 2:What about it? It's gone stupid and crazy.
Speaker 1:What do you want? He's like an 18-year-old girl now.
Speaker 2:Okay, yeah, don't like rock have you seen Greck?
Speaker 1:It's an anime cartoon character now.
Speaker 2:No, I have not. You'll have to send me a link.
Speaker 1:Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah, I'll send you. There's a male and a female version. The male one, I think, is called Victor or something, but it's your, you know, but it's your companion. And the female one is like a Japanese high school girl, enemy style, which got a lot of people asking Elon Musk why he's been talking about we don't have enough population and he's providing virtual girlfriends for everybody.
Speaker 2:Back to Epstein slash jfk. Yeah, there's a lot of things that have been released that just are going to have to be manually read through before we know exactly what's there.
Speaker 1:I'll give you that. Let's see what happens, but so far, to date, nothing news come up. Okay, so given that's what he kind of ran on, it does seem very disingenuous for him to be saying there's nothing here that never was here. Barely anyone cares about this, and then the whole thing was invented by obama, when in reality, we have video of trump partying with epstein from 1992. We have videos of bill clinton and trump and Epstein or photos, not videos all three of them together, and I don't know if there's a Mar-a-Lago or somewhere else, but we have photos of that.
Speaker 1:We have video of Trump back in the early 2000s talking about how Bill Clinton is going to have trouble about all the happenings on the island. But he obviously knew Epstein. He obviously knew very well what was going on in Epstein's island enough to make a you know, pseudo-threatening comment about Bill Clinton, about it. The first time that Epstein was arrested was during George W Bush's term, not Obama's, and the second time Epstein was arrested was during Trump's term, not Obama's. So how the Democrats invented Epstein and it's a big nothing burger doesn't jive with reality.
Speaker 2:Do you agree? Okay. So if you're thinking trump is that involved or new enough, then why would he campaign knowing that this would, then I don't think he knew, I don't think he knew, I think okay, so then why would he campaign, knowing that this would then be his downfall? I don't think he knew, I don't think he knew I think Okay, so then why wouldn't he release it?
Speaker 1:I agree he should release it. He should release it and deal with the consequences. But I think what likely happened is his buddy, jeff, who called Trump his best friend. Incidentally, now, trump never called him. That Trump more recently said I barely knew the guy, but again, we have videos spanning 10 years of those guys hanging out together. So barely a friend.
Speaker 1:Okay, I think it is very likely that Trump is one billionaire who likes chicks. Would have happily done a favor for another billionaire who likes chicks, epstein. And if Epstein say, hey, I'm going to be spending three days in Miami hosting this event with a bunch of models, can I get like six rooms at Mar-a-Lago and security to make sure no one interrupts us? And Trump would be like, yeah, sure thing, buddy. And then it turns out that in the Epstein files we have photos from Mar-a-Lago of underage kids being involved in sexual deeds. Now Trump didn't know and couldn't vouch for what Epstein was doing when he was at Mar-a-Lago. But is this something that would bring down Trump? You bet your ass it would. Why do you think it would bring down trump? You bet your ass it would. That's why do you think it'd bring down trump? I think and I've already said this on x. I think this is. We're seeing trump's nixon moments right now. I think we're seeing denials, much like we did, from nixon, that will ultimately end up in him resigning.
Speaker 2:Well cool, let him resign, Let JD do it, you there?
Speaker 1:Yeah, I'm here, I mean it's so. The argument then is just you don't care about the present, what?
Speaker 2:do you mean? One way or the other, whatever happens, happens happens, you're fine I, I, just I want the information out there and my attitude is if it tears down the entire fucking world let it tear down the entire fucking world. Yeah, like we, I, I dude, I'm a burn it all down anyway kind of person right now and you know I, I'm, I'm good take it out.
Speaker 1:that's, and that's that's kind of what I was assuming based on my, you know, friendship and knowledge of you. You just weren't saying it, so I'm glad you said it, because that that is definitely, I think, one of the scenarios. It's not a guarantee that's going to happen, obviously, but I think it's one of them, and I suspect it's a strong one, because whenever I post something like that like I, you know, when I post an exit I think this is Trump's Nixon moment that's the post that ends up getting, you know, republished and hearted the most. That that's the post that and look, I would never call this viral because there's still tiny numbers of people, but, like, if my normal post gets like four people liking it, a post like that is going to get about 70 people liking it. A lot of people are feeling the same kind of feeling, which is why are you lying to us? This is not going to end well and you're literally fucking your own party right now. And there are people that are I guess I'll refer to them, as always Trumpers.
Speaker 2:And I realized I was on mute. So I don't care about the Republican Party, and I'm fine with it crashing and burning which it will over this unless something has changed. Yep, but you know, maybe Trump gets a couple more things done. He has two years. He gets right to the midterms and says I'm stepping down at the midterms Because that would give JD Vance the ability to run for two more terms.
Speaker 1:Exactly.
Speaker 2:He wouldn't be at that 10-year limit. And you know, let it come out right after that would be a good way to do it.
Speaker 1:Yeah, I agree. I agree Because JD Vance is being like. I think he is an intelligent guy and he has been demonstrating that by not saying a goddamn thing pro or con. He's not supporting the president, but neither is he opposing the president. He's just not said anything about X-Beam. The closest he came was when he was on an interview on the podcast. He had made a joke saying well, we're gonna put out an episode because it's slow news week, which is obviously tongue-in-cheek, making fun of the fact that it's hardly a slow news week. But I think he's properly and rightfully staying out of this because it's not his problem. He has zero chance of being an Epstein list Trump. Why Not so much? Well, one that's because he wasn't involved in politics, he wasn't doing this stuff, he wasn't rich back when Epstein was actually active, so just timing wouldn't work out.
Speaker 2:Harvard, well, sure, sure, but I don't think Epstein was inviting a whole lot of Harvard students there.
Speaker 1:I'm sorry, I don't think Epstein was inviting a whole lot of Harvard students. He was getting rich people.
Speaker 2:I think he probably was engaged in a lot of what Harvard did.
Speaker 1:I think he probably was engaged in a lot of what Harvard did, and looking for those people early to you know, get them nice and blackmailable early on.
Speaker 2:And why. What have you seen to indicate that? See Brett Weinstein's story on you know what he did with Harvard?
Speaker 1:Yeah, his association with Harvard, sure, sure, yeah, but there again we're not really talking. Young people.
Speaker 2:I don't, maybe I'm old as a JD Vance.
Speaker 1:Maybe I'm wrong about his age.
Speaker 2:Uh, he's my age.
Speaker 1:Oh, there's JD Vance. Uh, let's see, he is 40 years old right now. So epstein, like I said, he's about my age. Yeah, so epstein got arrested in the late 90s the first time, so that was 26 years ago. I dare say he was a little too young to have been involved with Epstein.
Speaker 2:I mean Epstein didn't stop when that first arrest occurred.
Speaker 1:No, he didn't. But if JD Vance is 40, that means he was at Harvard 20 years ago. That's 2005. Epstein was arrested the second time in 2007. That's 2005. Epstein was arrested the second time in 2007. I mean, he would have been basically a freshman or a sophomore, not a grad student in math or science. So I don't see it. I think statistically it's just very unlikely, but I'm going to give him the default as a pass.
Speaker 2:So he wasn't at Harvard, he was at Yale, so there's one. So he wasn't at Harvard, he was at Yale. So there's one.
Speaker 1:So we screwed that up Even more of a pass there, although I just don't trust any of those Ivy League schools, frankly. But but either way, just age wise, I think there's an issue. But was he at Harvard then or did he go after his military? Cause he may not even have been in Harvard 20 years ago Because he was in the military right.
Speaker 2:Yeah.
Speaker 1:I don't know the timeline, yeah, but either way I'm going to give him the benefit of the doubt. I'm not saying it's impossible that he was involved, but it's highly unlikely. He was in the military from 2003 to 2007. He graduated from high school in 2003.
Speaker 2:Same year I did.
Speaker 1:Yeah, so I mean, I guess that means you're also unlikely to have ever been at Epstein Island. Congratulations.
Speaker 2:Ben, what did you say? What I? I'm unlikely to have ever been to epstein I yeah, yeah, I'm right. Statistically speaking, you have a very low odds of having ever been there I have never been there I have never met mr jeffrey epstein and I'm glad I didn't uh-huh, it's interesting how you phrase that, why you still call him mr epstein.
Speaker 1:Interesting, it's just a turn of phrase.
Speaker 2:You know those we should. We should talk about the fallout from this as well. Sure, Like Luke Renkowski has lost his mind over this. Have you watched any of his stuff?
Speaker 1:I have not been watching any of his stuff. I do read his comments, his posts on X, but it sounds like the videos you're talking about are a lot more interesting.
Speaker 2:X, but it sounds like the videos you're talking about are a lot more interesting. Well, he just thinks this is it, this is. Trump has totally lost the base, totally lost everybody. It's over.
