Just Two Good Old Boys
We never mean any harm!
Just Two Good Old Boys
084 Just Two Good Old Boys
What happens when you mix the unpredictability of seldom-used Windows machines with missed payments from Moscow and a Canadian flaunting a Lamborghini with questionable funds? It’s a cocktail of hilarity and intrigue that kicks off our latest episode. We debate the excessiveness of Jay Leno's car collection versus Jerry Seinfeld’s relatively modest fleet and dive into the quagmire of 'Russiagate 2.0.' Amid the laughter, we also ponder the conservative community's split opinions and the rush to judgment without a trial, reminding everyone of the importance of hearing all sides before making decisions.
Ever wondered how foreign investments are shaping U.S. media? We break down a case involving Russian funds sent to Tenet Media and scrutinize the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA). Comparing it to other foreign media entities like RT and Al Jazeera, we question the heightened scrutiny on Russian investments. From editorial control to broader issues of foreign influence involving AIPAC and Saudi investments, we cover it all. We even touch on media figures like Tim Pool, who now tread carefully with advertising amidst these revelations, and clarify that some individuals in the indictment weren’t actually charged.
Switching gears, we tackle heavy topics ranging from parental responsibility in school shootings to the intricacies of managing Bitcoin via the Lightning Network. We share personal stories, like a theological debate about government obedience with a local pastor and the challenges of parenting amidst state interference. And don't miss our light-hearted segment on body armor practicality and pet care practices, including the peculiarities of keeping large snakes. To wrap things up, we engage in political speculation, propose unconventional voting reforms, and share insights on effective research techniques in industrial environments. It's a whirlwind of thought-provoking and diverse discussions you won’t want to miss!
Check out Gene's other podcasts -
podcast.sirgene.com and unrelenting.show
Read Ben's blog and see product links at namedben.com
If you have comments drop at
Email: gene@sirgene.com Or dude@namedben.com
or on
X.com: @sirgeneTX @dudenamedbenTX
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
Hey, ben nice of you to join us.
Speaker 2:You know what, as late as you've been at times, I've never been late.
Speaker 1:I don't know what you're talking about.
Speaker 2:Well, good morning Gene.
Speaker 1:Morning, you sound chipper.
Speaker 2:Yeah, I'm good, my Windows updated this morning. Oh no, that's the problem with using the computer I use for the podcast once a week for the podcast yes, it is literally the only computer I have that's windows, other than my work mac and my work windows machine, but my per I have one personal windows machine left gotcha.
Speaker 1:Well, we're on. So, uh, it's been an interesting week.
Speaker 2:We seem to say that every week yeah, well, the stories kind of came hard and fast this week. Jesus, where do you want to start?
Speaker 1:well, I didn't get my check for one I know well.
Speaker 2:I mean, you would think that moscow would have you know your bank account number I know right what the hell man.
Speaker 1:They're paying some chinese chick from canada.
Speaker 2:That's not right, yeah, chinese chick from canada. Enough that she was driving a lambo or something around. It's ridiculous 10 million will do that I guess, yeah, I, I don't know, man, I would probably get like a three-year-old truck if I got 10 million.
Speaker 1:What's that I said?
Speaker 2:ben is like I'll get a three-year-old truck if I get 10 million dollars no, I would probably get a much, much, much older truck that would be restored and classic and nice, you get a raved.
Speaker 1:What's his name? Lennon's Garage.
Speaker 2:I would love to if that were an option.
Speaker 1:Yeah, he says he's never sold a single vehicle well, I mean, okay, cool.
Speaker 2:I used to say I'd never sold a single gun, but that changed.
Speaker 1:That's true, he's got. I think last time I watched an episode he had like over 500 cars.
Speaker 2:That just but why you can't drive them all. And he says he drives them all. Okay, so it takes you. If you drive one a day, that takes you over a year to roll through them.
Speaker 1:I mean well, I don't think it'd be that hard, because he seems to be interviewed by some tv show every single day. So I think his life is mostly these days like doing interviews in his garage and then taking the reporter out for a drive in a car well, okay, there's just I.
Speaker 2:There is such a thing as too much for utility sake, you know yeah, like seinfeld only has 50 cars yeah, well seinfeld didn't make as much money well, I mean, I don't know.
Speaker 1:I don't know if he did or not, because, uh, you know, seinfeld made over 100 million. I don't know how much jay made, I don't know, but but jay was never on a hit tv show and uh whoa? Yes, he was no. No. Nbc owns that show and gets the majority of the money. He was complaining about how little he got paid on that show.
Speaker 2:Okay, he still got paid a ton.
Speaker 1:I just don't know that he was making the kind of money that Seinfeld was. I don't think he was.
Speaker 2:Okay, I mean, it's not a sitcom, but it is a TV show.
Speaker 1:It is a TV show, it's an institution, for that matter. But uh, but it's not the same kind of money. Yeah, uh and uh. Jay seems mostly to be thrifty. It's been wearing the same jean jacket and jeans since the eighties.
Speaker 2:You know why. Why bother changing?
Speaker 1:Do I change a good thing? Your definition of a good thing is interesting, but okay, I was trying to come up with the phrase that you were trying to get to. Oh man, this reboot has screwed a lot of stuff up for me hmm, anyway, probably a good idea not to do those on the day of the podcast too thank you.
Speaker 2:Thank you for those sage words of wisdom.
Speaker 1:I'm just for the future reference.
Speaker 2:You may want to keep that in mind you know, I never, never thought that, I just well, it's a good thing that I'm here, then, isn't? It. Oh yes, yeah, no, no like a blessing, some would say the motu settings for, just like the visualization and the mixing controls, is all that changed what the? Fuck, that shouldn't have changed Because it's in the browser cache on what to display, and so on.
Speaker 1:Oh really Okay.
Speaker 2:Yeah, yep, yep, yep, yep.
Speaker 1:So well, let's talk more about this whole Russiagate 2.0 thing, gate 2.0 thing. So I've already seen signs of fragmenting happening within the conservatives. Once again. Like this is just like kyle rittenhouse saying oh, I don't think I'm gonna vote for trump and half the people are. They got their pitchforks out ready to lynch the guy. Uh, today I was skimming through messages on x and um. There was a post from one of my favorite lesbians on there, uh, saying how she wants to know more information about exactly what happened. But also, let's deport Chen out of the United States because she's bad for the conservatives.
Speaker 2:Yeah, I can agree with that. Well, that's crazy talk, why?
Speaker 1:what you're literally taking the words of the organization. We spent four years talking how it's politicized and it's bad and how it's crooked and now, at first sign of them, pointing the finger.
Speaker 2:Oh, no, no, no. No, I'm talking about after there's been a trial and proof, not like tomorrow well, plenty of people are not waiting for that trial yeah, well, those are, they're like well look, their company already shut down.
Speaker 1:That proves they're guilty. Get them out of here oh well, yes, completely agree. Like I really want to hear the blazes side of why they fire chin well, I know why they fired chin because she's bad pr right now and they would fire anybody that has bad pr that's shitty. That is not the way a company should function well, go, go tell that guy in charge of it then, because that's how every company functions. Hey, you're now famous for the wrong reasons. We're gonna have to part ways. There's literally a paragraph in their contract.
Speaker 2:I'm sure says that yeah, and they're evoked a clause that everybody agreed to yeah, and that's problematic is what I'm saying because it allows the government to weaponize shit like this and just the mere accusation exactly is enough to ruin your life, and that's not acceptable yeah, yeah.
Speaker 1:Now I am, I will say, tired of all damn canadians coming over the border just because they happen to be conservative.
Speaker 1:And then living here in the us say it's well, I'm that conservative canadians coming, but you know the, the canadians and the we gotta have a wall or something up there all we have to do with the canadians is have a sign, dude, they're polite enough well, that's what they have you believing, but I don't know that that's actually been proven in court yeah, okay, well, regardless, um the the canadians you know have have look at Leo Laporte and the influence on his career and everything with working in Canada tech TV, all that you know, there's a lot of Canadian influence in our media.
Speaker 1:Yeah, definitely way too many of them. I think you know like the old saying goes blame Canada. Well, I think in a lot of ways we can, that's not an old saying, that's a South Park reference. It's a true saying that's been old and true for years and years. And you know these types of things don't show up in the vacuum. There's always a grain of truth to all these old wise sayings and I think people forget that, you know canada is generally the one to blame well, when they didn't join us in our revolution should have been a hint.
Speaker 2:There you go there.
Speaker 1:Now you're starting to see my way. Things yeah, but anyway this whole debacle.
Speaker 2:They were being paid a lot.
Speaker 1:It was getting routed through tell people first of all what happened there. Maybe somebody is not familiar with it.
Speaker 2:Like people in europe, don't give a shit about this stuff okay, doj indicted um to rt employees for sending money to tenant media. Alleged rt employees. Yes, yes. Alleged rt employees for sending money to tenant media. Alleged RT employees yes, yes, alleged RT employees for sending money to tenant media. As far as I know, chin and her husband were not directly implicated in it, because this is FARA.
Speaker 2:This is the FARA Act that they're going after them under which is Foreign Registrations Act, right Foreign Agents Registration Act, and you know, chin and her husband are US citizens.
Speaker 1:No, they're not. Neither one of them is. I thought they were. They were both naturalized. They're Canadians living in the US.
Speaker 2:Are you sure they're not Canadians that?
Speaker 1:have a naturalized citizenship. They are not US citizens. That's correct.
Speaker 2:Okay, interesting Mm-hmm, because I'm pretty sure Chin talked about on one she had claimed to be a naturalized citizen at some point.
Speaker 1:Of Canada.
Speaker 2:No, Actually a chinese agent originally okay now, now you're just throwing shit out there, but anyway, regardless, let's see if it sticks. The the the indictment doesn't mention their um the indictment. It's weird because they'll talk about people talked about oh, her googling or them googling time in moscow and oh see, they knew they were talking to russians. How, okay, if I? I have googled what the time is in lots of different places around the world for various reasons throughout my life and I wouldn't be surprised if, joking with you, at some point in time I didn't Google what time is it in Moscow and go, oh man, good morning or something when it's night, or do something like that. So I just Unless they can tie it to, there has to be more correlation than that, and I don't see that there's more correlation than that.
Speaker 1:I was always suspicious of the name Tenet. Why? Because it feels like a mispronunciation Of Of either Ten-net or Tenant or some other word Like Tenet. Just it sounds wrong, made me suspicious from the get-go.
Speaker 2:It's a name I mean the only thing I but see. Here's the thing. I mean the only thing I but see, here's the thing I don't think they did Like. Okay, even if these Russians were sending money to Tenant Media, Right, and saying, hey, build up a media empire for us using this.
Speaker 1:Mm-hmm.
Speaker 2:And everybody knew that they were russians and so on. That doesn't mean that it's necessarily a for violation and it doesn't necessarily mean that anyone's done anything wrong okay.
