Speaker 1: 0:25

How are you, Ben? How are you?

Speaker 2: 0:26

today I'm doing well. Gene Yourself, All right.

Speaker 1: 0:33

So you know, interesting week, as always. It seems to be the pattern this year.

Speaker 2: 0:41

Yeah, to say the least.

Speaker 1: 0:43

Yeah, yeah.

Speaker 2: 0:47

Where do we want to start, though?

Speaker 1: 0:49

That's what I was thinking as well. I know I sent you a link to a video talking about the democrat introduced amendment to the next reconciliation bill yeah that's dead, it's doa well, I don't know. I think, even if it's DOA, it just highlights the betrayal that we had by Republicans.

Speaker 2: 1:17

Yeah, so we should probably tell everybody what we're talking about here.

Speaker 1: 1:20

Yeah, I think most people know, but let's go ahead. So the amendment that Gene is referring to is raising the NFA tax stamp back up and to adjust it for inflation and so on to $4,000 some odd dollars, yeah from zero that I get dropped to, instead of just simply removing that whole section because the Republicans in the Senate have no balls.

Speaker 2: 1:50

Well, Republicans have no balls.

Speaker 1: 1:52

Well, yeah, fair enough. Republicans in general have no balls. And then this unfortunately goes back to the problem that. I had to say it, but it's still there. The problem with the Republican Party is that they get comfortable very quickly and start ignoring the people that get them there, and this has been going on my entire life. Every time somebody runs for the first time as a Republican and I don't know, maybe this happens with Democrats. I think they tend to stick to theirs a lot more but every time somebody runs for the first time, it's all about representing the voter and reform and all the phrases that get you elected. And then, when they run the second time, you hear the exact same language.

Speaker 2: 2:43

Hey, I lost you there for a second Gene. Oh OK, zoom froze up for a second, so sorry about that. Oh, you want to reboot? I know I've rebooted actually before you got on, so all right. Well, you know anyway, any republicans don't have any balls yeah, they don't have any balls.

Speaker 1: 3:04

So what I started saying is the first time a republican run like a brand new candidate never been in politics, or at least not at this level before. When they run, it's all about representing the voters, it's all about reform, it's all about no nonsense. They kind of, you know, simplifying Washington and it's all the stuff you want to hear. And then they they actually try and introduce some bills that sound good in their first term. Then their second term is usually when they have the same rhetoric, but they do none of that once they're in office. Instead, they just do the usual backroom deals with their buddies, and then, every time they're re-elected, it gets worse and worse, and the problem is there's not a whole lot of new fresh blood, certainly not in the Senate. There's a little bit in Congress, but not that much anymore, and there isn't any in the Senate. And so I think the net result of that is you have people that know they're going to get reelected no matter what, going in and caring more about their other friends in congress certainly in the senate than they do about the people that elected them, and the only way to fix that is to get rid of them, and there's two ways to get rid of them.

Speaker 1: 4:32

The preferable way is to do it during primaries and elect somebody else in their place. Rarely does that ever happen. I know it's often attempted, but rarely does it actually happen. Does it actually happen? And the second way, which is a lot more brutal, is to not get them elected in the district, which means you're going to be stuck with a Democrat for that term. But I think we're at a place now where I would rather be stuck with a Democrat for a term and change the senator, so this year, probably voting democrat for senate well, you shouldn't do that, especially since you know we actually have a primary going on, that if you know our former attorney or our attorney general gets in, yeah, yeah.

Speaker 1: 5:26

If it's the first first term guy like him, yeah I I'm voting for him. But if he doesn't manage to do that, if we still have what's his, face Cornyn. Cornyn. I'm voting against Cornyn.

Speaker 2: 5:37

Well, I simply won't vote for Cornyn. I don't know that I'll vote for his Democratic challenger, but I won't vote for Cornyn. I think a pretty decent distinction, well, or.

Speaker 1: 5:48

Cornyn. I think a pretty decent distinction. Well, yes and no, I mean it's a half measure because he might still win, so you get to feel good that you didn't vote for him, but you still have the net result of having Cornyn in there.