Speaker 1:Well, I think he's lost a lot of people. He's certainly lost enough people to get him over 50%. That's for sure. And that's why I think right now, unless something extremely drastic happens like a resignation by trump, democrats will control both houses next term. That's, I think, the most likely. If I was making a bet on poly markets right now, that would be the bet I would make well, why don't you make that bet?
Speaker 1:I got money tied up in other things free funds to make a bet like that, but that would definitely be the best.
Speaker 2:You're tied up in spaceships.
Speaker 1:Tied up in NVIDIA, which is hitting an all-time high right now $173. I bought it four months ago for $120. Good for you. It's not quite time to sell it yet, but if I sell NVIDIA maybe I'll do that. I'll put a huge bet on PolyMarkets for midterms, going Democrat.
Speaker 2:Okay.
Speaker 1:Not that I want them to go Democrat, obviously, but I just think that you think that?
Speaker 2:even with the Democratic Party imploding on its own, like you do see that that's happening right.
Speaker 1:Here's the piece that I and I wrote about this too that I think there's a bit here that a lot of Republicans, a lot of MAGA wearing hat wearing crowd is missing. They think Trump won with a huge mandate for Trump. No, I think the reality is that he won with a huge vote against Kamala Harris.
Speaker 2:I don't know about that. I would say that he it was a vote for populism.
Speaker 1:All I know is he won against two chicks and he lost against a guy. Two chicks and he lost against the guy. So I think there's a. Certainly you can grind out the stats on this, but I think there's a possibility here that in both cases, trump won as the candidate that wasn't the candidate people didn't like.
Speaker 1:And not as much the candidate that everybody liked, and I think he's bought into this idea that that he, that everyone loves him and he can do no wrong and and whatever he says, people will love. And I think he's seeing the reality hit him right now, which is people vote for ideas and they vote against politicians just as much as they vote for politicians, in as much as they vote for politicians and as much as Californians voted against Trump, even if they didn't like Kamala.
Speaker 2:Most men voted for Trump because they couldn't vote for Kamala, even if they had previously voted Democrat for Obama, which is also a good reason to bring in the third party, because right now the the choice is always between two people that half the country hates well, it will be interesting to see who the declared candidates are this next time, and it sure looks like Gavin Newsom is going to make a try.
Speaker 1:Yeah, oh yeah, yeah, totally, I've been thinking that as well. He's popping up on all kinds of podcasts. He's making the rounds. He's definitely acting like somebody that's running, and I think there were people that were saying, oh, you can't look at what's happening in California. I don't think he cares and I don't think a lot of Democrats care. I think they like his image. He's a charismatic man.
Speaker 2:He reminds me a lot of Bill Clinton.
Speaker 1:Like the young Bill Clinton of the early 90s, I remember Bill Clinton back then Didn't vote for him, Voted for Ross Perot. But I remember Bill Clinton back then didn't vote for him, voted for Ross Perot, but I remember what he did and how he acted. Everybody thought his wife was a total bitch like in the first few months it became pretty obvious. But Bill Clinton and I've said this before if there's a living president that I would want to have lunch with, it would definitely be Bill Clinton.
Speaker 2:Well, I've told my Bill Clinton story story a few times.
Speaker 1:You did, but by the way bitcoin is over 120k oh, yeah, yeah, you're right, yeah, so that's also gone up. I don't have much of that, but just you know a little bit.
Speaker 2:But yeah, I need help getting my sats out of fountain. If anyone, if anyone, knows a good path to do that.
Speaker 1:I know a guy that could probably help you, but he's going to want to keep them all in his own custody. Yeah no. I think I think Darren could probably figure out a way to do it and say fun into him, because he's running his own node, yeah.
Speaker 2:Proton wallet works well. For what? For Bitcoin.
Speaker 1:Do they have a node now? How does that work? I've never looked at it.
Speaker 2:You haven't looked at Proton's stuff. No, yeah, they've got a wallet. It's pretty nice.
Speaker 1:How is it different from the other one you're using?
Speaker 2:the other one I was using was coinbase, and it's just I mean I trust it works fine, I trust proton a little bit more than coinbase.
Speaker 1:So yeah, I mean even paypal has a wallet now yeah, but it's weird because you can't just move, you can't convert easily, you can't dollars.
Speaker 2:They've made it way easier yeah, you can literally buy bitcoin, send bitcoin, receive bitcoin. You can.
Speaker 1:It's full function yeah, yeah, I get all that. You could always do that, but what you could, here's what you couldn't do in the past. You couldn't receive bitcoin and then take out US dollars. Sure.
Speaker 2:And you can use it to pay for stuff.
Speaker 1:Oh, that's awesome. Well, that's good. Not that I don't trust Proton, but I mean I would certainly trust PayPal. In that sense, they've had a long history of making sure that people making small payments get their money. I'm surprised Musk hasn't re-bought PayPal Right, because he started it.
Speaker 2:Yeah, that was part of his baby. That's what he wanted X to be. Yeah, but I think he's planning on X just to compete.
Speaker 1:Yeah, but if he bought paypal and brought it into x emerged yeah, that that's it. I mean he's got basically the, the tiktok app that he's always wanted but I think you mean the.
Speaker 2:I don't know if tiktok's the right thing there, but you know. But I think he's planning on x being a bank on its own without having to do that. So I think he's like why would I buy this? Well, it would bring a shit ton of customers and profitability to X immediately.
Speaker 1:That's one thing that would be a benefit for doing it that way. Yeah, but they keep adding more stuff to X. You know X has a dedicated video player now. That'll finally let you play a video while you're scrolling messages because, in the past, like if you watch a video, you can't scroll well, you can do the picture in picture thing now yeah, yeah, yeah, but like continuously, so you can. You can interact on x type replies. Do all that stuff while watching an x video so yeah, that's great, very cool.
Speaker 2:So you sent me the arms scholar video about that guy's so dry he well, and he exaggerates the importance.
Speaker 1:I don't everything he does, he does I don't, but he also covers shit before everybody else.
Speaker 2:That's the one thing about him I wish he was a lot less stuff.
Speaker 1:What quick yep yeah, I wish he was less, way less dry and I wish he was less clickbaity, because he's absolutely clickbaity and I've messaged I like I've left those comments on multiple videos in the past like, dude, you could be really good, just get rid of this shit because you don't fucking need it. But he, that's his style, I guess. But yeah, there's been a couple of things with the supreme court is apparently now. The latest decision came out eight. One allows states Apparently. Now the latest decision that came out 8-1, allows states to or what's the best way to phrase it? It removes federal government interference from states creating their own state laws about firearms.
Speaker 2:Say that again. Say that again it removes federal interference from states creating their own firearms laws. Well, you know, but that doesn't really do much to like the NFA or anything like that.
Speaker 1:No, it doesn't, but it allows.
Speaker 2:California to have their own laws. Yes, and Texas.
Speaker 1:And you're for that. I get it. I know We've talked about it. You think every state ought to control that. I'm more on the federal government side for things like this. I think there ought to be federal laws that embody the Second Amendment and no state can do anything to oppose it.
Speaker 2:Yeah, I don't want federal. I actually believe in a federal government, not a single government, so yeah, yeah, I mean it's.
Speaker 1:To me it's equivalent to just basically saying every church gets to interpret its own ten commandments.
Speaker 2:No, no, every church is supposed to have a copy of the ten commandments to interpret its own Ten Commandments? No, every church is supposed to have a copy of the Ten Commandments and enforce them.
Speaker 1:And then every state should have a copy of the Constitution. Yes, and most do in the Constitution.
Speaker 2:So when you talk about your gun rights, you should be appealing to your state constitution if a state law is violating it, and the federal constitution if the federal law is violating it. Yeah, I don't see what's controversial about that take.
Speaker 1:California is controversial about that. Take.
Speaker 2:Well, if California wants to fuck over Californians, then sorry To some extent I agree and I usually will say let it burn.
Speaker 1:But there's certain rights, including gun rights, that I just don't think any state ought to be able to just ignore. Then amend the Constitution.
Speaker 2:If the original states came together, then amend the Constitution to say the Second Amendment applies to the states.
Speaker 1:Well, does the First Amendment apply to the states? Nope, Well, that's not what the SCOTUS says. Well, they're wrong Under constitutional originalism under constitutional originalism.
Speaker 2:The Constitution only affected the federal government. It did not affect the states except by delegating power to the federal government. It did not affect the states except by delegating power to the federal government. All other powers were reserved for the states and the people. The state constitutions all had something similar to the Bill of Rights.
Speaker 1:But if all rights that are non-enumerated in the Constitution are left up to the states, which I believe is what it says, then the right to firearms ownership is enumerated in the constitution. Therefore, it's not left up to the states okay I don't know, dude, I mean I I think that of the things that are in the constitution, those and only those laws supersede state constitutions or laws yes, that is the incorporation doctrine and it is not what was done until after the civil war I bet you could find uh, that's not the case nope, before the civil war it was these united states versus the united states.