Speaker 1:Well, now you're getting to the actual, non-comedic part of this whole story, which is fara has never, ever in the history, applied to journalists well, because there are.
Speaker 2:It's not just that foreign journalists in the united states yes, and it's not just that, though, and we have allowed foreign media in the united states for forever, up until some of the sanctioning around rt yeah, in fact you used to. You still can get RT, you can get Al Jazeera, you can get Chinese stuff, you can get whatever you want pretty much here in the United States, because you know freedom of speech and all that.
Speaker 2:Except for Russia. Well, what's interesting, though, is I see no nefarious anything here. They were sending them money as an investment, and Tenet went out and licensed shows spent like a drunken sailor maybe, but when you get a sugar day, it's giving you a big investment budget and you just want to go do something. Maybe what you do if the goal isn't cash efficiency, it's to get the biggest audience. The startups do this all the time. Where they're not very cash efficient at all, they're just trying to get the most buy-in from users as quickly as possible, and then they'll worry about the efficiency later. That happens all the time, but they weren't editorializing the shows. There wasn't editorial control there. All of the shows, all these big names like Tim Pool, russian Agent, russian Agent who else was?
Speaker 1:it Benny Johnson, and then.
Speaker 2:Dave, dave Chappelle, russian Agent, no, anyway. But all of them had full editorial control of their shows and apparently knew nothing about this. So it wasn't a great influence scheme, if that was the case.
Speaker 1:Yeah, yeah, so a poorly orchestrated, clearly Russian influence scheme. But you know, Russians are magic they can spend $10, dollars on facebook ads and make sure hillary loses yeah, I.
Speaker 2:I think that's. The entire point here is that we have a scare tactic by the doj. They found this link. It may have just been even an investment and nothing nefarious, but even if it was, how are they being nefarious?
Speaker 1:other than propping up a secondary media and maybe that's the entire goal is a counter-narrative to the mainstream, because they're not allowed to be Russian spies, apparently.
Speaker 2:Okay, the far registration stuff is, and the only people that would ever get money from Russia are clearly spies. Yeah, the problem with the FARA stuff is okay. Why isn't all the AIPAC money in our media?
Speaker 1:being gone under the same exact thing with FARA. No, no, no, that's a different topic. We don't talk about that.
Speaker 2:yeah, because jews I get it, but at the same time, let's really look at this uh-huh you want to talk about foreign countries influencing the us media um first one that comes to mind is mexico, uh well, what with telemundo? No with owning the new york times oh well, you know, there's also, you know, telemundo and all that too.
Speaker 1:Telemundo is influencing non uh well, I shouldn't say none. They're influencing spanish speakers in the us, for sure. New york times is influencing non-spanish speakers. Yeah, the reality is that there is zero precedent for what just occurred. It has literally never happened before. Because the united states has so many international business connections and the international business order has been very busy trying to make sure that the United States is fully controlled outside of the United States. That helps them in a lot of ways. That trying to then make an allegation that some frankly obscure pair of Canadians living in the United States that would have not really had much of a media presence, all of a sudden now are everybody's looking up. Who the hell is, tell me, and what do they do because of this announcement?
Speaker 1:Well and it's crazy, it's, it's, it's like um, oh, we just found out that, uh, there was a saudi investment in literally name anything and there's a saudi investment in that. Oh yeah, and how did this ever happen? How did we allow it?
Speaker 2:well, and here again. Here's the thing.
Speaker 2:Um, everyone is jumping on this like it's true in a lot of ways everybody's throwing people under the bus, oh, left and right, and just it's become immediately toxic and instead of people going, well, wait why? Yeah, I mean even tim pool on his show, when addressing it, he even talked about having to think twice before accepting advertising at this point and vetting the advertisers. And you know that that's completely correct. Because, again, if, even if they were investors, again it's not clear to me how they were doing anything necessarily legal maybe. Maybe you could go after them for circumventing sanctions.
Speaker 2:Well, here's the, here's the thing the economic sanctions on russia do not do not prevent individuals from investing in stuff unless you are a sanctioned individual, I've tried no they do no uh from from. The russians can invest in our nations, we just can't invest in theirs.
Speaker 1:Those correct different flow there and this and that's what was happening. Yeah, and the remember that. The bit here everyone glosses over is that Lauren Chen was not actually indicted.
Speaker 2:She was mentioned in the indictment.
Speaker 1:She wasn't indicted. She was not indicted. She was mentioned, but so were Tim Poole and Dave Rubin.
Speaker 2:Very different context in the indictment.
Speaker 1:Not indicted dude. I agree, but very different context in the indictment. Not indicted dude.
Speaker 2:I agree, but very different context in the indictment.
Speaker 1:There's nothing that's been filed against these Canadian invaders from what I saw.
Speaker 2:it is really just it's effectively a punishment before the trial because their company is gone and gone and never coming back, never coming back, most likely their us uh visas.
Speaker 1:Well, there, yeah, I mean their work permits, cause they are working here. Those are probably gone. So they're going to be going back to Canadian land with their heads hung low. Yeah, I mean their work permits, because they are working here. Those are probably gone. So they're going to be going back to Canadian land with their heads hung low and then they can certainly continue working from there. They could be vindicated from there, but it's highly unlikely that they're going to remain in the United States at this point. So this is par for the course for the Biden weaponized Justice Department. But so many people on the conservative side that I've seen in the last couple days are doing exactly the same thing that they were with, like I mentioned earlier, when what's-his-face I got blanked out his name yeah, take the b12 here. Um, when what's his face said he wasn't gonna vote for trump, and people are like, oh are you talking about dick cheney?
Speaker 2:no, not dick cheney no, well, dick cheney came out. I know, I know which I thought was hilarious. Written house written.
Speaker 1:House said that he wasn't voting for trump and people were like well, well, you're just a grifter, fuck you.
Speaker 2:I actually I think he's an independent thinker and I again why, yeah?
Speaker 1:I mean like it's his first election we're going too polarized and too this is the problem with conservatives and we have talked about it.
Speaker 2:This is the cancel culture you want no, no, no.
Speaker 1:Well, it is the cancel culture I want, but it's done incorrectly. It should be done better.
Speaker 2:The problem here is it's like communism, it's just never perfect.
Speaker 1:Conservatives are individuals and therefore they tend to have individualistic tendencies. And then they speak within their safe group of other conservatives who then jump on them for doing the wrong thing. It's like, dude, you pick one you can't have. If you're going to go for the groupthink, then maybe you're not really a conservative.
Speaker 1:And because a conservative, hearing that somebody is doing something in a different way and then explains their reasons, which is I'm so conservative that I'm willing to stick to my principles and sacrifice a practicality like that's hardly a reason to then push the person out of the damn party. You know, I mean it's like, okay, maybe it'd be nice if they didn't stick to their principles and voted with the the block, but I can at least understand why they're doing it. You know what I mean. But whereas the liberals, on the other hand, they're all very lockstep, which is why they keep winning, because in the real world, in the non-theoretical kind, people that stick together tend to win more. And it's just been really frustrating watching just how little it takes on the conservative side to make people hate each other.
Speaker 2:Yeah, okay.
Speaker 1:Right.
Speaker 2:I don't know if it's hate each other or it's really the.
Speaker 1:Well, I'm, you know, being over, what's the word Over? Simplistic, yeah, yeah, I just over. Dramatic, I think, is the word I was thinking of. Maybe not hate each other for sure, but overdramatic, I think, is the word I was thinking of. Maybe not hate each other for sure, but you know what I mean, like be able to just turn on each other fairly quickly Because you know, like the reading the thing from the lesbian chick today. Who's a conservative lesbian? Who's this lesbian chick? Oh, you know who she is. Um, camille paglia. No, I, I like her too. I like lesbians in general. I've never had a problem with lesbians. Um, no, no, it's uh, jamie jamie she's the uh.
Speaker 1:Uh, she was the one that created the um. Gaze against the rumors, yeah, rumors. Yeah, her right and she's, you know, like she just likes pussy, that's all. She's not into all the lefty propaganda shit, she just likes pussy and so, um, it's somebody that is politically on the right, in spite, some would say, of her sexual preferences, but also like she's a lesbian, she's Jewish and she's throwing bricks. I see why you like her. I'm like, okay, maybe we should not be throwing bricks right now, because you know, the next group of people that are going to get kicked out are going to be the lesbian Jews yeah, okay so the self preservation instinct seems to be missing for some of these people, and I don't understand that.
Speaker 1:Maybe it's because I'm from the old country where self-preservation was still an important feature. Uh, and I guess if you've spent a lot of generations living in the us, you forget about that um, um I.
Speaker 2:I think self-preservation is rearing its ugly head in different ways. Did you see the video of the uh two girls? Uh is kind of like that hock to video in a lot of ways you know.
Speaker 2:Out on the street they're talking to him, uh, talking to him, and this guy walks up to these two girls and asks them about how many genders they think there are, and the one girl starts to answer and starts to say well, I think there are only two genders. And her friend stops her and goes no, you don't, no, you don't. You don't say that on video. It's going to go viral. Don't say that on video.
Speaker 1:Oh, I didn't see that no.
Speaker 2:Oh, it is a perfect example of the self-censorship that the cancel culture that you want leads to, and how wrong it is and the bad direction it will take us in our lives.
Speaker 1:That's interesting, and you know I mean there is certainly a lot more groupthink happening in the college student crowd.
Speaker 2:How do you think?
Speaker 1:I think you know, certainly even more in high school. It's like the kids, from the time that they are grouped with other kids at five years old, are imprinted with this group think mentality, where there's always a, an adult figure that's telling you what to do, how to act, what to think, what to learn, and that goes on for over a decade, just in high school, or just in school, and then another like four years in college. So when you're talking about college students, they've literally been programmed for 15 years. 80% of their lives have been spent being told that you need to listen to an authority figure. What you think that creates this is why it's such a big proponent of homeschooling is because, at the very least, you ought to have an authority figure that you hate as a teenager, ie your parent, not an authority figure that you actually trust so you know there's actually a lot to that and a lot of problems with that.
Speaker 2:I actually went and talked to a pastor at a local church because Mother's Day out program and looking at doing that with my son, and the pastor talks to the kids for you know, once a week and it's like, oh, okay, I'd like to talk to him and of course, course, this embarrasses the hell out of my wife and everybody else because, oh god, right, but I wouldn't say I don't understand what's embarrassing about it because I'm gonna go sit down for an hour and question him on his theology and have a discussion and make a decision based off of that, and that's not very socially acceptable anymore, really, yeah, and it's insane to me because it is absolutely needed huh, yeah, I mean I hey, don't look at me, dude.