Speaker 2: 5:59

Hmm, yeah, but I'd rather Cornyn than shit. What's that guy that keeps running against Cruz the gay guy? Yeah, beto, beto, yeah, I'd rather corn on that guy?

Speaker 1: 6:14

Yeah, obviously. But again, this is how we get to where we are right now. This is how we get to the state of the Republican Party we have is because the Democrats run insane wacko socialists. Yes, which means the Republicans can run Democrats insane wacko socialists yes, which means the Republicans can run Democrats. Literally. These people are voting the way Democrats voted in the 80s.

Speaker 2: 6:38

Or 90s. Yeah, I would say that Trump is even a 90s Democrat, you know.

Speaker 1: 6:44

Oh, trump is, but I mean he literally was. He was with Bill Clinton and Hillary in a ton of photos back then and supported them financially. So yes, very much.

Speaker 2: 6:55

But I'm saying from a policy standpoint.

Speaker 1: 6:58

Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. Well, clinton also, to be fair, was probably a more conservative Democrat by today's standards, like he would not be the guy that would be put up to run by the party today.

Speaker 2: 7:10

No, there's no way. I mean when. When Al Gore and Bill Clinton ran for their first term, they literally had campaign advertisement with the Confederate flag behind them, calling them Dixie crats.

Speaker 1: 7:26

Yep yeah, al Gore made a big deal back then out of being from tennessee and well, and bill clinton was governor of arkansas yep, yeah, it was definitely a southern ticket, but but it was. It was a very southern ticket because you also had Ross Perot running. Yes, so he had three. Well, two of the three candidates were from the south.

Speaker 2: 8:01

I mean arguably Bush was well.

Speaker 1: 8:03

Yeah, because he's a carpetbagger yeah. But he went back to Kenny Bunkport. Yeah, so I think. When did he come down to Texas? I don't even know what years he was down here, oh man Bush.

Speaker 2: 8:19

Sr. We're talking about people. I would have to look it up, but I would say at least the 70s, 80s, yeah. Yeah, because W grew up in Texasxas, not really no, I thought he did no, he, he really did his. You know oil field stuff in texas and all that he didn't go to texas.

Speaker 1: 8:40

I thought he went to college in texas maybe.

Speaker 2: 8:45

No, he didn't, he was. No, he went to yale. Oh, that's right, he did no, you're right.

Speaker 1: 8:50

What are you thinking? Maybe high school? I was thinking high school I. I just I'm thinking back to that movie I watched his life. Should we ask? The ai ai should know right, yeah sure what years was george.

Speaker 2: 9:06

George hw bush moved to texas in 1948 oh holy shit and worked in the oil industry.

Speaker 1: 9:12

Okay, well, so he would. He was here most of his life then.

Speaker 2: 9:16

Yeah, and w spent much of his life in texas yeah, and you people forget he was governor for two terms, which this state has.

Speaker 1: 9:31

Some effed up politics sometimes, man state has had plenty of effed up politics. I remember one that I can't remember her name, but it had a democrat chick as its governor and richardson and richards okay, and richards, yeah k, bailey hutchinson was a senator that ran for governor against Perry.

Speaker 2: 9:48

Sorry.

Speaker 1: 9:49

Yes.

Speaker 2: 9:49

Ann Richards in the 90s. You're right.

Speaker 1: 9:51

Yep, so yeah, that never made any sense. There's some weird stuff about Texas like that, like the gun laws here made no sense. When I first moved to Texas. I'm like how am I moving from Minnesota to Texas? And the gun laws are worse.

Speaker 2: 10:05

Well, there was a period in Texas during the 70s where you could not legitimately carry a gun under any circumstances. Jesus. Yep my grandfather had some laundromats back then and he would go, you know, pick up the coins and everything at night. You know when everything was shut down? Yeah, at night. You know when everything was shut down? Yeah, and it was always. He just had an understanding with local law enforcement that he would be carrying a gun because of the potential of robbery right.

Speaker 1: 10:41

Yeah, why don't you just pick those up in the morning?