Speaker 1:Yeah, that's fine dude, but it doesn't matter from what I'm saying okay it's these united states or whether it's the united state, it's irrelevant.
Speaker 1:If you have the states, the original colonies agree that these things we're going to agree on, things that are not in here, we can disagree on, and it's not a problem. And so once the constitution passed, once the bill of rights passed, which was after the Constitution, but once those amendments were passed by a majority of the states, that is no longer an up-to-the-states question. Because then why even have them at all? Why have the Second Amendment at all?
Speaker 2:To bar the federal government, but if the states can do, the states have more authority than the federal government.
Speaker 1:But if the states can do, the states have more authority than the federal government.
Speaker 2:That was the entire idea.
Speaker 1:If the states can impose laws contrary to what the federal government has as laws you don't need to, it's called nullification.
Speaker 2:That's what Thomas Jefferson Dude. Maybe you should look at the history of nullification, because my argument is what the founders argued for period.
Speaker 1:Well, some of them, obviously, because it's not what happened.
Speaker 2:No, it didn't happen until several generations later that the fucking stupid incorporation doctrine made its way into our ethos okay from a logical standpoint.
Speaker 1:Forget what actually happened. If you got 13 colonies that are deciding to become states in a union and they create this concept of a constitution, what does the constitution mean to those colonies? Why are they bothering to create it? Why not just be 13 separate countries?
Speaker 2:They are Dude. You're making my point for me. One. Under the Articles of Confederation they essentially were. Under the Constitution, the federal Constitution, they still were. These United States States is capitalized for a reason, right, they were supposed to be in a loose federation and each state was its own country. This is why going all the way?
Speaker 1:yeah, but why do you have a federal government if each state is a country, what? What is the purpose of the federal government?
Speaker 2:at all. Why does the eu exist? It's to come to join an economic union and work together.
Speaker 2:This is this is why, again, I am not an american, I am a texan. Texas is my country. Yeah, saying I'm an american is like saying I'm a european. Sure, and what it comes down to is this idea of the incorporation doctrine is really perverse. And it's really perverse in a lot of ways, because A it gives the federal government way more power than it should have and, b it takes away the identity of the state and as far as I'm concerned, the capitalized S doesn't mean anything anymore. It should, but you should be a Texan, not an American. You should be a New Yorkan, not an American. You should be a New Yorker, not an American. Have more loyalty to your state than to the federal government.
Speaker 1:That's all fine, but I still haven't answered my question. What is the point of a federal government, not a federal trade union? Not something that could be used for.
Speaker 2:Mutual defense more than anything at the time.
Speaker 1:Okay. So if we just say the point of the federal government as envisioned by the original 13 colonies is to have a NATO-like structure, that's all it is. It's just NATO for the colonies.
Speaker 2:Yeah, this was the structure that they came up with at the time. I'm not saying that we shouldn't just break apart and do some sort of NATO-like structure at this point in time. I would be fine with that, but that idea did not exist at the time.
Speaker 1:So it's a NATO-like structure, right? Okay, that's fine, let's go with that. So all it is, it is a treaty for mutual defenses, right?
Speaker 2:It's a little bit more than that.
Speaker 1:Well, but that's where I'm going. So why does this treaty for mutual defense, which is the only reason that we have a federal government, which you're saying why does it have three branches of government associated with this treaty?
Speaker 2:okay, because they wanted to do things unified in certain ways, like foreign policy. We're going to band together and we're going to do foreign policy, and part of the federal government's role is going to be foreign policy. Why? Because 13 voices going different directions makes us weaker and divides us. We're going to come together on this.
Speaker 1:We're going to come together on certain enumerated voices agree, then we have a, got a, an amendment to the constitution, and now everybody has to go along with no matter what Correct.
Speaker 2:So there is a lot of questions there. So actually I would state that the founders violated their own principles through the ratification process of the Constitution.
Speaker 1:That's exactly where I was going with this.
Speaker 2:Yeah, 100% yeah. The Constitution shouldn't have no bearing over a state that has not ratified it.
Speaker 1:The structure that they created is not one of a governing board for a treaty of mutual protection.
Speaker 2:The Constitution shouldn't be enforced. We should still be under the Articles of Confederation. We should not have ever gone down the centralized government route. I think the founders made a mistake, do I think they did a pretty good job of limiting that for a good long while? Yes, is it totally out of control at this point and we probably just need to burn it all down?
Speaker 1:and yes, yeah, but my point is simply that if we have the amendments to the Constitution and the Constitution itself, obviously, but with the amendments included with equal strength as the Constitution itself, then I think it makes no sense to disregard any of the amendments unless you're able to disregard all of them, including the Constitution. So if we say the states are under no obligation to uphold all of them, including the Constitution, so if we say the states are under no obligation to uphold the Second Amendment, great the states should also be under no obligation to uphold the Constitution itself.
Speaker 2:Except, I would agree, the states are under no obligation. It's the feds that have to uphold the Constitution. The only portion that the federal government has jurisdiction over a state government is ensuring a republican form of governance.
Speaker 1:Right, so any federal laws are null and void, then there cannot be any federal laws.
Speaker 2:There shouldn't be very many federal laws and they should be total.
Speaker 1:Federal laws could only apply to states, not people In your version states, not people in your version.
Speaker 2:Okay, federal laws should be focused on the areas of the government that the founders intended them to have, the powers enumerated in the constitution okay, so there are federal laws around the second amendment and they could, in fact, force states to not circumvent the second amendment no because, no, it isn't, because they said again incorporation doctrine versus separation of powers and that separation of powers wasn't just through the three branches, it was separation of powers from the federal government and the states, the states to the people, and I do do.
Speaker 2:I think my local municipality could go and ban guns, sure, if the state constitution allows for that yes. Do? I think the state has the right to ban guns. They can try. They're going to have a fight on their hands. But the point is the Constitution applies to the federal government. That's pretty much it. That's where it should be.
Speaker 1:I get all that. But it's not that simple dude, because the federal government either can only apply to governing states, not individuals can only apply to governing states, not individuals. But if the federal government can have laws that apply to individual citizens of states, then the federal government is an overlay. It's not.
Speaker 2:there are federal laws that could be yes, and that has seeped in in the last hundred and some odd years since the Civil War.
Speaker 1:Well, okay, so that's what we're getting to. So your argument would be that pre-Civil War, there were no laws that were federal laws In the last hundred and some odd years since, the Civil War.
Speaker 2:Well, okay, so that's what we're getting to. So your argument would be that pre-Civil War, there were no laws that were federal laws that applied to individuals. No, there was the Alien Sedition Act. Right, that was treacherous in a lot of ways. So you know there has been. The Constitution has been violated since it was written, which is why a federal system and all of us coming together under this large government is a dumb and bad idea and we shouldn't have done it. Texas should have never joined the union.
Speaker 1:Okay, that's fine, but way pre-Texas this existed.
Speaker 2:Sure, Virginia, Maryland. Everybody should have stayed separate and just had some treaties around what we wanted to do.
Speaker 1:Yeah, one of the oldest federal laws was the Tariff Act of 1789. Yep, was the tariff act of 1789, yep. So this laid out for import duties paid on goods imported into the united states, which were originally five percent and as passed by that law. So that law does not seem to apply to states. It seems to apply to individuals and corporations within the United States. But as early as 1789, we already had the federal government creating laws as a governing body, not as simply an administrative body, protecting a treaty for common defense.
Speaker 2:Again I, there's two pieces here.
Speaker 1:One is you're disagreeing with what should be, and I agree with you on that. I don't think it should be an ideal world. We wouldn't have a constitution ideally, but given the world we live in, I think that it is ridiculous to say that 250 years later, 249 years later, that the United States should not have the federal government treat constitutional amendments in the same manner that it treats the rest of the constitution, which is by being above state laws which is by being above state laws.
Speaker 2:Okay, then I want out of the Fed. Then there is no point in having a state government.
Speaker 1:The federal government should do everything centrally, then Well, and then in some places.
Speaker 2:So we have uniformity across all states, no variability.
Speaker 1:Remember the federal government.
Speaker 2:The Senate used to be comprised of people elected from the state correct and that's part of the problem we have is that the states, who are supposed to have a vastly outweighed, say this is why treaties go through the senate, this is why confirmations go through the senate, because the states were supposed to be in control.
Speaker 1:The Senate was supposed to be the representative of the states. The house was supposed to be the representative of the people.
Speaker 2:Correct.
Speaker 1:Yeah, which that was a horrible move, and I probably agree with you on this that it was a horrible move to make the senators be directly elected.
Speaker 2:It was, but I also understand the senators be directly elected. It was.
Speaker 1:But I also understand why they did it because of corruption, Because humans are humans.
Speaker 2:The other thing we screwed up is allowing Congress to cap its number.
Speaker 1:Yeah, yeah, we talked about that, yeah, and that is an interesting question I would love to. I've never looked into it so I don't know, but I would love to see, like, what is the largest governing body of all the countries in the world?
Speaker 2:Who has the?
Speaker 1:largest governing body.