Speaker 2:Remember I spent like 10 weeks talking to rabbis, so yeah, yeah, well, anyway, what it came down to, we, we went through and I, you know, I wasn't playing gotcha questions or anything like that, but just having a conversation and the biggest difference in our theology is about obedience to government and my interpretation of Christ saying you know, render unto Caesar, what is Caesar's is that there's a place and a proper place for government, and that proper place is something you should abide by. But what is not is not. And he said well, christ was just talking about taxes there. I said, no, christ talked in metaphor. But OK, and this is a pastor of a church.
Speaker 1:A pastor doesn't understand.
Speaker 2:And then he starts talking about Paul and I said well, you know, paul can say whatever he wants but the words of Christ are read in my book for a reason and he goes oh so you put certain words in the Bible over others.
Speaker 2:I said don't you? And he said others. I said don't you, and he said no. I said, oh really, you abide by dietary laws. Then, well, no, no, no, yeah, because Christ came to fulfill the law. So therefore, you know, this is historical information. We're not about like no, it's funny, because this pastor was just not prepared to have that kind of conversation, a theological conversation with a layman, exactly.
Speaker 2:He got like totally caught off guard and even at one point called me. You know, brother Ben, you're pretty intense and I'm just sitting there going dude, this is mild. You have no idea.
Speaker 1:You have no idea where this can go, you have no idea.
Speaker 2:You have no idea where this can go, but anyway you know he, they shut down their church during COVID and I said, well, why did you do that?
Speaker 2:And he said well, we, we, you know, we believed it was the right thing to do. And I said well, would you do it again? He said no, I think at this point I'd be arrested before I do that. And I said, well, you should have the first time, so you know. And he, he wasn't expecting someone to be blatant enough to say stuff like that. You made a mistake, you were wrong, learn from, yeah, but anyway so you're gonna let your kids talk to him?
Speaker 2:oh, um, I think yes, with the condition of I will be paying attention to what my kids say about it. I think, there again, I don't have to have someone agree with me on everything. That's not what I'm after, I know, but you know, I think obedience to government is what we're called to do by Christ is.
Speaker 1:I don't think that's a good historical interpretation there, bud, but whatever, that's not even a historical interpretation for people that don't believe in Christ. That's just wrong.
Speaker 2:But my point is I don't believe that that is what Christ or Paul called us to do, and I don't believe that there's anything wrong occasionally with raising a christian army.
Speaker 1:so anyway, it's been done before yes, it has.
Speaker 2:Um, and I dude, we need to talk about the uk at some point. But I wouldn't be surprised if that's not the start of it, but anyway, if there's any christians left in the uk.
Speaker 1:You know uk is like 70 percent atheists at this point yeah, I think those atheists are turning back quite a bit.
Speaker 2:Maybe, maybe, but we'll see that is the the uh.
Speaker 1:The beauty of it is that um uh it. It's much faster for an atheist to become religious zealot than it is for a Christian to become an atheist.
Speaker 2:I don't know anybody that's become an atheist quickly. It's usually a long drawn-out process, yeah, process, yeah, yeah, yeah. And what are you playing or doing in the background? I hear the. Can you hear the?
Speaker 1:chirping it's, it's, it's uh text messages but I. I don't understand where they're coming from because my phone's on quiet, so it's something on my computer. It's probably. Signal is what it is. Let me quit. Quit out of Signal.
Speaker 2:I didn't think you could hear that. This is why I just like I sign into Signal on this computer to be able to send you stuff, because you don't want me using it in the Zoom chat.
Speaker 1:Right, because I don't read the Zoom chat. Yeah, but that literally.
Speaker 2:I just don't sign into Signal anywhere other than my phone.
Speaker 1:Okay, all right. Well, the problem is I like to copy and paste it into signal, so I generally have it signed in on the computer.
Speaker 1:if I was on mac strictly mac then I could actually copy and paste to my phone directly, but I don't have that ability from the windows pc oh yes, if you want that, I cloud connectivity that has been proven so so, so secure in the past I would never send something that I didn't consider irrelevant to security on there, which is like 99 of everything well, I mean like it's people who go into their good, like if you have a pixel and you can go in and back up all your photos to get a photo. Oh yeah, yeah, because that's really useful for them for building up your profile.
Speaker 1:Well and I mean it's good for safety, for, you know, backup purposes yeah, yeah, I mean all the screenshots, all the memes, everything We've obviously switched over to tech bitching segment, but I have one here for you.
Speaker 2:Well, I think the tenant media is tech bitching, yeah, kind of.
Speaker 1:So I was. You know my ongoing struggle with lost Bitcoin through opening channels and then not being able to close them. So finally, I had a phone call with the tech dude uh, he has a long beard, so he's obviously a cool guy. And so, um, I proposed look, why don't I just give you access and then you can fuck around with it, see what you can figure out, because at this point you know I've kind of written the whole thing off.
Speaker 2:Right, you don't think you're going to lose anything more because you've already just written this off. So who the hell cares?
Speaker 1:Exactly. And he says yeah, I was going to ask if you mind doing that anyway. So he says, all right. So, rather than you giving me any kind of passwords or anything, all I really need for the account to log in is, uh, it's got a like a hash tag, kernel thing, whatever the hell they're called, um, I can't remember off the top of my head, but basically a big, long hash or not hash, I mean hex string that allows them to log in. And I'm like, oh, okay, I see it, I found it, let me get this. And he's like, yeah, just go ahead and email it to me. I'm like email. I mean, look, I mean I care about this account anymore, but email is clear text, dude, I'm not going to fucking email this thing when we're already talking through an encrypted platform.
Speaker 2:Yeah, email is a postcard ah, yeah, yeah it's.
Speaker 1:It's not just the postcard, it's a postcard that goes through a, a copy machine on its way like every email is saved by multiple services yeah, every piece of mail is. It is saved, not just read by multiple services.
Speaker 2:So do go through email and there are ways of encrypting the payload of email and there's ways to do things, but in general I tend to agree with you. I would not send anything sensitive of mine over email. People send me shit that I would never send all day long yeah, yeah, that that is true.
Speaker 1:But also looking at my email, I'd say it's about 90, maybe even 95 spam oh, yeah, I mean depending on the email address.
Speaker 2:You know my, yes, my, I mean my, my, my poor old Gmail has over 124,000 unread emails. Yeah, yeah, yeah exactly. But that Gmail has been open, active and running since, like Since they started giving them up. Yeah, it's pretty early, yeah. I don't know if I was in the first round of beta, but I was probably in the second.
Speaker 1:Oh I see, now you got me curious. Yeah, I don't know if I was in the first round of beta, but I was probably in the second. Mm-hmm, oh, I see, now you got me curious. I've got 69,000 on red. Yeah, so it's really trying to find a needle in the haystack. If somebody sends something actually useful through email, you know what the latest thing that pisses me off Anyway, what was the resolution to that? In the haystack, if somebody sends something actually useful through email, you know, you know what the latest thing that pisses me off anyway.
Speaker 2:What was the resolution to that?
Speaker 1:oh, oh, yeah, sorry, I uh, yeah, I forgot we're talking about a story. So I sent him all that stuff he was able to log in. The reason I brought it up is just to kind of laugh at the fact that he wanted me to use email to send the uh secured login credentials. But uh, um, so yeah, he basically did command line shit which we knew because darren had looked it up. That was the the only way to shut down those channels by force it's through command line there.
Speaker 1:There's no other way to do it. So so that's what he did. And then he sent me over like $35. $35? And that was that.
Speaker 2:How did you go from several hundred to $35?
Speaker 1:Yeah, so the original amount sitting there was over a million sats, which was about $700 originally, 700 bucks originally. I got about 40% of that sent over to myself, so I probably sent like around 280 bucks or so and then the rest of it. I could not for the life of me get to pull off that system, so there should be a little over 300 bucks in there. When he manually closed all the channels, what what ended up being free to send was about 35 bucks, so nobody knows what happened.
Speaker 1:The rest of my money okay now he did credit me back for two months of service, me back for two months of service.
Speaker 1:So I I appreciate the thought cool thanks but I will say that, uh, the warning was there. This is. This is all on me, this is not anybody else's fault. When you first sign up and start using not Bitcoin but specifically, satoshi's, it tells you yeah, lightning, yeah, that this is not a, you know, ready for service system. This is an experimental beta and you should consider that any funds you deposit to never be guaranteed to be pulled back out, like you're agreeing to all that shit anytime you're dealing with Satoshis, and I don't care who the provider is. This is the system itself is not in a finished state and is occasionally reset, so has the potential to, has the potential to be right, and so it's really.
Speaker 2:It's annoying to lose money that people have donated, but it's not unexpected well, yeah, and you know there have been issues with, there have been issues with several different uh upstarts on this what was the? What was it breeze? I lost money on breeze, initially because of a wallet reset yeah there was which has the same thing.
Speaker 1:They tell you ahead of time. Yeah, yeah, but they take a lot of the stuff too yeah, um, fountain, fountain.
Speaker 2:I've had random issues with and you know, I think that there are people boosting on fountain that we're not getting is my feeling, but I can't prove it.
Speaker 1:Well, fountain's whole system is Bassack words. I'm happy to call that out because they essentially will collect money to donate but not send it unless the owner of the podcast registers on their system. Correct, that's not the intent of Podcasting 2.0, and I'm fairly familiar with that, having been there when it was created. Uh-huh uh-huh.
Speaker 1:And you know I mean they're free to do things as they want, but they are not following the standard, that's for sure, because that information on where to send the funds is included in podcasts like ours that are 2.0 um compliant yeah, I know, to your wallet to my non-existent wallet exactly. So it's uh, uh, which, by the way, I probably should remove that from the podcast because that wallet no longer exists or hasn't for a while.
Speaker 2:Yeah, you probably should, and you probably should, you know, send me my cut of what you lost.
Speaker 1:Oh, so your cut of what I lost means you currently owe me about $100.
Speaker 2:How so.
Speaker 1:Because I lost $200, and half of that would be yours.
Speaker 2:Therefore, you owe me 100 I don't think that's how that works. That's exactly how it works. That's not how that works.
Speaker 1:I don't know. I can I I can explain this very well thank you, you and darren man, you and darren hey, if I, if I actually got up any money from darren now, that would be a miracle all right.
Speaker 2:So, uh, I think we need to talk about the shooter and his father being tried yeah, so there was a shooting that happened another school related.
Speaker 1:This wasn't even high school, right, 14 uh I think it was high school, but it was a high school shooting. It was a school shooting.
Speaker 2:That's not the point of the story. That's relevant to me and what I want to talk about yeah but I want to give a background to people because, again.
Speaker 1:We have a few people in europe that may not be familiar with what's going on here, because they don't just sit there and follow us news all day long. Um. So this this young kid, um, went and took his rifle to school and then proceeded to shoot at a bunch of people in the process, killing four of them, two of them teachers, two of them students, and yet somehow did not get killed himself, which is, I think, a first right, because usually all these shooters end up dead, right, a lot of these shooters end up dead and executed by the cops.