Speaker 2: 11:09

I. He just did it after shutdown. I don't know. You'd have to ask him.

Speaker 1: 11:14

Yeah well, it is a good reminder that Texas can swing the other way. If Americans don't watch, well, texans don't watch what they're doing.

Speaker 2: 11:31

Well, and let's be honest, We've got to get out of this mindset of Democrat versus Republican what we really need to be doing is focusing on making sure that we are electing good candidates Period.

Speaker 1: 11:47

Yeah, but that's hard to do when in the primary there are no good candidates. I mean, I'm not saying that's true all the time, but plenty of times the primaries don't have good candidates.

Speaker 2: 11:58

Well, maybe you ought to run for office, Gene.

Speaker 1: 12:03

I've done that already. It's your turn.

Speaker 2: 12:07

Don't you put that juju on me. Maybe that's what you need, oh God, no, I do not. Don't you want to be there?

Speaker 1: 12:17

come on, ah, the the amount of no, no, I don't I will say that when I ran for office, I thoroughly enjoyed it, even though it resulted in so loss, but the process itself was. It was. You know how some people go to what are they called Like? Where you you give speeches Toastmasters. You know those people go to Toastmasters to learn how to talk in front of people. You know people go to Toastmasters to learn how to talk in front of people. There's nothing like walking your district and knocking on 10,000 doors and some people telling you to get the hell off their yard before they shoot you To really get past any kind of hesitation of talking to strangers. It it's. It was very good training. I I wore out a pair of shoes, cause I did it all in the suit and tie, so you know I'm walking basically like 16 blocks every day before the elections, knocking on doors, talking to people, and I, by the time I was done, my shoes had to be resold.

Speaker 2: 13:38

Yeah, and I've flirted with politics in the past. They tried to. The local Republican Party tried to get me to run for city council a long long time ago and it's just not something I'm. I don't want the scandal.

Speaker 1: 13:55

Mm-hmm.

Speaker 2: 13:57

You know, you and I have talked plenty and this podcast would come out right and I would be nuked from orbit.

Speaker 1: 14:06

So what you'd sing. He said Orientals, oh my.

Speaker 2: 14:10

God, I still think that's one of our funnier interactions. They don't like to be called that.

Speaker 1: 14:14

I don't give a fuck. Yeah, that is funny, I think it's. I guess the term is supposed to apply to things and not people, but it's all bullshit. Made up stuff. My entire childhood, orientals was the proper term for people from asia yeah, I look, here's the thing.

Speaker 2: 14:38

I'm not against asians in any way, shape or form. I am not. I'm just not. How do I put this? How do I put this? Yeah, I, I am go ahead well, I I think you're one of the least racist and systematic people I know thanks, gene, you're welcome oh yeah, you know, I just not, I, I, I don't care about someone's race or their color of their skin or anything about them other than are you a capable human being and can produce? Yeah, like I judge people off the content of the character, right?

Speaker 1: 15:32

yeah, yeah and I I think that's a big distinction is that there is there are genuine people, or that genuine people there are genuinely people that will hate somebody for a characteristic that person was born with. Like I've I've met people like that.

Speaker 2: 16:00

But I don't understand that. If it's an immutable characteristic, then why would you judge anyone? I know it's low IQ.

Speaker 1: 16:07

Remember, this is something that that I just posted the other day on X. So remember, half the population in the US has an IQ below 100. Yes, well, I mean that tells you something, right? Okay?

Speaker 2: 16:25

So when you look at, things like that's assuming a perfect bell curve, which the iq distribution is not.

Speaker 1: 16:33

So it's not quite half that have iq under 100 well, yeah, it's, it's like a tiny fraction of percent less fine 49 of the people have an iq below 100. But if you look I'm looking it up I mean it's kind of self-evident.

Speaker 2: 16:52

But okay, no, no, it's not because you have a no, because the high IQs skew that to the right Mm-hmm, and, and there's also a lot of clustering around average by definition.

Speaker 1: 17:11

100 is the average. Yes, no shit. Thank you, sherlock. I understand. I wasn't sure you were aware of that, the way you're talking.