Speaker 2:Ask your AI Grok.
Speaker 1:Well, yeah, I'll do that, but it's obviously not the UK. We've seen how small their chambers are.
Speaker 2:The UK has way more representation than we do Per person. Yeah, the UK has way more representation than we do. Per person, yeah, so you know I think that's somewhat important.
Speaker 1:Now watch, it'll be like.
Speaker 2:China or Russia or something Larger, yeah, but that wouldn't count. I'm trying to phrase the question very specifically here what phrasing are you raising, yeah, what phrasing are you using there gene china, it's china yeah, how many people 2 980 members but they're, but are they really representing anything?
Speaker 1:largest? Well, they are I and I. I give them this because they may not be able to have the types of freedoms that we have in demanding what we're going for, but when it comes to things like where does the railroad get built or which river to dam, you bet your ass. They're representing their constituents. Maybe Largest legislature in the world. They serve for a five-year term. Okay, they meet annually. Oh, I'm sorry, this is the part I shouldn't laugh at, because it's awesome. They meet annually for a two-week period in Beijing.
Speaker 1:The rest of the time they are in their home districts.
Speaker 2:How do they pass any laws?
Speaker 1:Well, they all know what to vote for before they get there. Dude, come on, it's China. Exactly this is my point, but that's awesome. I love the fact that they're only in there for two weeks. The rest of the time they're in their home districts.
Speaker 2:Well, I think we ought to.
Speaker 1:There's no reason for us to have, and there are a couple of minority parties there too.
Speaker 2:I think Congress should be a work from home job, fully remote.
Speaker 1:Do it over Teams or Zoom or whatever, or whatever number of blowjobs during zoom would increase tremendously if that happened not if they're at home well, yeah, yeah, be out of hotel rooms yeah, that's crazy did you hear what's his face? The little weasel guy. Apparently he's gotten caught, adam's little weasel, okay about definitely a weasel how he was living in one state, I think, maryland and sending his kids to school there, while being a representative from a different state like he didn't spend enough time in his home state.
Speaker 1:Basically, interesting like he was renting his house out. Okay so that may get him to be well, at the very least he should get, you know, chastised or whatever the official term is Sanctioned, sanctioned by the house. That's the bare minimum. But they're pushing for him to be removed completely and a special election held because he's not representing his people. I think the likely compromise is going to be he's just not going to run again.
Speaker 2:Do you think Interesting? Didn't they find mortgage fraud on him as well? Yeah, because the primary residence wasn't that part of it Exactly.
Speaker 1:He's trying to have his cake and eat it too.
Speaker 2:Yeah.
Speaker 1:But imagine like if Congress only met for two weeks a year, It'd be great. Well, every time that there's a government shutdown, I always try to explain to people that this is the best thing that could possibly happen.
Speaker 2:Well, or model it after the way the Texas legislature does, you know. Every other year, every year, and you know, let the president call in an emergency session if need be yeah.
Speaker 1:Yeah. I think that's not a bad approach Because, honestly, the more time people spend at home with constituents like like I don't think they shouldn't work, I think they should work, but that working should involve addressing grievances back home. Like if you spend nine months talking to Texans that have complaints about what's going on and you spend two months in Washington DC, I think that would be much better for Texans.
Speaker 2:Agreed and they need to get rid of some of the procedural rules that the house and Senate both have. That's for sure.
Speaker 1:Yeah, yeah, cause they create them Totally. Did you send me something?
Speaker 2:Oh, just something funny. It's a picture of a cat 5 cable coming through the door on the server rack that someone has crimped. It's just to fuck with people, jesus christ that's funny.
Speaker 1:Uh huh, oh. Should we talk about technology shit?
Speaker 2:what do you want to go back to?
Speaker 1:politics. So I I told you, I bought a little, a little external drive box thing yeah, which I dude.
Speaker 2:It only has rate like I. If all you care about is RAID 1, then fine I care about no RAID.
Speaker 1:I'm not running RAID.
Speaker 2:So you're just running just a bunch of disks letting it go together and you're going to end up losing data. You realize that.
Speaker 1:No, no, I'm not, because the point of the two normal drives non-SSDs is purely for backing up the SSDs. So I'm effectively doing a RAID 1 from SSDs to normal drives, but I'm not doing it using their hardware, I'm just doing it running a software on my PC. Okay, so it's just, it's non-real-time mirroring, it's like delayed mirroring so which is what I want to tell.
Speaker 2:Do you want to tell people what this thing is?
Speaker 1:yeah, I'm sure somebody like csb is going to ask for a link for it. It's super cheap, it's like 100 bucks and it's just a small external drive enclosure and it's decent you know decent quality. It's metal with, although the drive trays are all plastic and stuff, but it has room for two, three and a half or two and a half drives or ssds, doesn't matter, and then it has room in one of those trays. It's got the three tray basically, basically Two trays for a three and a half inch disk and one tray which has up to three M.2 SSDs in there there's some limitations on what combination you can utilize right.
Speaker 1:Not really. I mean you can have from one to three SSDs of any size up to eight terabytes, and you can have up to 22 terabytes per drive for the normal drives, I believe. So it's pretty much anything that's available right now you can fit in there. I mean, even the eight terabyte ssds are crazy expensive still. So all I'm doing is just taking my current SSDs out of the PC and just buying larger size SSDs to put into the PC, because even though this thing does do a full 10 megabit per second transfers, which I timed on my computer, I also realized after plugging in and testing it that that's still like eight times slower than what I get when those same SSDs are inside my PC.
Speaker 2:Right, but you're maxing out USB, I guess.
Speaker 1:I'm maxing out USB 3.2, yeah. Your USB chip that you have, I could be yeah yeah, yeah, you're exactly right, it's not the connector, it's the chip. If I had a newer computer with Thunderbolt 5, I could do 80 megabit, which would be a lot closer to the actual speed of the individual drives.
Speaker 2:But it's good enough.
Speaker 1:It's good enough for video work. All I'm doing is just doing videos on there. I'm making videos for my youtube gaming channel and I'm just capping stuff on there did you see the here?
Speaker 2:this, this is something to potentially talk about. Yeah, yeah, I. I just wants actual raid. I want like raid six. I would love to build out a new nas with just purely ssds well, sure, but that's expensive.
Speaker 2:I would love that too but it's crazy expensive right now you know, what I would like is I would go with magnetic media for big long-term storage, like I would love to build out a nas, use something like free nas and have you know the ss, ssds basically be that working storage if you will, and everything else after it's done, file saved, whatever go to disk. That would be great, but it's just, it's expensive and you know, unless I upgrade my network, direct attached storage is better but again you just don't have any great makers, like it's unfortunate, drobo went out of business because had drobo made like a 10, 20 gig usb 3 compatible drive system my god would that be cool?
Speaker 1:yep, I agree, I've got a drobo sitting here. That's, you know, no longer alive. That was a their their last high speed one that used thunderbolt 2, I believe, and so I had that running for several years and it was, at the time, the fastest attached storage you could do because it was raid and it was running over thunderbolt. So it was, at the time, the fastest attached storage you could do Because it was RAID and it was running over Thunderbolt, so it was quite a bit faster than anything you could do with USB.
Speaker 2:And you know their proprietary sauce. That was pretty cool, was they had essentially just a bunch of disk RAID with redundancy.
Speaker 1:Yep, yeah, which you know. My network RAID was the same way.
Speaker 1:The Synology also had that same, or at least while I had my first Synology, they introduced that option where you could do like a hybrid RAID and it would take care of figuring out how to spread redundancy, which was pretty cool, because that was always the problem with raid in the past, as I'm sure you recall as well, is that you have to commit to a drive size. When you first started it, even if you had three drives initially and you add more drives later, you pretty much had to have identical drives for everything. Or you're going to lose capacity, or you get into a situation where you're making a raid with multiple volumes and all those volumes are not spread across the same disk. So the cluster fuck. But what they did with synology and what drobo did during their time is they figured out a way to do all the math and calculate how to do that more efficiently and, more importantly, seamlessly to the end user. So I had to initialize my new SSD using Disk Manager.
Speaker 2:Are you at least using the self-encrypting disks?
Speaker 1:No, why Well you should be? It's video storage. There's nothing there. It's like it doesn't matter. This is nothing that is going to be holding anything important. It's there for speed and no other reason. Okay, literally it's holding. What is on on the ssd are things that anyone can watch on youtube. They're already public.
Speaker 2:It's just a local copy of that see, I figured it was your security camera footage no, no, no, that's on a separate secured raid system.
Speaker 1:see, are you crazy? Come on, man, but that doesn't have to be high speed anyway. The my my point with all this is that I think we're we're starting to see the prices finally coming down. So this is post tariffs, even that. I bought this thing with two physical drive slots and three M.2 slots for $100. And it actually does what it's claiming to do in the description, which is a Saturated 10 megabit, which is 3.2 USB, now USB 4 and Thunderbolt 5, that's something that I don't have a single device that uses, but I'm definitely looking forward to, because those speeds are 80 megs and that ought to be awesome. You mean gigs, gigs, 80 gigs, yeah.