Speaker 2:Um, you know, and it. I am glad he is alive. Now we're using the pronouns he, and there's question on whether or not we should be.
Speaker 1:If you look at the pictures looks like a chick.
Speaker 2:Uh, it's very effeminate guy and you know part of one of the videos that surfaced with him having blood on his face and, oh my god, this toxic masculinity his dad was trying to force on him and everything else. Okay, the the kid's a soy boy, real effeminate and apparently got bullied for being gay and lots of stuff, and his dad bought him this gun and took him hunting and trying to um, you know, get, get the gay off of them.
Speaker 2:Not necessarily that, but at least not be a man, boob fluffy, you know, can't do anything, kind of guy. And now the dad is being charged with involuntary manslaughter and murder.
Speaker 1:Yeah, so this is, I think, a topic that we disagree on. I talked I asked darren about it yesterday also, and he was probably about 90 overlap with my opinion on it yeah, well, yeah, that doesn't mean anything, you can both be wrong uh, yeah, we could also be right you could be, but you choose not to be.
Speaker 1:It's okay so I think that this is a concept that is high time starts coming back it used to be the case in the in the olden days, um and it, it is disappeared. As government has replaced responsibility for people, then this concept is you're responsible for your children.
Speaker 2:Yep, you are.
Speaker 1:You're not abdicating your responsibility to the state just because they use public school.
Speaker 2:All right, here's the problem, and this goes back to why it used to be legal for men to beat their wives, because they were legally responsible for them, responsible absolutely.
Speaker 1:beat their wives yep, because they were legally responsible for absolutely okay.
Speaker 2:Well, you can't even do that with children anymore. And I see fucking lauren southern on twitter yesterday said yeah, who buys a 14 year old a gun?
Speaker 1:this is just wrong yeah the fuck yeah, I just bought a lauren southern, another two guns. Prime example of a canadian hold on.
Speaker 2:I just bought two guns one for a four and a half year old, about to be five. One for a two and a half year old. Now, obviously I'm not handing these to them these are put away but I bought them for them. At that age they don't even know they have them, but I wanted them to have 10-22s one day, so they were on sale. I bought two of them.
Speaker 2:You know the interpretation of when you get something, and not only that. I was given a gun at a very young age. I wasn't turned loose with it, but I went hunting with my dad. I was taught gun safety from a very young age, and there's nothing wrong with that. And the problem I have right now is what we're doing is we're tying this mentally ill kid's actions to his dad, which I don't think the dad deserves.
Speaker 1:If you can knowingly prove to me, if you can prove that the dad knew that the kid was, uh, violent and intended to carry out something and he bought him and gave him a gun anyway and gave him free I can prove that very easily, because the dad had a meeting with the fbi nearly a year prior to this okay that the fbi had told him that the school is concerned about his son's. There were anonymous web.
Speaker 2:There were anonymous tips put through the web saying that they were worried about a school shooting. Which kids do? Pranks, stuff happens. But let me, let me just say this again you have not proven to me that he thought his son was going to do that.
Speaker 1:Well, and it's unfortunate that he's too stupid to know.
Speaker 2:Hold on. No, because again he did not. He does not get to abdicate his responsibility for his child. That doesn't mean he gets charged with murder. It does.
Speaker 1:No, it doesn't, Because he's responsible for that. You're wrong in this. No, I'm not right. It is evil, it is a slippery slope. It it's wrong, it is evil, it is a slippery slope.
Speaker 2:It is the same bullshit argument as the cancel culture thing Nope.
Speaker 1:In the old days he would have shot his own son for doing something stupid like this. It does make it right, because you are responsible for the actions of your minor child. When that kid turns 18, your responsibility goes away.
Speaker 2:So here's another thing we're infantilizing. In the olden days, this 14 year old would probably be all about ready to head out and get married. So we're we cannot as a girl we cannot, we cannot. Well, anyway, we. We cannot compare apples to apples here, and to cherry pick one thing and ignore the rest is problematic.
Speaker 1:No, this is, I think, a good trend that is starting, which is to finally hold.
Speaker 2:I think it is a slippery slope. I would put every single one of the parents no, can you let me talk for a second?
Speaker 1:you keep saying hold on and then talk and then saying hold on again. No, fuck that shit. I'm gonna say what I'm gonna dude, which is I think every parent of a school shooter should be looked at and possibly charged with murder because they raised that kid in a way that resulted with those deaths. Parents don't get to abdicate their responsibility no.
Speaker 2:If you want to have a fucking kid, you need to. The sins of the father are not visited upon the son and the sins of the son are not visited upon the father. You've interrupted me several times and I'm going to interrupt you too.
Speaker 1:Absolutely no. It isn't. Yes, it is no, it isn't.
Speaker 2:Yes, it is. If you can't raise a good kid, you have no principles as far as what is legal. What is the rationale of law?
Speaker 1:No, I do Because you are responsible for your son Period. It is your responsibility. It's not the state's, it's not the responsibility of the people that were killed by your son.
Speaker 2:You are barred from taking that responsibility in the way that you would have to do to be able to stop him. You that, and even if you have that responsibility and you tried to talk about it, you did everything of it and he got away before you could shoot him you should still be charged with murder.
Speaker 1:No, that's asinine there's nothing to indicate that I've seen, and tell me if there is to show that the father did anything at all to stop the son.
Speaker 2:I think that a I that you're, you're going about this wrong. First of all, I don't have to prove to you that he tried to stop him or anything else. You have to prove to me that the circumstances exist that he should be even charged with murder. Because I don't it's his son.
Speaker 1:He has the responsibility for them that's not relevant.
Speaker 2:The child is incapable of being responsible for his own actions as okay, so then where you're going, gene is a situation where, if you have kids, you can't have guns.
Speaker 1:No.
Speaker 2:I'm not saying anything about guns.
Speaker 1:Because 99% of the kids that have guns given by parents.
Speaker 2:You were opening up here.
Speaker 1:No, you don't understand it, my friend, because 99% of the kids that have guns don't go and shoot everybody else up. Guns is not the issue. And you're falling into the liberal trap if you want to consider guns.
Speaker 2:no, no here's the thing.
Speaker 1:This is if you want to give your kid a gun, you are responsible, not the kid you are responsible, just like if you give the kid a car, you are responsible. That kid has not learned to be self-sufficient yet. It is your responsibility to know when it's appropriate to do things that allow the kid to take somebody else's life. And in this case the father did not act responsibly. You don't know that. I do know that because I can see the circumstances.
Speaker 2:No, you don't. I do know that because I can see the circumstances. No, what happened and the entire look involuntary, manslaughter, maybe murder.
Speaker 1:That's different I'll agree with you on that. I totally agree with you on that. I think that there that it probably should be involuntary manslaughter, not murder, and it likely will be dropped down to involuntary manslaughter before this thing is finished in trial regardless but he still has the responsibility.
Speaker 2:Quit saying hold on dude well then, give me an opportunity to speak every time I drink tea.
Speaker 1:You have an opportunity to speak. Go ahead, oh.
Speaker 2:God. Okay, there are a limited number of facts here. I think my read on the story is that the dad was trying to do the right thing by his son.
Speaker 2:I don't see it as abusive, I don't see it as anything bad, but again, I don't know that there has any details here that are necessarily relevant and I, I, I, I feel for that man because I think he was trying to do the right thing by his son and, hobbled by society and the shit we have to deal with, you don't have kids and bingo card, darren, and I said you were going to bring that up yesterday.
Speaker 1:Okay, it's true, it is true and it has nothing whatsoever either. And yes, yes, correct, okay, so, and that's why we're going to hold you accountable, because you don't get to that's why you don't understand the stupidity of what you're saying. No, I do.
Speaker 2:Because you don't get to. You do understand the stupidity of what you're saying.
Speaker 1:Good, you do. God damn it, bastard. Yeah, trick me. You don't get to have kids and then walk away from the responsibility for your actions. I'm not walking away from the responsibility. Yes, you are. I'm not suggesting this. No, I'm not.
Speaker 2:Yes, you are, I'm just saying no, I'm not. What I'm saying is that this kid went and did something horrible and I want to hear from him, I want to see what drugs he was on. I think that's relevant. Did the dad allow those drugs, or was he put on them by the mom? Or was the state involved with pushing those drugs? And if the state said well, you know, sir, your son is having issues, you don't like how he thinks, and we're going to tell you right now, if you don't want to lose custody of your child, you have to abide by this, you have to let him do this. You, right now, if you don't want to lose custody of your child, you have to abide by this, you have to let him do this. Then that dad is fully absolved of any sort of responsibility that you think he may have because it was taken from him what responsibility was taken from him?
Speaker 1:what are you assuming now?
Speaker 2:I'm assuming the kid was put on ssris by the school. That's what it looks like to me in my research. Put kids on ssris fuck they don't the school. That's what it looks like to me in my research. Put kids unnecessarized fuck they don't?
Speaker 1:the school tells parents to put the kids unnecessarized. The school's not gonna pay for fucking necessarized dude. You don't get those free from the school.
Speaker 2:The parents are paying for that dude, I'm telling you right now, this is a dad who is walking a fine line with CPS and trying to maintain any control he could with his son and trying to do what he thought was right by his son, and I think he was interfered with to a great degree. Okay, you want to hold me responsible for all my kids' acts until X, y, z age? Then I have complete and total authority over them and everyone else fuck off. Yep, agreed, okay, that is not the world we live in. That is not what you can do. And to right now, what you're doing is a a trap, because you're saying, okay, we're going to hold you responsible for this because you should have blah, but you didn't give them the authority nor the ability to do that.
Speaker 1:In fact, you hobbled them through cps, the schools and everything else okay, explain to me what happened with cps, because you keep talking about cps. Like you know, there's something happened. What happened?
Speaker 2:okay, there are a lot of things related. You already mentioned it when you go back to the first FBI conversation and everything else. Questions were raised Then there were several interactions that have been talked about and documented I'll have. I haven't pulled up my research on this right now but I can later. Um, the point is the interference from the state, from the others involved, is palpable. In this kid, the I mean anytime you look at him he is, he's soy boy. Do you agree with that? Visually, absolutely okay. Sure, seems that way. When I did you watch the video of him hunting with his dad yes in the greatest day ever not what I would call that, but yes.
Speaker 2:I see, but that's what the kid was clearly miserable.
Speaker 1:He didn't want to be out there, he was not a happy camper. Killing that deer Okay.
Speaker 2:But the dad was trying you get that right the dad was doing what he thought was right.
Speaker 1:Do you agree with what the dad was doing? Not for that kid. Why? Because clearly, that kid was not his dad. His dad grew up in a different okay.