Speaker 2: 17:21

Right, but the standard deviation right. So the IQ distribution in the United States has a standard deviation the same deviation as 15.

Speaker 1: 17:33

Correct, I know that Everybody knows that, so that doesn't mean that there are more than 50% of the people with an IQ of 100.

Speaker 2: 17:46

Yeah, so the US population there's approximately 6.6 million people with over a 130 IQ, 46 million people with over a 115 IQ. 100 to 115 is 113-ish million. 85 to 100 is 113 million. So yeah, it's not quite symmetrical is my point.

Speaker 1: 18:16

Did I say anything about symmetrical. I just said half the people have it under 100. Okay, so my point is, when you look at things like somebody saying I can't believe almost half the country voted for Kamala Harris, it becomes easier to understand how that happens when you remember that half the people have an IQ below 100. Okay, my only point, because I think most people, regardless of where they fall on the IQ chart, frankly tend to think that they're the average and that everybody else is similar to them, or at least close enough yeah, and sadly that is most discernibly not true no, it's not.

Speaker 1: 19:01

And, frankly, people that differentiate based on iq, and especially those that have a higher iq, that differentiate based on iq you know they're looked down upon as well. You shouldn't be discriminating like that. You know you're such an asshole for talking about how you have a high IQ and all these people are idiots because they don't. You know there's a very, very common negative kind of push against that.

Speaker 2: 19:32

Yeah, I mean. But here's the thing Everybody should read the Bell Curve, Yep, yep. That was a good book. That was a very controversial book, mm-hmm.

Speaker 1: 19:47

But I think that's one of the things that you have to keep in mind is that the cream doesn't always rise to the top. Sometimes it's just the loud person that rises to the top. Yes, and I'm going to tie it back to what the original reason we're talking about IQ was, which is with politics and primaries. Sometimes the people that you have available to vote for in primaries are the loudest ones not the smartest ones.

Speaker 2: 20:25

Okay, yes, so well it's.

Speaker 1: 20:31

This is. This is the problem. Again, going back to the very first topic that we started talking about. As I said, when you have politicians that take for granted they're going to be reelected and don't really give a shit about what their constituents want like those in the Senate, like John Cornyn, who had an office right across my office for a while these politicians, the only way they're going to get kicked out of office is if they're replaced by somebody who you may actually consider to be worse than them temporarily.

Speaker 2: 21:17

Yeah, but I think we're seeing a lot of movement in politics right now and I think between Tulsi and what's coming out there Ghislaine Maxwell actually getting interviewed by the DOJ for the first time.

Speaker 1: 21:32

Amazing that it just took this much shit for them to get around to interviewing her.

Speaker 2: 21:36

Yeah, but you know what dude? What if stuff actually does come out and we get to reset?

Speaker 1: 21:41

the third plus of Congress. Well, yeah, I mean that would be awesome, but that would also be vindication of those of us that have said it's being covered up.

Speaker 2: 21:50

Yeah, okay, okay. Vindication of those of us that have said it's being covered up yeah, okay, okay, but anyway, I so I I think we're seeing a lot of people really pushing the politicians on the epstein stuff, for example I think the gun law be talking about?

Speaker 2: 22:03

need to push any. Any politician that votes for this in committee, uh, needs to be hoisted on their own petard, like immediately, we're not playing around with this. Nope, screw you absolutely. Yeah, so there's that. Yep, I agree. So that's what I would like to see. So let so, let's talk about the Tulsi thing. Well, did we talk about Canada last time?

Speaker 1: 22:34

No, oh no, we did yeah that, Alberta and Saskatchewan.

Speaker 2: 22:40

Saskatchewan want to leave and that's gaining a lot of momentum up there. Like, I've sent you a few videos on it and we'll keep it brief because we covered it a little bit, but go ahead.

Speaker 1: 22:51

Yeah, I've sent you a few videos on it and we'll keep it brief because we covered it a little bit, but go ahead. Yeah, no, I was just going to say that even the Western most province there, what the hell is it called? What's their West? One called British Columbia? Yeah, that one Other than in Vancouver? Yeah, other than Vancouver, british Columbia is also on that same bandwagon, yep. People do not like the leadership that Canada has right now in.