Speaker 2:Cool. So what do you think of this shit going on in New York?
Speaker 1:Let's go ahead in.
Speaker 2:New York. I sent you a link. I don't know, I didn't look at it so cops pulled over this van to New York.
Speaker 1:I sent you a link. I don't know.
Speaker 2:So cops pulled over this van in New York City.
Speaker 1:Propane tanks and gasoline Driver apparently took off on foot yeah. I mean, what else could it be? Right, I mean a potential terrorist attack. But new york is, like a socialist, you know, pro-palestinian place. Why would there possibly be a terrorist attack there? I don't know. I don't know. I honestly have no idea why this is the case. I'm also not inclined to jump to terrorism conclusion based on what I'm seeing.
Speaker 2:I mean, there's like 30 propane bottles dude.
Speaker 1:Yeah Well, and how many do you have in your garage?
Speaker 2:Like five Okay.
Speaker 1:There's my point. Guy was clearly a delivery man driving propane tanks to a bunch of preppers.
Speaker 2:Uh-huh Okay, I don't think so.
Speaker 1:You think this was another FBI Patsy kind of situation?
Speaker 2:I think it could be. Yeah, I think it could be a six-week cycle All right, we'll find out.
Speaker 1:Yeah, I think it could be a six-week cycle. All right, we'll find out.
Speaker 2:You know some of the you know things on Twitter. People are pointing out that maybe he was doing propane delivery for food trucks or something. Yeah, it could be something that could make sense, right?
Speaker 1:Given the number of like bodegas and stuff that have little fryers for making shawarma.
Speaker 2:Yeah, god.
Speaker 1:Getting you hungry am I?
Speaker 2:Yes, I'm definitely hungry.
Speaker 1:Yeah, I did eat lunch today, though. Oh, you did yeah.
Speaker 2:I actually went and had a work lunch.
Speaker 1:I had a horrible lunch today, but I'm willing to confess that I had it. I had to drop off some stuff at the UPS store and right next to there is a Burger King. Oof, yeah, exactly. But I got tempted with their promo, which was they have their new. What do they call it? Not a ribeye, it's a. What the hell do we like in barbecue? God damn it. Brisket, brisket. Yeah, they have a brisket burger. I had brisket today. Okay Well, I'm sure yours was better. They have a brisket Whopper, basically now.
Speaker 2:And I can?
Speaker 1:I can tell you, don't bother, because it, while you could taste the barbecue sauce, it still tastes just like the crappy Whopper. Normally does Not worth it.
Speaker 2:Well. I just don't like Burger King.
Speaker 1:Yeah, yeah, and I think the last time I went to a Burger King was probably last year. I don't go to fast food places For multiple reasons, the least of which is they just don't make me feel good. Well, because the food's not good, it's god-awful food, but I'm also not morally opposed to fast food. So if I'm in a situation where, let's say, I'm driving somewhere for five hours and I'm getting kind of hungry and the only thing that I see is a mcdonald's, I'll stop at a mcdonald's I don't care.
Speaker 1:I'm not gonna like hold out and not eat all day just waiting for the right quality food place to show up. But if I have a choice, it'll never be fast food so I bought something technological oh, and you didn't tell me, go ahead I got a blue air air filter. That's pretty interesting okay, all right, you were thinking about it.
Speaker 2:I guess you did tell me you were gonna yeah, so I I got it with their, you know, heavy duty filters and everything, and I didn't really care about this when I was looking at air filters. But it's you know, wifi enabled.
Speaker 1:Oh yeah, you can control it.
Speaker 2:It's great, yeah, but one of the cool things on there is it actually does a parts per million reading.
Speaker 1:Are you sure you got? You didn't get the same one that I have.
Speaker 2:I got the blue air.
Speaker 1:Okay, mine's the Iniclean, but it sounds like it's exactly the same thing.
Speaker 2:I've got the blue air three, whatever I yeah, and yeah. And let's see if you can hear it when I turn the fan speed, all the way down. All right, the fan speed is all the way up yeah, I still can't hear it you can't hear it through the noise gate right and it.
Speaker 1:What's your parts for really that right now?
Speaker 2:it's. It takes a second to read. Right now it's saying zero okay mine's at five right now which, by the way, anything under 10 is considered good yeah.
Speaker 1:Clean air. Yeah, I and I'm mine. It's about two and a half feet tall, maybe three, two and a half to three feet tall. Yeah, it's probably three, three feet tall. I think it's meant to stand on the floor, but I actually have it on my desk or on one of my desks. I have a bunch of desks here, but I actually have it on my desk or on one of my desks.
Speaker 1:I have a bunch of desks here but behind the computer monitor, so that way it's out of sight. But it's basically pumping out clean air in an upward direction towards the ceiling from behind the monitor, right close to me.
Speaker 2:Sucking all the desk, the desk, the dust off your desk.
Speaker 1:Well, I wish it was all. It's sucking about half the desk as I the dust off your desk. Well, I wish it was all. It's sucking about half the dust, because I'm looking at dust right now, there's clearly more dust that needs to get vacuumed out of here. I don't understand where the fuck my house has dust. Dude, I don't use paper like I don't do anything with paper, and yet I still have dust your skin.
Speaker 2:Your snake skin, okay, I do have snake skin.
Speaker 1:I have my own skin, that's true, I guess. But the dust is not the color of skin. It's like pure white.
Speaker 2:So I don't know You're ashy Gene.
Speaker 1:I'm ashing. Yeah, you're ashy. Yeah, dude, if I could peel off my dead skin the way that the snake peels off his dead skin, it'd be so much cleaner skiing, what nothing.
Speaker 2:I'm teasing, oh man because it's just.
Speaker 1:I mean, the big snake still has like strips and patches of skin, but this last time he shed I have a rolled up, dried out strip of his shed skin from what was on his back going down the back of the snake. That is about 16 feet long and you keeping that why it's a souvenir.
Speaker 1:I've never I like I. I think the last one that I kept of his was probably about six or seven years ago, which was almost a perfect shed. It just looked like one long sock that was about seven feet long. Now he's about twice as long, but it's no longer just a single piece. Normally he sheds multiple pieces now, okay, but it was long enough as a single unit that I thought it'd be kind of cool to keep it as a record.
Speaker 2:You better mount it or something if you want it to survive.
Speaker 1:Eh, it's just rolled up. It's rolled up kind of like you'd roll up a bandage. Nothing happens to it, it's dried out, okay. So I should be able to unroll it any time I wanted to, if I wanted to really do that.
Speaker 2:So we got a new supporter, so thank you.
Speaker 1:We did. Yeah, Thanks for that. So our call to replace the one that dropped out worked, which is very nice and certainly for anyone that enjoys listening to us. You know either talking about tech or guns or arguing about politics and mostly agreeing, but a little bit of arguing. We certainly appreciate anyone that wants to say thank you to us for providing enjoyment and entertainment with a monthly donation, and it could be of any size. We have people doing anywhere from $3 to $10. And occasionally somebody will come in with $100. But I don't tell Ben about those.
Speaker 2:Yeah, no, send it to my PayPal next time.
Speaker 1:I'm just kidding Maybe. So let's see, what else have we not talked about?
Speaker 2:Well, I was just going to say to the new donor thank you, mark.
Speaker 1:giving that call out, yeah yeah, and we always tell people like we have an easy way to contact us. If you want to say something or pass on a message or a link, you want us to look at something and talk about it, you could totally do that by clicking on the send us a message link on the podcast.
Speaker 2:Or messaging on Twitter, or yeah.
Speaker 1:Yeah, and you can find us on Twitter. I think we have those links in the text with each episode as well. I'm very prolific on Twitter, so if you want to, I am not follow me, you'll. Ben doesn't even read my messages, but I've been getting pretty decent replies lately. I get pretty regularly, almost daily. I get like 50 plus people doing a a heart on the messages I post. Okay, seem to be connecting with what folks are thinking. Now, you promoted one message, didn't you? Didn't you do a test at some point? I did, I did do one, okay.
Speaker 2:I think I need to do a better one. I think I need to get a good clip of us, and put that on there and do a few things, but that's you know.
Speaker 1:Yeah, yeah, but yeah, I X is. It's a. I think it's been a good platform. I hope that it doesn't get ruined in the coming years because there is a downside to getting what Matt, what Musk actually wants on there, which is like it's your one stop, for it's essentially Facebook. What he wants is a portable phone based Facebook where you you post everything, you read, you watch videos there, you do news there, you can buy products there, you can do your banking there, like all in one place kind of thing. And I get it. He likes it, because that's what I don't. I don't think it's tiktok. I think you're right, it's some other app in china does that. But I'm not a huge fan of doing my banking where I post political critiques, if you know what I mean. Like there's been plenty of times where I've gotten the message back from grog saying that they're filtering my message because it found to have hateful content or some shit like that. So it's free speech light.