Speaker 1:So you're saying that dad should have just written off that son I think dad should have sometimes, yeah, but dad should have actually not just done what he thought his dad did with him, which is take the kid hunting and then smear blood across his face, but realize he has a gay son and that maybe he should treat him differently and not just stick a gun into his hands.
Speaker 2:A confused son that never should have been in public school.
Speaker 1:And that's where absolutely have to be totally, but totally.
Speaker 2:Well. Again what I'll say there is you, but when you have kids, you can't just write them off.
Speaker 1:None of it absolve well. If you don't write them off, then guess what? You have kids. You can't just write them off. None of it absolves, Well. If you don't write them off, then guess what. You have responsibility.
Speaker 1:Okay, and if you can write them off, you're a psychopath Maybe, but then you don't have the responsibility if you write them off, and sometimes it's not up to you, sometimes your ex-wife will make you write them off, whether you want to or not. You don't get to see your kids, because that happens all the time in court too, and if the dad couldn't see the kid, I could see an argument saying oh, not dad's fault. But, in this case, the kid was living with his dad, who is divorced.
Speaker 2:Yeah.
Speaker 1:So his dad has 100% control over the kid.
Speaker 2:Yeah, and the kid was in public school.
Speaker 1:And the kid was in public school. Absolutely. And again, if you send your kid to public school, guess what? You don't get to absolve yourself of responsibility, because it's your choice, it's literally state mandated in a lot of places.
Speaker 2:It is your choice to do that, Not always. And again this is it is. It is not your choice, absolutely. It depends on the state, my friend, and this is what I'm trying to get you telling me there- you're telling me that there's a state that will not allow you to home raise a student yes, in fact that has been the default up until fairly recently in most states. You have to go get exemptions and purposely pull them out and you run afoul of truancy laws and everything else.
Speaker 1:Yes, and yet people do it.
Speaker 2:Some people, it's still a vast minority and the homeschooling movement has been growing in popularity. And the Northwest is really. You know, Idaho had great laws around homeschooling. It literally said the parent shall cause the child to learn. That was the end of the schooling laws, that's a good law. Yes, agreed. Actually, it's a bad law because it shouldn't even fucking exist. But it's a good law in that it was very limited in scope.
Speaker 1:But when you look at friends of mine who have in like new york or, uh, california- and does that absolve them of the responsibility if they choose to live in a place with bad laws? My point is the same on all these issues and we've talked about a million times. People make choices out of convenience and then they're shocked when their choices end up causing bad things to happen. Okay, that's what you chose to live in fucking new york.
Speaker 2:Congratulations we have to choose what the appropriate age of majority actually is yeah, I've said for a long time I don't think it.
Speaker 1:18 is magic.
Speaker 2:It's not a magic number, dude okay, but you have to codify something in law you do again. I, I, I can. I just I do not believe the dad should be charged with what he's charged for.
Speaker 1:Um, it should not be I'm happy to give you that. I know that's the part I disagree with.
Speaker 2:I think he should be charged, but maybe with manslaughter okay and you know what, if maybe the default is he's charged, we go through a uh court proceedings and we actually have a good evidentiary uh process where you know we have a competent jury that will actually look at evidence and not just, you know, be stupid, which we don't have today. Part of my you're a big fan of juries I I am a fan of juries that are educated.
Speaker 2:The problem I have is I don't trust our court system at all right now and here's the thing if you can prove that he knew, not that there might be, but that there was a, you know beyond a reasonable doubt that this kid shouldn't have access to a gun.
Speaker 1:Yeah.
Speaker 2:And still allowed him access to a gun. And what I mean that is, he didn't put it in the safe. He, the kid, had it in. You know, I'm not talking about that. I'm not talking about it was in dad's room and he's not supposed to touch it. I'm talking about he's got it in his room and has unfettered access to it.
Speaker 2:Mm-hmm Okay has unfettered access to it. Okay, if he gave him unfettered access to it, knowing that there was mental instability, knowing that there were problems, knowing that there was this, that and the other, then yeah, he can be charged with involuntary manslaughter.
Speaker 1:Sure.
Speaker 2:But if he locked up anything, if he locked up the ammunition but said, okay, yeah, you can have it on your wall, that's fine, but I'm putting the magazines and ammunition over here and the kid went out and bought a magazine and bought ammunition nope, sorry. If he did anything to have any sort of barrier to prevent his child from doing it, he should not be held accountable.
Speaker 1:I agree. I agree, okay, but I think more parents need to be held liable because they fail to do those things and we haven't been holding them, holding them liable okay, but like I, I leave there are.
Speaker 2:There are loaded guns in my house um I don't know why you keep bringing guns back like the guns to me are irrelevant.
Speaker 1:He could have killed somebody with a car. My arguments would be identical.
Speaker 2:No, because the reason why he's being gone after is the guns is the AR-15, is that he was a 14-year-old Like this is a gun control. This is Sandy Hook 2.0 in lots of ways, but it shouldn't be, as far as how it's going to be used, what we ought to be doing is focusing on the fact that the tool is irrelevant. What matters here is what happened. That's not what the media is doing.
Speaker 1:I don't care what the media is doing, I'm talking about my point, my stand on this issue to you, which is that the parents have abdicated responsibility for far too long for the actions of their children, and I think this is how you get parents to actually take charge of their children's education. More is by making them realize, hey, guess what? You're responsible, so you better start making some better choices, because if you don't, you will pay the price.
Speaker 2:I disagree, because what is going to happen is you're going to have all the responsibility and none of the authority, and that is not a place to be in.
Speaker 1:They're not going to demand authority unless they have responsibility.
Speaker 2:That's not true. That happens all the time.
Speaker 1:Abdication of responsibility happens all the time.
Speaker 2:Okay, here's the thing, um, if you get married and you have a credit card and you give your wife access to a credit card and she goes and spends a bunch of money, you're liable to pay that back.
Speaker 2:You are okay if you cut her off and say you're spending too much. I'm not going to allow you to do this now. You're a financial abuser, maybe Not. Maybe. That is what, dude. We lived in a very fucked up world where people are not. Everyone is a fucking victim. Everyone is a fucking victim, and those who try and take responsibility and try and actually exercise some competence, yeah, are the ones that are demonized as the bad guys.
Speaker 2:Sure, so those who are successful those who are actually trying to be competent are the ones who are demonized over and over and over again in our society. Yeah, absolutely.
Speaker 1:But it doesn't mean you stop being competent and you throw your hands up in the air and say, oh, who cares, let her spend, because you always have a choice.
Speaker 2:I, you know, I don't know man. I've got friends and people who have gone through some divorces.
Speaker 1:I'll tell you this At my age, I rarely have a period in time between when one of my friends isn't getting divorced.
Speaker 2:Yeah, like right now I've got two, but there's a generational difference between divorces.
Speaker 1:Okay, what does that mean?
Speaker 2:Well, I'll talk to you off air about it some, but I feel like women are getting nastier in their divorce strategies. Oh, okay.
Speaker 1:Sure? Well, I will say they've never not been nasty. Yeah, Maybe they are getting nastier.
Speaker 2:I'll give you that We'll talk about the force of law here later. But I mean I had one friend Hold on. I had one friend who, his wife, ran up a whole bunch of credit card debt.
Speaker 1:Yeah.
Speaker 2:He took the credit card away from her.
Speaker 1:Yep.
Speaker 2:She filed for divorce, yep. The judge demanded he give her access to the credit cards again.
Speaker 1:Why would he give her access if they're getting divorced?
Speaker 2:Because during the divorce, she has equal access to the money. Yeah Well, she was never on bank accounts previously, so she couldn't get access to that. But she wasn't authorized to use her own credit card.
Speaker 1:Yeah.
Speaker 2:And the judge mandated that he give her back access to the credit card Post-divorce.
Speaker 1:No, during the divorce period. Oh, during the divorce period? Well, yeah, you can do that and then shut down the credit card the same day.
Speaker 2:No, you can't Because you have a court order saying she has to have access to this money.
Speaker 1:She can have access to a dead credit card sure.
Speaker 1:Look my point is people are too willing to comply and say, yep, I have no choice but to do X, y and Z. Was it your choice to marry this girl? Yes, it was. Did someone hold a gun to your head and tell you you have to marry her? No, I'll bet you had multiple friends telling you don't fucking marry this crazy chick. Because that's what I've said to all my friends every time they get married and do they listen? Hell, no, they get married to crazy chicks. And then I have to hear a few years later about oh my god, my wife is a crazy chick. She's doing x, y and z. I can't believe I'm gonna have to get divorced. Really, you can't believe that, because I told you that before your wedding. Really, the.
Speaker 2:The other thing I'll say is I think the uh and I I wonder if this kid doesn't fall into this category. Going back to the shooter, but the uh, the cluster b personalities, um, and their rampantness, um, you know, I, I, I really think that's kind of interesting that the that the rapidity and rate of that in our society has increased the way it has.
Speaker 1:Explain more to me.
Speaker 2:So cluster B is borderline personality disorder, narcissism, a lot of those sorts of traits. There's a couple other in there. You mean traits that are exaggerated by TikTok. By TikTok, by social media, by women's lib. You know lots of things. Mm-hmm so I don't know, it's just interesting to me, uh, and I think that can we agree that the kid was not normal oh, 100.
Speaker 2:Okay, yeah, something is mentally wrong with the kid, yeah, and I mean that's obvious through his actions. But beyond that, even if you didn't know what was going on, if you look at him in, a lot of people say, oh, you're just being whatever, but he has that stare of just someone who is lost. Yeah, it's the best way I can put it. He doesn't know.
Speaker 1:Mom went to prison for drug abuse.
Speaker 2:Right, but he, I and I don't know if she was abusing when he was, you know, in the womb or whatever, but he's not completely there and I'm not saying that from like a mental capacity standpoint. I'm saying he's checked, he is not engaged in what he is doing and this is a life-altering scenario.
Speaker 2:Yeah, he's got dissociative behavior disorder Did you see the video of the dad rocking Mm-hmm, yeah, like the dad is distraught. Well, who wouldn't be? Come on, I mean, yeah, you're charged with murder, yeah, and you didn't even get to do it. Okay, gene, I'm going to recommend you edit that part out of the podcast.
Speaker 1:Well, but it's true. It's like the dad is. Basically, if you look at it from his standpoint, he did everything that he thought was right, like you said, yes, and now he's looking at a life sentence yes, and I don't think at a life sentence. Yes.
Speaker 2:And I don't think he should be. I do, no, you let's rephrase this, because you say that and I think it's gotten a little inflammatory and ticked me off a couple of times. But I think what you're saying is he should be investigated and if he did this, he should be held accountable, because we've already cleared up where. Okay, if he set the gun in his room and said don't touch it, don't do it, and the kid still went in there and did it, he's not responsible well, he's still responsible.
Speaker 2:Because I don't think that it we just said if he separated the gun and ammo, if he did this, if he put any barriers on it we didn't say that, you agreed to it we can go back.