Speaker 2: 23:16

Western Canada, but the population of British Columbia is Vancouver, right.

Speaker 1: 23:22

It's most of it, yeah. Yeah, it's less likely that they would be able to escape. However, what I'll say— the bigger issue is that if they could get a majority in British Columbia, I mean, it's a solid chunk of land, it's not a weird shape.

Speaker 2: 23:38

Yeah Well, here's the thing Alberta and Saskatchewan. Whoever leaves first, Canada's done, Canada will break up. Yeah, yeah, Quebec what you think. Quebec's going to stick around. I think Quebec takes money from the rest of Canada, so I think they're going to stick around. I think Quebec takes money from the rest of Canada, so I think they're going to stick around as long as they can.

Speaker 1: 23:58

Yeah, but they've been voting to leave.

Speaker 2: 24:00

Yes, I understand the pleas of the Quebecois Fully understand.

Speaker 1: 24:08

I think that would be good.

Speaker 2: 24:10

I think it'd be great, and then we can pick and choose what we want. Yeah, yeah.

Speaker 1: 24:15

And by population. I think all of these provinces are actually like small states. Oh yeah, they're very small, so there's not even a reason to subdivide them. You know, like, literally, manitoba could just be a state. Yeah, I think we'd need to break him up a little bit but then you're going to end up with a situation that you don't want, which is increasing the number of politicians in washington well, I'm okay with it if we're increasing the representation.

Speaker 2: 24:44

Like I, I'm all for increasing the number of politicians, actually dramatically. One of the things I think we did wrong was capping congress at its current number. Yeah, so, you know, adding additional congressmen, like and this would be a great reason to go in and change that back is say, look we, we've added draft vast new territory.

Speaker 1: 25:04

We you want to grow the senate to 100 people, or sorry, it's at 100.

Speaker 2: 25:09

You want to grow the senate to 200 well if we add another 50 states, but anyway, and I think it would be great if we like. This is all a pipe dream, but if we could it would be great how many?

Speaker 1: 25:22

okay, how many states is greenland?

Speaker 2: 25:26

greenland because of the population and where it's centered. It's one, one state.

Speaker 1: 25:30

Yeah, it'd be, a huge state, but yeah, and it's not anywhere near as big as people think it is, because of its placement on the map. If you look at the globe in that a square map, you can see that greenland's actually not that big isn't that something?

Speaker 2: 25:45

how distorted like africa is way smaller on a map than it actually is.

Speaker 1: 25:53

Yeah, yeah yeah, the and russia looks way bigger because it's stretched out. On the north there's a lot of well, and alaska does too. I mean, alaska is not as big as most people think it is alaska is pretty damn big dude.

Speaker 1: 26:07

It's twice the size of texas it is pretty big, but it but if you look at a square map, it looks like it's literally half the country, half the US, and it's not half the US, and then I think Australia also looks a little bigger than it actually is. If you look at the globe, australia is not as big as it looks on a square map.

Speaker 2: 26:29

Well, anyway, I think the process would be them becoming territories first, and then, us working into that.

Speaker 1: 26:37

Yeah, and then they can decide how to subdivide and then apply for statehood. Yes, exactly, so you could end up with potentially a state out of Manitoba or out of yeah, I'm blanking out Columbia. Yeah, but you could end up well, no, no, I was thinking of like uh, where's Edmonton? In the like, you get up with a Saskatchewan that is actually the size of like a small state and then a territory of Saskatchewan up North.

Speaker 2: 27:11

Yes, yeah, and I think that would make sense, you know and leave, because territories are, you know they're governed differently and they don't necessarily have representation the same way, but they also don't pay taxes and they have tax benefits. Yes, so like if you took the major population centers that are close to the border.

Speaker 1: 27:31

90% of Canadians live within 50 miles of the US border.