Speaker 1:It's not fully free speech yeah so, and I kind of want my bank to be separate from that.
Speaker 2:Well you know, yeah, so, and I kind of want my bank to be separate from that. Well, you know, I wouldn't want it to be my only bank. I'd say that.
Speaker 1:That's for sure. Yeah, for sure. But speaking of free speech, so I was perusing OnlyFans the other day and you know something I didn't realize. You know, there's no ads on OnlyFans.
Speaker 2:Yeah, because you're paying for it it yeah, but you don't have to pay.
Speaker 1:There's tons of free content on there.
Speaker 2:And what I didn't also realize, I don't know if you want to watch the free content I'm gonna send you one right now there's not going to only fans g no, no, I downloaded there.
Speaker 1:I copied the video. You don't have to go there. But what I didn't realize is there's a shit ton of categories of non-sexual videos on there, and so I was watching.
Speaker 2:Well, I mean it started out as like a platform for competing with YouTube or Twitch.
Speaker 1:It was basically like Patreon Yep, but I was watching like cooking videos for about two and a half hours on there.
Speaker 2:Okay.
Speaker 1:Because it's just like watching cooking videos on YouTube, except the chicks are hotter.
Speaker 1:But, and there's no ads, but it's still watching somebody do a recipe and showing you how they're making everything else. So I'm like, well, this is fascinating, this idea that you can go to a website that is mostly known for sex related stuff and find all kinds of other interesting content on here. And the one difference is like I don't know if you've ever had this thought I think most guys have is you're watching some news, report or video or something. You're like man, she's hot. I wonder what she looks like naked, and on OnlyFans you can find out.
Speaker 2:Why are you going to OnlyFans?
Speaker 1:It's not like you have to jump in there looking for porn. In fact, I would say this I think most only fans porn is really shitty porn like. You could get much better quality porn on actual porn sites. So it's really more. I think it is more of of the sort of a voyeuristic fetish kind of thing, where you see somebody that's fully dressed and they're doing something, but they're really cute, and so you're looking at her and you're thinking, okay, well, what else does she have that she's done videos of where she's wearing less clothes. And the difference is on OnlyFans you're not just perving on her normal videos trying to find one where there might be a bikini, but the chick's actually just selling videos of herself wearing a bikini or even less. So that was an interesting perusal that I did.
Speaker 2:Okay, I'll have to take your word for it. You don't have to explore yourself.
Speaker 1:No law against it I'm good, I I have the porn sites I use, thank you. But that's my point, this you would not go to only fans as a porn site to rub one out. I don't think, because it's it's. It's too much like the old cinemax after hours where there's too much storyline and like not enough actual sex you know, yeah, you know watching the story is like playing a video game for graphics.
Speaker 1:Right, it's. It's like, you know, playboy versus hustler, but I just think that it's the people that do go on only fans, I think, are exactly identical. There's no difference between them and the people that go to twitch and watch a female streamer who sucks at playing video games. Play video games just because her boobs are popping out of her, her top. It's the same kind of people with the same mentality. It's like I want to see an ordinary looking girl naked Versus porn is like I want to see a fantasy of somebody that I couldn't possibly get in real life, or somebody I wouldn't want to have in real life. I guess that is a possibility as well.
Speaker 2:So the house just passed the bill to stop a central bank from creating CBDC.
Speaker 1:I saw that yeah.
Speaker 2:So that's good.
Speaker 1:But there was something that was pro-gun that was tied to that bill so that now no longer gets passed.
Speaker 2:Well, we'll see if it gets passed or not.
Speaker 1:I think the Senate said they're not going to pass it.
Speaker 2:We'll see if it gets passed or not. I think the Senate said they're not going to pass it. We'll see. I think we are going to get a digital dollar, but I think it's going to be pretty interesting, especially if we allow banks to create digital dollars by buying bonds and if we tie it to that, then that could be a really interesting way to A solve some of the debt issues and, b stay the world's reserve currency.
Speaker 1:Mm-hmm. Yeah, I think most countries are leaning in that direction, but I'm not sure the US is quite ready.
Speaker 2:Okay, We'll see. I think that's Trump's play man. I think that's coming.
Speaker 1:Yeah, yeah, we'll see. I think there's a lot of question around that. Hmm, yeah, I think there's a lot of question around that.
Speaker 2:Yeah, so Grock says posts on the X reflect a strong public and political opposition to digital dollar okay, I don't oppose a digital dollar as long as the paper dollar still exists, like if we go all digital currency. That would be a problem. I like cash. I don't oppose a digital dollar as long as the paper dollar still exists, like if we go all digital currency. That would be a problem. I like cash. I keep cash. I'm on the other side.
Speaker 1:I don't like cash. I almost never use cash, but I don't want cash to go away. Yeah. Cash to me is what's you know hidden in a storage locker, somewhere in a duffel bag? That's cash. That's that. That's for when we don't have power for everything else I'm happy to use.
Speaker 2:Yeah well, I, I, I like cash. I use cash all the time. I take money out of the bank regularly and use it do you not care about how dirty it is?
Speaker 1:nope, you know how many people have touched that with their noses okay, gross, touch that with their noses. Okay, yeah, gross. It's like literally putting something into your pocket that some random stranger who didn't wipe his hands after going to the toilet was handling. Okay, gross.
Speaker 2:Okay, but versus what your cell phone is disgusting, take camera and have it, take a picture your eyeballs and charge you.
Speaker 1:No, why not, I wouldn't cleaner. No, no touch involved. Yeah well, I mean the places you're probably using those dollars. Depends on the place, obviously. But you know you go to walmart buy something. There's a camera every six feet recording your movement. They can backtrace an entire path regardless.
Speaker 2:Sure, sure, I'm not worried about that, but I still. At least it's harder.
Speaker 1:Yeah, I don't know, I guess it is, but I just that's the one thing that I just don't really care, because maybe it's because I buy most of my things on Amazon anyway, so there's no difference. Like, I rarely walk into a shop to buy something, and even more rarely to do it with cash, so I like the fact that I can look up my past 10 years worth of history of what all I bought and how much I paid for it.
Speaker 2:No, thank you.
Speaker 1:Yeah, and how much I paid for it no, thank you. Yeah, well, clearly I'm only going. You know innocent websites like OnlyFans, and God only knows where you're going.
Speaker 2:Well, I mean, you can do things a little hanky in digital life too, like you can buy prepaid cards and things like that.
Speaker 1:Yeah, Darren's been telling me about that. Yeah, that's where he spent all my Bitcoin.
Speaker 2:I mean, I just, I don't know man, I like cash, I like to have cash.
Speaker 1:Mm-hmm.
Speaker 2:I'm not paying with a credit card at a garage sale.
Speaker 1:But if you've got cash it's a lot harder to say, oh sorry man, I don't have any cash, I'll get you next time.
Speaker 2:No, it's not. Go get a fucking job. I'm not here to pay for you.
Speaker 1:No, you don't tip huh, I tip. Okay, Well, I don't so.
Speaker 2:Yeah, not that.
Speaker 1:I don't, I obviously do, but Dude.
Speaker 2:DoorDash. Doordash tried to add a 30% tip.
Speaker 1:Yeah, as base tip.
Speaker 2:I know it's crazy. It's like what the fuck.
Speaker 1:I don't think many people just keep the defaults unless they're trying to impress somebody who's looking at them while they're ordering. Because I routinely will get thank you messages from people that I tipped when I tip them like five bucks and the default is rarely that low. The default's usually 15 bucks, 20 bucks. I mean it's just arbitrarily crazy amounts for a tip, because the way that they, the way uber does its default tipping is you know, if you're ordering a deal on uber where you're getting two for one, it counts the value of the food you're getting not the actual amount you're paying to determine the suggested tip, which is usually 20 to 25 percent.
Speaker 1:So you could be ordering, like, what would be 60 dollars worth of theoretical cost of food, but you're paying 35 for it. But then they're going to calculate the tip based on the 60 and say, oh yeah, that's 15. No, I'm not paying 15. A tip on 30 worth of food that I just ordered. No, yeah, yeah, I really. I mean, I think the defaults are crazy, plus all the places that are self-serve that are asking for tips.
Speaker 1:now that's like when I went through the airport. That was classic it's all self-serve at the little airport. He asked which is it not? It's not. Only is it way overpriced, it's like $23 for a little bag of jerky, for like a four ounce bag of jerky, $23. And then $5 for a small 18 ounce bottle of water. And then you check it out yourself because they don't want to pay the cashier to work there. And then on the receipt they have the gall to give a suggested minimum tip.
Speaker 2:I think our tipping culture has gone out of control.
Speaker 1:I think Europe may have had the right answer on this.
Speaker 2:Yeah, just pay more.
Speaker 1:Just no tipping. Yeah, but even the pay more is kind of. I think that that was true pre-covid, I think generally you did pay more for equivalent food in europe. I don't think that's true anymore.