Speaker 1:I said that there are certainly things the father could have done to demonstrate he's not responsible because he took actions that should have prevented this from happening. Okay, I'll give you that much. Have prevented this from happening? Okay, I I'll give you that much. However, my default position is the parent is generally responsible, unless they can demonstrate that somehow through their actions they have removed that responsibility so you're guilty until you prove yourself innocent as a parent? Yes, you are. No, you are responsible for your child side coming through and you know not what we want in this society.
Speaker 1:No, it is. We don't want a bunch of children that nobody's responsible for but the state that's. That's literally what we had in socialism. We don't want that here, even though we're getting it. What we want are parents that have the responsibility for their own children.
Speaker 2:Yes, and I believe in moral and social responsibility. I believe in holding people accountable and you know, if it was so egregious that the dad was negligent enough that he shouldn't be tried for involuntary manslaughter, fine, but that should not be the default, in my opinion.
Speaker 1:It has to be in the most egregious of circumstances then, that's. That's where we differ them, because I think that should be the default. And then, if there are circumstances that demonstrate that the the parents were actually taking steps that should have prevented this, well then, yes, then we can see that they are not responsible for it. But in the absence of those demonstrated steps, the parent, by default, is responsible for their child. If they're not, they have no business being parents.
Speaker 2:Yeah, I'm going to go with the leftist uh argument on abortion and say if you don't have guns and kids, you can't have an opinion, and you just lost the debate. Congratulations, that was a joke dude.
Speaker 1:Well the joke. I'm not joking because that that that is exactly what the liberals will say, and it is as equally incorrect.
Speaker 2:And no, they'll say if you don't have a uterus, you can't have an opinion. But yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, I know but all the childless cat ladies will be happy to tell me about what to do with my kids and guns. Yes, I mean you and Dan are in great company there.
Speaker 1:That is absolutely correct. The childless cat ladies will tell you that. However, in this case, just because childless catsless no, they have cats. So the childless cat ladies will tell you that doesn't invalidate what I'm telling you as well, and that is that you have responsibility for your children if you raise a kid that happens to be not provided food.
Speaker 1:Let's use a slightly different example. They, you know you're not feeding your kid. Kid has to go out and steal food. Guess what? You are still responsible for the crimes that kid commits in order to feed themselves because you are the one responsible.
Speaker 2:Let me ask you this I stop him from stealing food, yeah, and he dies of malnourishment? Yeah. Am I held liable?
Speaker 1:no, he's your kid okay I'm consistent, it is, it is. I think you have to have responsibility, yeah, now, if you want to abdicate your responsibility from the get-go and just say, hey, I just don't eat some sperm, not really. My kid don't give a shit, not responsible for him, I think that should be an option too yeah, I think, kid, I think if you're gonna have easy access to abortion um I wasn't talking about abortion.
Speaker 2:I was talking about like well up your kid for adoption, but yeah no, what I'm talking about, though I'm going, here's the thing we cannot have women being in sole control of abortion. Um, so I I think if a dad wants to keep the kid, the mom doesn't. You know how can we provide for a way for the dad to keep the kid?
Speaker 2:um, if the dad wants to abdicate his responsibility and the mom wants to keep it, yeah, uh, then the dad shouldn't be obliged to pay child support, like there has to be a male choice and a male way out, otherwise we have inequality under the law, and that's that's a problem now I will say this um, we should have inequality under the law, because not all circumstances are the exact same. Male and female are different. There should be differences. That is not the liberal talking point. That is not the way this society has gone. So there's all of that that we can get into as well.
Speaker 1:Yeah, and I think if you rape somebody and she gets pregnant, you ought to be held accountable. You're liable for that. It was an involuntary act on the part of the female. If you didn't rape somebody and she gets pregnant, then she is a willing participant and you got to be able to walk away yeah, the problem is.
Speaker 2:I mean, the problem is women are going to just claim oh well, this, that and the other like that's why you never perform a sexual act without video, recording it for evidence.
Speaker 1:Anyone that has sex without the recording is crazy man in this day and age at least the audio right. No, sometimes the audio can create a contrary perspective. You remember that old song from the 50s, right? What's that? Please, daddy, or Please, daddy, don't. And then it ends with Don't Stop.
Speaker 2:I don't remember that, do you remember?
Speaker 1:I'll find that. I'll track it down and send you a link, because it's a classic. It is back in a time when, like adults, could actually have adult conversations and not everything had to be antisepticized.
Speaker 2:Well, I think there's a lot of. I don't think that, so I think there's. I think there are two very different groups in our society and I think this is why we're headed towards civil war more than anything.
Speaker 1:Yeah there we go, bingo card civil war.
Speaker 2:What the what is this bingo card? Okay, okay, so yes we're playing, so we haven't actually done this, but we talked about it so many times of actually printing up some business bingo cards and then people that donate money sending them to them as a pdf or something but, the idea is, there's certain terms that are mentioned with the regularity or this, yeah, well, darren's, usually the one that brings it up, and I just have to respond to you and the uh bitcoin stuff that you know, uh huh, okay, you lost money Cool.
Speaker 1:We've been hearing about this for months now I lost money? Yeah, because my fucking account started creating opening channels by itself Okay, but anyway the bingo card. Yeah, so for our show, one of the items on the bingo card Seinfeld, taylor Swift. No, you're talking about the other show.
Speaker 2:Yeah, I'm talking about you and Darren's show. Yeah, yeah, yeah.
Speaker 1:Those always come up with some regularity.
Speaker 2:Some sort of medical supplement? Talk between two old men who are having failing bodies. Oh, you just wait, you're not that far away, man man yeah, but luckily by the time I get there you'll be gone maybe, maybe if you're lucky, but you may not be lucky and for that, ladies and gentlemen, if you can't tell, we are friends.
Speaker 1:We may have heated conversations occasionally, but we give each other enough I wouldn't bother having a heated conversation with somebody who's not a friend. Yeah, why waste the air? Yeah, yeah, at least with friends it's fun yeah um, I keep finding, but the wrong songs I'm, I'll find it okay, because apparently puff dabby did one as well. Yeah, what about it?
Speaker 1:never mind anyway um, I don't, I don't think I've been in a bingo, an actual bingo game, in like 30 years, so I mean it's, it's all metaphorical right, but I I just didn't know if y'all had actually discussed more topics that would be on the bingo card for this show. Oh, no, no.
Speaker 2:Anyway, regardless, I think that we are moving towards a very interesting place. Did you see that Trump's Shit sentencing? There we go. I don't know why I blanked on that, but Trump's sentencing got delayed till after the election. I did see that, yeah.
Speaker 1:Yeah, and you know what the the first reaction from conservatives, like yay, finally some justice. The second reaction is like oh, hold on. Second reaction is like oh, hold on. That means that his um, what, what?
Speaker 2:the hell is it called his inability to?
Speaker 1:talk about certain topics due to the court case. Yep, they are now going to be extended through past the election yep, so you can't.
Speaker 2:If I were him, I would just say fuck it.
Speaker 1:No, you can't do that to me yeah well, I mean, you can't do that to me, yeah, well, he shouldn't be submitting to all of this anyway. There's an argument to be made for that, for sure, and I'd like to think, were I in his shoes, that I would act slightly differently. But I'm not in his shoes and I don't know what kind of pressure is he under.
Speaker 2:Yeah, I do know that generally, the older people get, the less they give a shit well, I mean, at some point you just have to go back and say, no, we're not going to go this, we're out, we're not going to do this yeah, gag order.
Speaker 1:That's the phrase I was looking for.
Speaker 2:So his gag order has just been extended by another two months well, the whole thing is insane and uh, bravo to mug club and steven crowder man yeah, so tell me I I watched like 10 minutes of that and then I think there's a lot more than 10 minutes. So tell me more so he, he did. He pulled a. James O'Keefe Went on a date. Yeah, not personally, but you know, he's Holy shit. Did you hear that?
Speaker 1:I did. That's a lightning.
Speaker 2:No, that was a jet. Oh, really that sounded like lightning, no that is an aircraft flying right over my house. Oh sure, it's not a black helicopter no, no, that was not a prop based aircraft okay, um football game.
Speaker 2:So 42, 42, what? Hey, oh no, uh, football game kickoff. We're doing this on a Saturday, so the flyover just happened, apparently, which means we're going to have to wrap up here soon so I can go watch the game. But you know, he pulled a O'Keefe Media Group Project Veritas undercover sting and guy working for DOJ said basically hey, this is weaponized against Trump, we know it's weaponized against Trump.
Speaker 2:Yeah, we know Alvin Bragg and the prosecutors and everybody involved is just you know, political and shitty and shouldn't be doing what they're doing, and we all know it. We all know how he goes on to talk about how ambitious brag is and yada, yada, yada, and just you know, because he thinks he's on a date and he's just talking he's actually speaking the truth, and then he comes out and isn't it amazing what men are willing to just talk about to impress women?
Speaker 1:or each other or like other gay dudes oh no, it's not even necessarily gay dudes.
Speaker 2:I mean guys will open up and talk and brag about lots of shit, yeah but anyway regardless. What it comes down to is um, he said a lot of what the conservatives are thinking and then goes oh no, that wasn't my real opinion. I was just saying something to impress a woman. How is that what you're saying? To impress a woman, you know, like if he had slipped in there. Oh yeah, and I got an eight-inch dick. Okay, maybe.
Speaker 1:Right.
Speaker 2:Or hey, I make this much money.
Speaker 1:Wait, you think eight inches is impressive Really? Okay, go ahead, go ahead. Hey, I make this much money. Wait, you think eight inches is impressive? Really okay, go ahead, go ahead. That's the other thing guys do we're gonna, yeah, we're gonna.
Speaker 2:No, that's what women do no, no, no, no.
Speaker 1:I mean always try and put each other down. Yeah, yeah, yeah, but you've seen the women?
Speaker 2:yeah, he was talking about he had a big dick and then shows up with 10 inches. It's like, no, I mean, always try and put each other down. Yeah, yeah, yeah, but you've seen the women? Yeah, he was talking about. He had a big dick and then shows up with 10 inches. It's like, oh, you dumb bitch. Yeah.
Speaker 1:These are the same women, remember, that say well, and my husband needs to make $680,000 because that's how much I'm going to spend. Six foot and over six inches is the common theme between women right now, but anyway.
Speaker 2:So he just got caught with his pants down. The reaction has been hilarious in a lot of ways, but to me, based off of what he said, if at all true, which I think it is the prosecutor and the judge the case should be thrown out just from conflict of interest.
Speaker 1:So yeah, but who would throw the case out? And I? I don't have the answer. I'm actually genuinely asking, like who could step into this, because I don't think anyone can step in without it being appealed. The next level, correct? Yeah, so they can just fuck around and do this forever yes, they could.