Speaker 2: 27:35

I think it's 70 or something, but yes, it's a large percentage of the population and you could grant them statehood relatively quickly and then leave all the rest of the lands. As you know, in fact, we could just rebrand everything as the Northern Territories. There you go, in fact, we could just rebrand everything as the Northern Territories, there you go, and I think you'd see a lot of investment in mining and everything else up there because of the tax benefits.

Speaker 1: 27:59

It was right between us, it's 66%. Okay, oh, 66% within 50 or 90% within 100 miles of the border. There you go. It's a lot, it's a vast majority of them, yeah.

Speaker 2: 28:15

Yeah.

Speaker 1: 28:18

Well, it makes sense. I mean, there's sort of like a remora around the US.

Speaker 2: 28:26

Yes indeed.

Speaker 1: 28:27

Sucking on and then grabbing those scraps. Yeah, dude, every time that lately I've dealt with companies that have Canadian employees or Canadian contractors, everybody always gets paid at the exact same rates in US dollars as Americans. Okay, even though their cost of living and their dollars there are way cheaper.

Speaker 2: 28:50

That's interesting because we don don't like we pay, so our pay scales are a based off of experience and it's a pay band. But our pay bands are also geographically coded. Okay, that's good. So for the company I work for, where you live matters.

Speaker 1: 29:10

So so we're taking you want to live in like New York City and then just travel everywhere.

Speaker 2: 29:17

I don't know why anyone would want to live in New York City.

Speaker 1: 29:18

You know what I mean, not live-live but well, yeah, but for pay purposes. You want to live someplace that pays well, but then not actually have to work there.

Speaker 2: 29:32

Yeah, maybe have a residence there. That's just a mailing address, sure.

Speaker 1: 29:40

Yeah, I mean there was. I have a client.

Speaker 2: 29:42

That would cost you an arm and a leg, so would it really be worth it?

Speaker 1: 29:45

Well, and that depends. Like I had clients years ago that were in California, so I was flying back and forth to California but I was still living in Texas, but I was in California a lot. Whatever, the legal maximum is before your tax, that's how long I was there.

Speaker 2: 30:04

As far as I'm concerned, okay, california if you're listening.

Speaker 1: 30:10

Yeah, I think it's 50% of the time. So if you're in california more than 50 of the time, they don't care where your driver's license is from. They consider you a california resident. Well, and they will back to you.

Speaker 1: 30:20

Yeah, and they will come after you for taxes dude, they come after people for taxes up to two years after they leave california. I don't mean like for taxes from when they lived in California. I mean they will still expect to collect California taxes for two years after you leave the state. Yeah, it's insane, and they're bankrupt. It's like they do all the mega tax shit that they do and they're also bankrupt, okay, and both both mentally and financially. So crazy shit. But it is a beautiful country. I mean it's like if you get rid of the californians, the land is awesome out there oh, indeed, california is.

Speaker 1: 31:14

The land is beautiful, I agree and when you come down, like if you're driving, you know, out of arizona and towards the coast in san diego or something, you, you come out of the mountains, you get in the valley and it's just kind of muggy and hot and good climate for growing stuff. And then as you get within about 40, 50 miles of the coast, the weather just gets fucking perfect. The clouds all disappear and it just it the like. It just goes from 90 down to 72 degrees. It's just fucking perfect.

Speaker 2: 31:51

So back to you know real topics.

Speaker 1: 31:55

Yeah Well, I'm just saying, if we get rid of the Californians, you know, or make California Republican again.

Speaker 2: 32:00

Yeah, so Sig is suing a police Academy.

Speaker 1: 32:04

Yeah, that which is insane.

Speaker 2: 32:07

Yes and no. Like they, they have a lot of business reasons to do this. Did you watch the video I sent you of the guy who I did? They were? They were fractionally engaging the trigger and then moving the slide, yeah, yeah. So I think literally it could be the trigger return spring getting worn or not being quite strong enough because they were showing a millimeter of engagement of the sear, which is a lot. I mean, the total movement of the sear is probably only two. So you're talking basically half engaged sear and then wiggling the slide, putting pressure on the slide, causing that sear to lose hold and go off, causing that sear to lose hold and go off. So his explanation of the engineering is contrary to what I've seen on the other side from Sig. But it's interesting and I will admit there's a lot of play in the slide on the P320. Like when I go to pull the trigger.