Speaker 1:I think we pay just as much. Somebody just did a something that surprised me recently. They showed the inflation from 2011 till now. So that's what? How many years is that? 14 years, okay. So what would you think? A dollar in in? Like a dollar today or no, the dollar back then? What do you think that's worth today? Dollar in 2011.
Speaker 2:60 cents. So right now I'm ordering my dinner. Just to give you an idea. My total for the food is $25. The suggested tip is $11.
Speaker 1:Yeah, that is crazy. Guess how much Burger King was for me today? I don't know $21.
Speaker 2:That's insane.
Speaker 1:Oh, I did have a shake as well as a drink, but yeah, for Burger King. That's insane, that is crazy. So if you were to spend $1 in 2011, you would have to spend a dollar 56 today to get the same thing that you would have gotten for a dollar in 2011 and that's with the government's numbers I'm sure that's not with the actual yeah, yeah, that's usually.
Speaker 1:That's usually official numbers. That's the inflation from 2011 to now is like 56 cents. That is crazy. You think about that? So if you were making 100 grand in 2011, just to stay even, you'd need to make 156,000 right now.
Speaker 2:Yeah.
Speaker 1:For the same level of living whatever. Yeah, for the same level of living whatever most people I don't think have gotten now. If you've moved on to other jobs, sure, you could do that, but if, if you were in the same position today, or at least a close to that similar position, or forget even you, let's say, you've moved on to management, so that's fine, you're making more now, but the guy that is in your position that you were in in 2011, making a hundred thousand, that guy is not making 156 000 today.
Speaker 1:That guy's probably making 120 000 if yeah, it depends if you stayed at the same company or did you move around?
Speaker 2:what did you do? Have you? Have you increased your?
Speaker 1:So there is a very realistic deflation or inflation in that regard. And somebody I think actually it was even Alex Jones, I was watching showed him a chart of the cost of living versus average salary, of the cost of living versus average salary, okay, and the point at which the two paths separated was 1976, where the cost of living started outpacing the average salary. And he didn't say anything. He was just talking about, you know, government gold standard inflation, blah, blah, blah. The bit that I think he's missing that I know I've certainly talked plenty about before is what happened in the late 70s, early 80s, the late 70s, when we had the first mass inflow of women out of the house and into the workforce.
Speaker 1:It was the culmination of second wave feminism and it was no longer considered to be the goal of a woman to what used to be the most important job on earth, which is raising children. And now women had to go into the workforce, and that continued on through the early 80s, because I think it was around 1983 or 1984, we flipped to where a majority of women were now working rather than staying at home. Prior to the early 80s, the majority of women in the United States were staying at home, with a small minority working, and in the early 80s that switch flipped and now it was the majority that was working and the minority that was staying home with the kids.
Speaker 2:Well, and you know what?
Speaker 1:Well, just let me finish the thought real quick. But you realize what doubling the workforce does.
Speaker 2:Sure, it makes competitive prices, decreases wage it's not like.
Speaker 1:The amount of available jobs doubled at the same time, so now we have more people per job and and that just means cheaper labor. And that's exactly what happened is everything else started going up in price, while salaries were segmented.
Speaker 2:So, anyway, okay, now I'm the thought yeah, and you know what I think has changed, and this is something that a lot of women don't like to hear but a big portion of the problem is that women want to be boss babes. They want to act a certain way. The problem is, a man isn't going to tolerate that. So what we're seeing is the number of men who are just staying single, not dating, probably even in their 50s, that are going fuck, what did I do? Why didn't I just stay at home? They've been divorced, all this. Why didn't I just stay at home, be good to my husband and let him work instead of me having to do this? So you know.
Speaker 1:Oh, there's videos of women, even in their 30s, saying I'm tired of being a boss, I just want a man to take care of me, of being a boss, I just want a man to take care of me. Well, you kind of blew it because you didn't do it when you were hot and now you're trying to what. You're appealing to men in your late 30s and your non-childbearing years through oh, I have money. Alright, that's never interested men. Men don't care if they marry a waitress or a CEO. There's no difference to a man yes, right, I mean it's like that's a it's.
Speaker 1:the piece that I think women miss is that men don't look for the same factors as women do, because women have always been about wanting to marry up, wanting to marry a man who's the go-getter, who's going to be successful, who's going to start his own business, be a CEO, have a lot of money. Why? Because a woman is looking out for her future, children's you know, lifestyle or whatever, her ability to have a better life for her kids, even if she doesn't have any yet. Men don't look for that same exact thing in a woman. They don't marry a woman to find a better, probable lifestyle for their kids. They're looking for a woman that is kind and helpful and pleasant, who is going to be a good mother to their children, and I think a lot of the women that got sucked into feminism don't understand that.
Speaker 2:Well, I I think a lot of women. They thought they wanted one thing and as they grow up they realize they want another. But there are problems with that and I think what you're going to see with this next generation is more and more young women saying, hey, I don't want that because these older women, they're going to be vocal, they're going to talk and what's going to happen is the older women aren't going to have anybody because the younger men aren't going to want them and the older men are going to be going after the younger women.
Speaker 1:Yeah, yeah. I think the it is a self-correcting system. That is one of the, I guess, positive silver linings around the cloud right Is that in the end, all of these are self-correcting systems. The woke is self-correcting, Socialism is self-correcting All these things are self-correcting. It just sucks the people living through the correction phase.
Speaker 2:It takes time, yeah.
Speaker 1:Is it? They're not fast, they don't correct in a matter of a year or two, it takes decades.
Speaker 2:Well, I think we are at an inflection point and I think that inflection point couldn't have waited much longer, because otherwise it would have been a violent revolt. That made the correction.
Speaker 1:It might be. I don't think we're out of the woods.
Speaker 2:Yeah, we'll see. I've been saying we're out of the woods.
Speaker 1:Yeah, we'll see. Yeah, well, I've been saying we'll see a lot lately. It's hard to know. All I know is that it's getting harder and harder to think of Trump as being on my side anymore. Yeah, you know, it's like how many things that you were hoping he would do and he didn't do, or things you were hoping he wouldn't do, like sending more money and weapons to Ukraine is he going to continue to do before he just gives up? Because I'll tell you at this point, I don't think I'm going to vote for midterms, I'm just going to stay home.
Speaker 2:So I think he's done a lot, though, man Like we are getting the rescission bills, they're passing. So you know that's a good thing we are, you know. At least he made NATO pay for it for what's going to Ukraine?
Speaker 1:No, no, no, no. That's just like saying, well, trump just saved us $80 billion over the next 25 years. Nato's never going to pay for this. It's not going to happen. The US is going to be still on the hook for all this stuff, saying, oh, nato's going to buy the weapons. No, they're not. No, they're not. You're going to have, now, nato, be the ones that receive the bill, which never gets paid.
Speaker 2:Okay.
Speaker 1:That doesn't mean NATO's paying for it. Us government's still going to end up paying the suppliers in the end. Where is NATO going to get its budget from if they don't have money? We'll see, I know, but my point isn't that we'll see. My point is that you can't wait until everybody has basically lied to you on every point before you make up your mind and say, oh, I guess I was wrong for voting for that. I think you can come to a conclusion much sooner.
Speaker 2:I think he's done a lot of what I've asked, a lot of the reasons why I voted for him. I think he's done, like he's done, a tremendous amount in the first six months. Like what? What do you mean that? Even even down to the removal of the tax on suppressors?
Speaker 1:and that's Congress. What has he done?
Speaker 2:He pushed the big beautiful bill and signed, signed it. We didn't need the big beautiful bill.
Speaker 1:We just needed a bill to do that piece of it and we had that there's a lot of really good stuff in the big beautiful bill dude there's. There's a lot of pork in the beautiful bill.
Speaker 2:There's not and now they're going through and doing rescissions, which is what they said they were going to do yeah, and how much of that do you think they're going to pull out?
Speaker 1:And why do they have to do it with rescissions? Why couldn't they just have what we used to have back in the old days, which is not these omnibus, last minute bills?
Speaker 2:Because then they would have had to have 60 votes in the Senate.
Speaker 1:Right. So maybe we just don't have a budget, which is even better, I agree. So I don't have a budget, which is even better, I agree. So you I don't know maybe maybe you got more stuff that you like about it. So far, I'm like there's about 25 of the things that I wanted him to do that he's done and 75 that he hasn't and then that includes those percentages. Don't add up right 25 and 75, don't I up right I?
Speaker 2:thought you said 75 and 75. Sorry.
Speaker 1:No no 25 and 75. I think he's done 25, and he has not done 75. But what would you have gotten?
Speaker 2:with any other candidate.
Speaker 1:Well, that's the thing, right? So the argument you're making is the least of bad choices, the least of bad choices. It's like are you willing to do the? Are you willing to kill one person to save five in the trolley problem, right? No, no, I think it's better to have the trolley kill all of them and then start over.
Speaker 1:Okay, that's always been my answer to that question. It's like well, would you do this? The only change I would make is if we can kill more of those people, because the trolley will never stop killing people unless enough people get killed for everybody to revolt against the trolley dude, I'm all for tearing it all down and starting over so my point again.