Speaker 2:And now, um, kathy hokal could come in and say uh, trump is pardoned because he shouldn't have been charged in the first place. And da, da, da, da.
Speaker 1:And end it now right, except now they could then alter the charges and she'd have to do it again now imagine if trump actually gets elected. This is, and they continue this for four years oh they will.
Speaker 2:This is state level, he can't do anything about it, yeah, he can't pardon himself, he can't do anything. So this is why he shouldn't have complied in the first place and should have fucking ignored him. Well, what, which is easy to say on the state of just defund the state of New York across the board.
Speaker 1:I'm sorry. What if we just defund the state of New York?
Speaker 2:Let's cancel New York when New York has its capability of leveling its own taxes. You realize that right.
Speaker 1:And yet people keep leaving that state. So I don't think they can hold enough people in New York to keep those taxes sufficient. Yeah, we'll see, because I mean literally this is a stupid thing for the states to have gotten to. However, large states like New York, california, receive a tremendous amount of money from the federal government and the federal government can pull those funds.
Speaker 2:Yeah, well, what it comes down to is I I think what's going to happen is we're going to wait till after the election. I think trump's going to win and I think they're going to double down. You know a lot of course they will. A lot of concern, but but, dude, have you been paying attention to the conservative commenting space? They're all saying, oh, they're hedging their bets, they're gonna suck up to trump after he wins. Why do you think that that?
Speaker 1:makes no sense exactly.
Speaker 2:But this is where the conservative thought is that you know, oh, they'll do this, that or the other. Why do you think they would stop? Why do you not think they would put trump in jail? Why do you think that they would hold back at all? There's this weird optimistic streak that some people have that I don't understand yeah, that's fair, which, by the way, this is part of why I'm saying civil war is because if trump wins and new york tries, to continue this yeah, yeah, bingo card.
Speaker 2:Fuck you. Um, if, if trump wins and this new york case or any of the rest of the cases continue and they try to haggle him for four years, at what point do you just go. You know what this isn't working. Y'all go do what the hell you want to do. We're going to go do what the hell we want to do. Leave us the fuck alone. We'll leave you the fuck alone. We can split the nukes. Everybody can take a nuke.
Speaker 1:No, no, no, no, no. I don't trust him with nukes.
Speaker 2:Okay, I don't care, I do Okay, anyway.
Speaker 1:That's like leaving nukes in Ukraine, that's crazy talk.
Speaker 2:For the record, Gene is not a Russian agent agent. He just naturally believes what they want him to believe without being paid any.
Speaker 1:Any semi-intelligent person would realize.
Speaker 2:This is why you're not getting a check. Why pay when you can't? Why?
Speaker 1:buy the cow when you can get it.
Speaker 2:Yeah, right, when you and you get the milk for free.
Speaker 1:That's true? That is true, yeah, it's. I don't understand the exuberance that happens every time from people before the results are known, like I fully expect Kamala Harris to be on the front page of the New York Times as the first woman president. I fully expect that.
Speaker 2:Yeah, I think it'll happen right after the election too. Yeah, exactly, exactly Because when she loses, she's going to 25th Amendment Joe, and get him out and be like still did it bitches.
Speaker 1:That would be actually funny. I would call that a boss move if it were to happen. If she loses the election and then still becomes the first female president for like what a month? Yeah, two months.
Speaker 2:And making Trump instead of being 45 and 47, he's 45 and 48. Yeah.
Speaker 1:Yeah, 45 and 48.
Speaker 2:I can totally see her doing that. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if she doesn't do it before the election, just as the October surprise.
Speaker 1:Yeah, maybe, maybe that's the surprise is that Joe finally does what everyone realizes he's been doing for a long time and just goes off to the big ice cream factory tour in the sky.
Speaker 2:And he is so checked out. He is not even pretending to be everybody internationally.
Speaker 1:That I've seen is talking about how the us has no president right now.
Speaker 2:Did you see the video of him?
Speaker 1:uh, at the kids desk that whole set just looks like he's on on mr rogers or something right, it's, it's just like hey, boys and girls, the president's here to talk to you all yeah, it's.
Speaker 2:It's very wrong in so many ways it's a saturday night life skit that's what it looks like.
Speaker 1:Right, yeah, it looks like something you'd see on satellite live yeah it, or a nickelodeon like keenan peel skit where it's over the top just ridiculous right? Yeah, and this is the president.
Speaker 2:Boys and girls, yeah there's my ice cream dude, I'm telling you, texas, it's time it's past time we gotta go I yeah, I agree, I agree, I agree.
Speaker 1:The problem is again, there's like been a billion californians that have moved here in the last year.
Speaker 2:That's fine. Well, we got to build some walls or something dude around Austin. All I can say is and I was thinking about this how about this?
Speaker 1:Instead of one man, one vote, mm-hmm let's do votes by acres there's a problem with that. I knew you were gonna go there, and I'll tell you why, because the two biggest voters in the state of Texas would be BlackRock and Bill Gates no, no, corporations can't vote.
Speaker 2:I'm talking about individuals good luck with that one yeah, well, okay, you know, and you can even have it weighted for property value or something like that. You know so that someone who owns a thousand acres in west texas and someone who owns a million dollar house in austin, that there's some equality-esque there. But you know, if you rent you don't vote. If you have a very small lot in a city and you don't really, you know your city dwell, it basically disincentivizes city life. You have to have additional property outside of the city.
Speaker 1:I would disagree with that yeah.
Speaker 2:Something. But again the problem is that it has to be your homestead, have to have additional property outside of the city.
Speaker 1:That disagree with that, yeah something, but again, the problem is not it has to be your homestead. It only counts for your homestead, not any additional properties okay, okay, because that that's the issue, because I, like I know a lot of people, both conservatives and and not so conservatives, that own multiple homes.
Speaker 2:Yeah, yeah, yeah, I mean I own multiple properties, but it's not my home, right? So again, your homestead is the only one that matters. Yeah, it counts, so I think that we could come up with some stuff like that that could solve the problem.
Speaker 1:One vote per homestead.
Speaker 2:Sure, yes, fine with that.
Speaker 1:I think that'd be the proper way to go. And then slaves count for three-fifths. We don't have slaves, but if we did, let's just say no no, no. Well, maybe some people do.
Speaker 2:And if we're going to have slaves, we don't count them at all. I mean, if we're going to dehumanize someone, we might as well dehumanize them fully.
Speaker 1:Hold up here, sonny. You're telling me somebody that has to take care of a whole plantation doesn't get to have more of a say. Correct, well, that's just not right.
Speaker 2:Uh-huh, says the guy that was the whole parents accountable for you know what their 20-year-old kid does?
Speaker 1:Exactly. You're accountable for all your slaves, man, do you not get that, oh Jesus?
Speaker 2:We're so canceled. Sir, you realize we're going to hell. We are so canceled. Yeah, hey, did you hear? What did you think of that Trump joke I sent you.
Speaker 1:Remind me.
Speaker 2:So Trump goes to hell. He finally passes away and goes to hell and the devil says look, you're supposed to be here. You're supposed to be here, but I don't have room for you, so someone's got to go for you to come in. So I'm going to give you a chance to pick who you replace and whatever punishment they had, that's. That's the punishment you're going to have.
Speaker 2:Yeah, okay, so Trump goes okay fine First door he opens up and it's Barack Obama and Barack Obama's jumping off a diving board into a pool. Over and over and over again.
Speaker 1:Yeah.
Speaker 2:And Trump goes.
Speaker 1:You know I think Barry— there's a dick cook in the pool too.
Speaker 2:Yeah, yeah, I think Barry deserves to be here. I'm not going to let him go. And he goes to the next one and he opens the next door and it's George W Bush.
Speaker 1:George.
Speaker 2:W Bush is breaking rocks in the in the room over and over, and over again and Trump goes. You know, I've got a bad shoulder and I never liked the Bush's anyway, so now he can stay and they go to the third and final room and it's Bill Clinton tied to a bed and Monica comes in and Monica does what Monica did over and over and over again, and Trump goes. I guess I could get used to that. Sure, We'll let Billy Boy go and the devil goes. All right, Monica, you're free.
Speaker 1:That's so bad. That is such an anti-Semitic joke, I swear to God. How is it anti-Semitic? Well, because Monica's Jewish Okay, lewinsky Okay.
Speaker 2:You're clearly poking fun at the Jews. No, that's actually not the object of the humor. Uh-huh, yes, you know what? Get, get, uh, get to get mimi to help you. Uh, on the structure of a joke and you'll understand and that is a pretty good one.
Speaker 1:Uh, I think that if you would have just not said the line, let billy go, if you would have just said, yeah, I guess this would be the room or something like that, I think it would be a tighter, tighter joke. Okay I'm not a comedian, I know all right just so we're clear, and now so does everybody else yeah, uh-huh, uh-huh, uh-huh, uh, what else we got?
Speaker 2:uh, well, uh, last weekend I did get to. Uh, well, we talked about it last week, never mind, because we we recorded on monday yeah, that's right, man, the labor day event thing how was your labor?
Speaker 1:day. How was your day of uh not working, thanks to unions uh, I worked like I I was at home uh had lots of stuff to do around the house and then, you know, catch up on work stuff.
Speaker 2:So that's what happens when you're busy and have a bunch of employees and everything yeah, you gotta, you gotta catch up on things. I get it that's uh, it's an important thing to do um I'll be in dallas, did you? Buy any more guns no, I haven't yet I did. I did buy uh the uh a plate carrier, though.
Speaker 1:Oh yeah, you did, didn't you? I think I was online talking to you while you were buying it.
Speaker 2:Yeah, probably I kind of split the difference. I didn't go Haley because it's just by the time I did everything I wanted to do. It's ridiculously expensive and if I'm going to do that, then I'm going to get some lighter, nicer plates for that.
Speaker 1:So yeah, I didn't go Condor cheap. At that point you might as well get a Team Wendy helmet. Yeah, exactly.
Speaker 2:And I didn't go Condor cheap, which you can do for about $80 for the complete carrier kit. I went 5.11 and 5.11. Tactical because they have some nice stuff. And there's actually some pretty neat features on them. I've had no problems with 5.11 and 5.11 Tactical because they have some nice stuff and there's actually some pretty neat features on them.
Speaker 1:I've had no problems with 5.11. I've had a lot of their gear over the years. Yeah, yeah.
Speaker 2:So I got the 5.11 plate carrier to go with those plates, and my thought is, you know A, I'm not going to be wearing them.
Speaker 1:I'm wearing 5.11 shorts right now, in fact.
Speaker 2:I'm wearing 5.11 shorts right now too. Get out of here, jinx. Yeah, I'm wearing a 511 belt too, wow look at that. I like that infinite adjustability on the belt. That's what's nice. So going from carrying to not carrying, and you know not having holes. It's great, yep anyway, but uh, yeah, there's some nice features, it's good stuff. And uh, worst case scenario, with this cheaper level four armor that I got and everything else, this ends up as my stuff in my truck and who cares, you know, and it's there for an emergency, so yeah, yeah, now are you.