Speaker 2: 33:04

The slide moves and it's something that's always I I found weird, so I think I don't know if they just need to type.

Speaker 1: 33:10

Does that mean that your red dot moves too A little bit, yeah, ooh that's annoying, yeah, yeah.

Speaker 2: 33:17

But anyway, I think part of the reason why they built to that spec was to, you know, for some of the sand and dirt stuff you know same reason why an ak is a sloppier spec than an ar. So it will be interesting to see if there's not a way just to with the frame of the gun, which is not a serialized part, but to change the tolerances there so that it's.

Speaker 1: 33:42

you can't do that yeah, I think this is a horrible idea for this lawsuit because the strides on the fact what's going to end up happening is a lot more places are going to start banning that gun and possibly sit all together. They already have.

Speaker 1: 34:00

They're several police departments gonna be a lot more because they, if you, if you sue you, had better be not only on the winning side but on this clearly obviously winning side, like it should be obvious to anyone that these guys are doing something bad, and wanting the safety of your cadets is not a bad thing. Yeah, wow. So I think they're going to get fucked. I think there's a chance they lose the US government contract, because here's what could happen Whatever state this academy is in, you know they're going to be talking to their congresspeople about this and the fact that they're getting sued by a manufacturer that has a safety issue and they're trying to do something to save lives and the manufacturer's suing them. That's a great thing for Congress to literally bring up and change, make that contract illegal. Just say US government cannot do business with SIG Done, end of story.

Speaker 2: 35:04

Yeah, but who are they going to give the contract to?

Speaker 1: 35:09

Well, there's plenty of companies that bid last time.

Speaker 2: 35:12

Yeah, and Glock wouldn't put a safety on there. You don't need a safety.

Speaker 1: 35:16

Glocks are safe enough. In the 40 years that they've been around, Glocks were going to be $100 million more expensive. Yeah, but they're made in America. They're the SIGs, are they? Yes, the shitty American craftsmanship. See, I knew it. If they were coming from Switzerland, they wouldn't be doing this shit, would they?

Speaker 2: 35:42

Mm-hmm.

Speaker 1: 35:43

Yeah, either way, I think you just don't sue in a situation like that. There's a lawsuit that I've been following by a lock manufacturer against a youtube channel of a guy that picks locks and for people that are into that topic, I'm sure you've you've been paying attention as well the the channel is called mcnally official and he is a great lock picker. I mean, he has got a fantastic channel. He's also really good at throwing knives and shit too. But there was a one of the premiumly priced I don't want to call it a premium lock, but I'll call it a premium price lock, which means you know locks that are over a hundred dollars that there was a a manufacturer and I'm looking up the manufacturer because I can't remember him off the top of my head but they sued him for essentially picking their locks and they're saying, oh, he's using pre-lockpick locks or he's changing them around.

Speaker 2: 37:00

Yeah, he's changing the bidding. Yeah, yeah.

Speaker 1: 37:03

They're basically claiming that the locks are not actually easily pickable the way that they are and the reality is that he wasn't doing anything special and as a result of that lawsuit, all kinds of bad shit came out about the lock company he he created. Basically, from that point on, he just started creating videos that just pick their locks, which obviously makes sense. The I'm still trying to find a stupid company that does that, but they're they, I mean, completely backfired on them. It. It brought them into the spotlight to demonstrate that their locks aren't particularly good, especially for hundred dollar locks.

Speaker 1: 38:01

He had a video where he received, where he go, like he's outdoors he's picking up an amazon delivery from the amazon delivery box and it's like a one cut video with no interruptions. But he takes the box, you know, opens the box, takes out the lock from the box, takes the lock out of its its packaging, takes and drinks a can of, you know, red Red Bull or something whatever. It is a white claw and then cuts out a shim out of that white claw, sticks it in the lock and pulls open the lock and the lock opens and this is a padlock.