Speaker 2:This is why I think we ought to release epstein's list. New enough of congress that we literally have a legitimate shot at starting over absolutely, absolutely.
Speaker 1:I, I would love to see that happen. I don't think it's going to happen and I've said now, remember, I've been saying that list will never get released for months now and and you were saying what We'll see you were saying we'll see and we will. We have, we have seen it didn't get released.
Speaker 2:I don't think this is over. I think it has to come out at some point. It just has to. I think Trump's going to resign before then. You know again, I think, as long as he makes it for two years.
Speaker 1:So jd has two terms that he can serve, I'm cool with that. Well, if he resigns before two years, can jd not run for a second term? No, the it's 10 years max. Okay, so they couldn't two terms go ahead. Uh, so you couldn't like get elected, and then when the 10 years comes up, then you resign.
Speaker 2:No, no, because you would have—no Now ever been challenged in court. No one's ever done it so who knows? But no, the entire point was if a vice president got to serve the majority of the other president's term too bad.
Speaker 1:It counts for a full term, right? Yeah?
Speaker 2:But if you didn't, then you get two terms.
Speaker 1:Well, regardless of whether Trump resigns or not, I just wish he would stop putting down the people that literally got him elected.
Speaker 2:Yeah, it's not a good look.
Speaker 1:That's the people I'm talking to and seeing and that are replying to my posts on x. Like this is the rah-rah mega crowd. This is the crowd that was, you know, helping financially, helping with volunteering, making sure the vote got out. Like these are the people that want to see the epstein files and trump is just calling all of us that want that. You know, we're morons, we're, we're stupid.
Speaker 2:We don't realize this is all obama's, you know scam or whatever well, there is something to be said, for you know the democrats were in power. I would not trust the files. I think they need to be investigated because who knows what's in them, right?
Speaker 1:Well, apparently somebody does, and they don't want it coming out. If nobody truly knew what was in there, they would have been released a long time ago. Epstein committed suicide. How many years ago? Six.
Speaker 2:Six years ago.
Speaker 1:Yeah, allegedly. Yeah. Well, we'll see. And then if you're going to put out any video at all, and especially if you put that out and call it raw footage, don't fucking edit it with Adobe. Yeah, yeah, I mean like there's just that, out and call it, don't have it edited. And don't fucking edit it with adobe missing. Yeah, yeah, I mean it like there's just it. It's literally like saying we went to the moon but we lost all the videotape yeah, okay, yeah, yeah.
Speaker 1:Well, gene, I think we've beat the epstein thing to death I, I don't know, man, I think, I think I'm going to keep beating it until it gets fixed, because this is important and Darren needs to clip that sentence. What? I'm going to keep beating it until it gets fixed.
Speaker 2:Yes, I'm going to keep beating it.
Speaker 1:Well, the problem is Darren right now has basically got my voice. He doesn't need clipping anymore. He just had me say anything he wants.
Speaker 2:Yeah, voice, he can, doesn't need clipping anymore, you just have me say anything he wants, yeah, yeah, yeah, I've got his too.
Speaker 1:It's just I'm not gonna keep paying 20 bucks a month for it. Well, yeah, not worth that much. No one knows. No one knows who he is enough to justify 20 bucks a month you know, I haven't given a health update.
Speaker 2:Should we talk about that?
Speaker 1:if you got one sure well, I update.
Speaker 2:Should we talk about that, if you got one? Sure, well I, that you are aware of where my blood pressure went and then we've been on the high side, yeah, so one of the side effects is some of the medication I have to take. When I have one of these events is it can raise your blood pressure, and when I took double the dose I didn't have a blood pressure monitor, so I wish I did, because I'd be very interested to know how high it got then, but even half a dose from what he originally prescribed me had my blood pressure up at 178 over 124.
Speaker 1:And I halved your guns when you die.
Speaker 2:Which is stroke territory, dude, yeah, hell yeah, like it didn't stay there so I didn't go to the hospital. But yeah. Like, definitely not a fun thing. I did the next time it happened took half a pill, so I half the dose, whether or not he told me to or not, and it didn't, it half a pill wasn't effective, so I ended up having to take the whole pill. But, like, spreading it out over 20 minutes did not spike my blood pressure, which I found interesting.
Speaker 1:Interesting. Have you tried taking a mega potassium dose? No, it's not medical advice, but I was watching a video where they were talking about some stuff related to blood pressure and that was one of the and this is from an actual what was he? What's a heart doctor called?
Speaker 2:a cardiologist cardiologist.
Speaker 1:Yeah, yeah, there's a cardiologist talking about it and he had said that if you're feeling like your, your blood pressure is just going crazy and you might have a condition. One of the things that he advised people to keep handy is potassium on hand, to do like a mega dose of potassium right away and chew it up so it gets into your bloodstream very quickly yeah, and to be clear, my blood pressure is.
Speaker 2:I don't have blood pressure issues. My blood pressure is usually like 110 over 50 right, right right so for me to be this high was really it was a scary thing, yeah, you know. And the high blood pressure, high heart rate and everything side effect of this medication, which is terbutaline, by the way lasts for hours.
Speaker 1:Well, that makes sense. It's terrible for your heart, Of course.
Speaker 2:Hours and hours, like my heart rate, my watch, you know, monitoring this, my heart rate was over 110 for six hours, so that just wipes you out. I mean it's like doing cardio for six hours. It literally is yeah.
Speaker 1:Yeah.
Speaker 2:Yeah, it's not good.
Speaker 1:No, the only time that I went through the emergency room ever in my life was when I had blood pressure that was about 175.
Speaker 2:Yeah Well, I don't want to do that again, but we'll see what I have to do. So at this point, it's been over two and a half. It's been over two months since.
Speaker 1:I haven't been taking any supplements, so I started saying screw it, I'm taking my supplements again.
Speaker 2:All of it back in, including methylene blue and all that.
Speaker 1:Yep, yep, yep so well, you or somebody else sent me a picture of like here's what your brain looks like on methylene blue, and it's totally fake oh, yeah, yeah yeah, is that you or somebody? No, it wouldn't be okay, all right. Yeah, somebody's who clearly knows I'm taking it was like oh, check this out. Here's a brain removed from a person that was taking methylene blue and it's all blue.
Speaker 2:Methylene blue is, to me, the best nootropic supplement I've ever taken. So, I don't know.
Speaker 1:I think that the version of it that I started originally on is way better than it alone, but I don't want to take that every day Because it has nicotine and caffeine in it in very high doses.
Speaker 2:Yeah, but see I get very high doses of nicotine and caffeine in other ways.
Speaker 1:Oh well, okay. Well then, you're basically doing the same thing.
Speaker 2:Exactly.
Speaker 1:You'll form, except you're doing it another way.
Speaker 1:Yes, much more enjoyable ways, the one that I'm taking right now I really like because it provides enough of that. The main reason that I started taking it and there's also secondary, but the main reason is I I heard that it kind of gets rid of brain fog in the morning. Very much does, and it completely does that. So if you take it first thing in the morning you just skip the brain fog portion of the morning and I I guarantee you that. You know, when I was your age I was barely had any brain fog. These days I'm like three hours of brain fog. So taking methylene blue absolutely helps with that.
Speaker 1:The secondary thing that I read about it through my own research or through reading other people's research, but doing it on my own is that methylene blue has been used as a mild antibiotic, so essentially it doesn't do anything for viruses or, you know, doesn't do it for all pathogens, but it is an antibacterial and so taking methylene blue proactively is like taking a lightweight, light acting antibiotic all the time but without a critical thing, which is the reason you can't just take antibiotics all the time and in fact I think in general Americans have been taking way too many antibiotics because you're creating super bacteria by doing that the thing with methylene blue, and the portion of the cycle that interferes with bacteria is literally the mitochondria inside the bacteria, and so the bacteria can't evolve to not being affected by methylene blue the way that they can from antibiotics, because antibiotics is just.
Speaker 1:It's basically mushroom defense, it's mold defense against bacteria eating it, and we've just learned how to utilize it to kill bacteria that's eating us. But the inner function of the methylene blue, the way that it works with dealing with bacteria, is actually at a very different level. It's not a poison to bacteria, it's actually breaking their ability to generate energy.
Speaker 2:Well, one of the interesting things about methylene blue too, is it actually it actually raises dopamine levels in the brain.
Speaker 1:So a lot of people who you know it gives them a better outlook on life, makes them less depressed, so you know that's useful yeah and again, given how many people are actually prescribed much worse, much stronger drugs that deal with depression, I would much rather personally take something like muffling blue and feel good about myself than to take one of these craziest drugs that people take.
Speaker 2:You should. You should look for any drug interactions though, too, because it is a drug. Consider it a drug. It's you know. It's not just an herb, it is a synthetic compound, and how it interacts you you do need to be aware of and take care of yourself, but you know, just having blue piss is just a cool side effect yep, and on that note gene that's a good note to end things.
Speaker 1:Huh yeah, all right, ben see you next later.