Speaker 1:Uh, you mentioned when you were picking up the, the plate itself, that you wanted to shoot it.
Speaker 2:You still want to shoot it I want to shoot at a plate, not the plates that I'm going to be trusting, oh, well, would you not want to test them? No, no, no, I believe the rating system. What I was saying, did I not?
Speaker 1:offer to shoot you in the chest yeah, yeah, yeah.
Speaker 2:What I was all. What I was saying is we can should get some of the cheap stuff off of like AliExpress or TuneIn and test that.
Speaker 1:I mean, I guess, if you want to trust those when I shoot you in the chest, that's fine.
Speaker 2:No, I'm talking about. Did you see the Florida guys that got arrested?
Speaker 1:Which Florida guys? There's a lot of Florida guys getting arrested every day.
Speaker 2:Yeah, yeah, florida man right, but no, these two guys got arrested for shooting at each other while wearing body armor.
Speaker 1:No, I missed that. That sounds very interesting.
Speaker 2:Yeah, they were literally two buddies out at the range testing shit out. I almost sent it to you as a joke, but here we go now.
Speaker 1:That is pretty funny. There was a guy that I I remember seeing. It was one that was probably 10, 15 years ago, but it was one of the uh companies that started making oh I think it was the dragon scale armor so they were doing a layered plate yeah, individual ceramic plates yeah they micro ceramics, yeah yeah, and they looked really cool and they were really fucking expensive.
Speaker 1:But in their test they had a video of the founder of the company getting shot with this plate on his chest, getting shot by one of the employees, and I mean that's pretty ballsy. Like you've got to believe in your product to do something like that.
Speaker 2:Well, there was a CEO at some convention here recently that they had this new stab proof undershirt for executives. And he's up on the stage talking about it and one of his guys comes up and literally comes up with a knife and starts going at him to prove it out, which, you know, the blunt force, trauma is going to hurt. I know, right, this is not like magical, I don't feel it, right? So you know.
Speaker 1:The knife doesn't disappear just because you're wearing one of those.
Speaker 2:Well, and the force for which you were hit doesn't disappear magically.
Speaker 1:No, no.
Speaker 2:And that's what a lot of people don't understand about armor is you know, even if you're hit square in the armor, the odds of you requiring severe, significant medical treatment after?
Speaker 1:that is pretty universal. You're not just getting up and walking away from it no, it's gonna hurt and there's gonna be a big bruise, at the very least yeah, you, you may have broken which, by the way, have you ever broken? A rib yes okay, I have as well, I had the snake, give me a hug once and uh, yeah, it really sucks because your ribs don't take all that much effort to break and holy shit do they hurt?
Speaker 2:because every time you breathe you're moving your ribs, all right, and fuck whoever makes you laugh when you have a broken rib.
Speaker 1:Yes, oh god I know exactly what you're I I I have a memory of that feeling.
Speaker 2:Just as you said it, that was very unpleasant yeah, I mean, as soon as someone makes you laugh and you can't help it and you're just like and of course the sadistic ones are encouraged even more to try and make you laugh.
Speaker 1:Absolutely. Now, they do heal. Generally, the ribs are one of those things that does heal because they are fairly easy to break.
Speaker 2:But yeah, it is as long as they're not displaced. If you have a displaced broken rib, I mean the odds of a lung puncture go through the roof I guess I've never had one of them.
Speaker 1:Yeah, um, but yeah, it was, uh. But I also, like when I mentioned this last, I think I've had it happen a couple of times, but this last time I was moving the snake and I was holding it and then I think I I tripped or something. I don't know what happened, but I I let go of the snake right, so I let go of his head, uh, so that he started falling down, but his rest of him, his tail, was wrapped around me so he gripped harder to prevent himself from falling. Well, it's an 18 foot snake, so he has a bit of grip, strength and uh, and all I felt was like you know, like a tight squeeze. And then, as soon as he let go with the tail, is when I felt like oh, what the fuck? Because that's where I realized he just broke a rib. Yeah, yeah.
Speaker 2:It happens.
Speaker 1:Look it's a pet.
Speaker 2:How big is that snake's droppings?
Speaker 1:Bigger than human size.
Speaker 2:And it just crawls around your house, so you got to go behind it and clean that up.
Speaker 1:Oh, no, no, no, no. It poops once per meal and it eats once every two weeks to once a month in the winter, when it's sleeping.
Speaker 2:All right, so do you lock it in a room until it goes?
Speaker 1:Yes or either uh, either the tile floor.
Speaker 2:Yeah, so he generally will eat. Oh it's, it's better than that.
Speaker 1:He'll generally it's like uh, it's like bird poop in a way, well like it's one excrement, is my point yeah, he generally will poop after taking a warm bath in the bathtub, so it makes cleanup a lot easier, okay, and uh, if he doesn't, and you know, sometimes he'll poop in his cage, which he can go in and out of, but that's where his heat is, like the heat lamp and stuff on top of his cage.
Speaker 1:So um, but he's pooped on the carpet probably three times in over a decade, so not very often. But yeah, the large snake shits are large that would piss me off but compared to a dog that shits multiple times a day, dude, this is so easy.
Speaker 2:Yeah, but the dog's trainable to go actually out into the you know yard.
Speaker 1:Your odds of stepping in dog poop are so much higher than stepping into snake poop. The snake, literally, will poop. You know why 20 times a year. You know why.
Speaker 2:Why? Because we used to hunt and kill snakes.
Speaker 1:We still do yeah.
Speaker 2:We should.
Speaker 1:We should. I mean some people like snake meat. That's not everybody's cup of tea.
Speaker 2:I have eaten snake, so have I I think it tastes like chicken mostly. It's okay.
Speaker 1:I mean, look push comes to shove, I would have some extra food supply at the house.
Speaker 2:Yeah, yeah.
Speaker 1:Well, at least you're willing to do that a lot of people are just not, and that's the problem well, I mean it's a pet, but doesn't mean you never eat it. If you had to yeah, I guess some people wouldn't eat their dogs. I'd'd eat a dog too. They just don't taste very good. Have you tried dog? You can go to China and eat a dog all day long if you want, but they just don't taste that good it's not an animal you'd want to breed for food.
Speaker 2:No, and it's just or cat.
Speaker 1:Oh, you cannot eat cats. You cannot eat cats, dude, they're horrible tasting.
Speaker 2:Yeah, well, I eat cats.
Speaker 1:You cannot eat cats dude, they're the horrible tasting, yeah, well I mean it's I don't know I've had big cat, have you what kind mountain lion, puma, mountain lion, um mountain lion's not an animal, it's a category that covers the world so what, uh, and?
Speaker 2:you didn't think it tasted bad. It tastes horrible. I've eaten coug tastes horrible.
Speaker 1:I've eaten cougar, I know you've eaten cougar. Hardy, hardy, hardy hardy, hardy I try to avoid cougar at all costs.
Speaker 2:I just don't like the flavor. Yes, I know, yeah, I'm looking for more of the little you know. Oh, anything else?
Speaker 1:for you to cover my friend, I don't know. I think we're good. I think we covered most of the week in in politics and whatnot and other things. Um, trying to think if there's. Let me give one last scroll to our signal messages because it can't I will say something I did use co-pilot this last week oh, you did okay, in a very limited fashion.
Speaker 2:Um so company has, you know, unlimited co-pilot licenses and we can get you know, if you want it, you can get chat GPT or whatever. But I was doing some research and putting together something and I needed some references and I asked it for references for a specific thing and it gave me a summary and then I was able. What I liked about it is I was able to go it actually tags like with, you know, postscript and everything else, the references. So I would click, go, read through, find where it found what it found, that it was summarizing, and put my own spin on it and it was useful in that manner and I like that versus the little bit I've played with chat GPT because it actually links to the references that it uses, versus chat GPT making shit up. But you know, boy, I can tell when someone tries to use it to write certain things and that is not the use for this sort of tool, like if you're using it to write if you're a bad writer, it's not a bad use.
Speaker 1:Oh Jesus, dude, You've got to be a really bad writer for that yeah. Yeah, I don't know, I've never used the paid version, but I will occasionally use the free one, and here's what's crazy.
Speaker 2:Here's what's actually pretty good at you, probably even though you don't do it these days, you probably remember playing video games. Sometimes you're like can't figure something out, so you're like I want to find like a video or some kind of tutorial that walks me through that you remember the books they used to sell for video games oh yeah, I.
Speaker 1:Companion books, yeah, I remember those. I never bought any, but I remember seeing those. Yeah, yeah, but, um, but it's actually pretty good at just telling you the goddamn answer immediately without having to do searching.
Speaker 2:So I do like, uh, having it sitting there in my browser it's a it if you're good at googling, if you're good at searching, if you have that skill. It's not that helpful, but to someone who doesn't know how, to use a search engine properly it's very helpful, and that's what it is. It is a user interface for a search engine, and that's all it is. And we need to quit calling it AI. It is just a user interface, an advanced user interface.
Speaker 1:It is. It's a better GUI for searching. Yes, and if you leave it at that, we're good. It's a better GUI for searching.
Speaker 2:Yes, and if you leave it at that, we're good. It's where people go to another place with it. That it's not useful.
Speaker 1:So on the last episode of, Unrelenting Darren and I were, which I haven't finished yet. Okay, we were comparing Chad GPT versus Grok's answers to some stuff.
Speaker 2:I was listening to that Okay, oh, in 1984. Yeah, yeah, yeah.
Speaker 1:And they actually got pretty damn close in their answers. But the interesting thing I found is Darren does the same thing that I do, which I think most people don't, which is he doesn't use english sentences when he's asking questions in gpt. He does more search term programming yeah and shorthand yeah, yeah, which I also do, followed by a question exactly where most people don't do that, they ask english language questions, and so that I thought that was kind of neat because I'd never. I mean, really, I assumed I was the only one doing that.
Speaker 2:Well let me tell you how I was already putting together, validate what I was saying in industrial environments such as da-da-da-da-da, and found the research I needed, read through the papers myself and then did it, and I could have used Google Scholar, but this was a better, more refined search in a way, but it was predicated by putting the declaration of what I meant by industrial environments and bounding it in that way. If I had just said what is zta and ics, I wouldn't have gotten the results. I got is my point.
Speaker 1:That's why I always have to put in 22 year old into the image creation you gotta, you gotta, bound those things, man, otherwise the it doesn't know what you're looking for well it gene. I don't think anybody knows what you're looking for no, I'm pretty sure it knows exactly what I'm looking for at this point uh, and on that note, uh. Yeah, that sounds good. We'll wrap it up. We'll see you again next week, man.
Speaker 2:All right.