Speaker 2: 38:42

Yeah, yeah, it's like a $100 padlock, but shimming a padlock is nothing new, I mean that's no, but it's a $100 padlock that's supposed to not be shimmable.

Speaker 1: 38:51

That's the point. They're selling these things as being not your typical $12 lock from Home Depot. They're selling these things as supposed to be the high security locks. That whole thing happened, happened and after about three weeks oh and they also try to put to they ask the judge for a uh, for an order to, or a uh, temporary restraining order to prevent him from making more videos about this. Successful no, god, no, I was like no, guys, that's first amendment. Shit. You can't stop somebody from speaking about your locks or making videos about your locks. And after about three weeks, they ended up canceling the lawsuit. They, you know they sued him, so they just basically said, yeah, we're gonna, we're gonna pull back out. They did that. They got hit with a lawsuit from another lock manufacturer. Because of the deposition that came out in the first lawsuit Turns out that their Made in America locks are actually mostly made in China.

Speaker 1: 40:00

They're maybe arguably assembled in America, but they're definitely not made in America. And so this other law company is now suing them, suing the first law company for deceptive trade practices and advertising and contributing to the lack of sales of the other law company by, you know, whatever the laws are that exist in the books about how you can't be lying in advertising. So now they've, essentially, by going after a guy who has a youtube channel that picked their locks, they got him to make a shit ton more videos showing how bad their locks are, and, as part of the deposition that they had, they had to admit. You know, I mean, you're asked under oath. You know where are the parts coming for your locks, how are they sourced? Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. And you know, because they're trying to prove that their locks are made really well and it turns out well, no, actually they're just buying these from China and they're assembling them, and then they get sued with this. The company's probably going to go out of business as a result. I think it's hilarious karma.

Speaker 2: 41:12

Yeah, well, you know, talk around and find out, yeah exactly. So we lost a couple of people. What do you mean? Well, ozzy Osbourne died, oh, okay. And then Hulk Hogan.

Speaker 1: 41:26

Thank God, I thought you meant for donations. Okay, you're just talking about people died, okay.

Speaker 2: 41:30

Yeah, I mean Ozzy was, you know, screwed up kind of guy in a lot of ways, but at the same time Crazy Train and a lot of his music is good and Sorry, I just finally found it.

Speaker 1: 41:46

Proven Industries is. And so you just, I just finally found it's. Proven industries is the company name that has the shittiest locks ever made, according to youtube. Okay, um, yeah, so yeah, aussie. Last time I saw aussie in concert was 95. It's been a damn long time. I still have all my hair back then now that I a hard time believing.

Speaker 2: 42:06

Uh-huh yeah but Ozzy and Hulk.

Speaker 1: 42:13

Yeah, yeah. And the last time I saw Hulk in a ring was probably in the early 90s as well.

Speaker 2: 42:22

I was never a wrestling fan, yeah.

Speaker 1: 42:25

Dude, I was never an Aussie fan Doesn't mean I'm not going to go to the concert if somebody pays for the ticket.

Speaker 2: 42:31

Yeah, I don't know, I enjoyed some of his music, but you know, hey, I don't.

Speaker 1: 42:41

Okay, it's not my thing, by the way.

Speaker 2: 42:42

I don't know if you've looked at the download numbers, but our last episode did pretty good. Oh yeah, I did not check actually. Yeah.

Speaker 1: 42:49

Yeah.

Speaker 2: 42:50

So that's good on a upward trend, but yeah, well, I wonder what it. But it's interesting though. Hulk Hogan.

Speaker 1: 42:57

you know he's 70, which is still too young, but he had a heart attack so yeah, well, and that's, I think, more common to guys that like really worked out a lot like heart attack is the typical way they die. Yeah well, you're constantly putting stress on your system yeah, like it takes a lot, you know to, to move blood, to supply all those muscles with oxygen takes a lot of strength so well.

Speaker 2: 43:23

Actually, it takes more energy from your heart to do a pound of fat than a pound of muscle. There, Gene.

Speaker 1: 43:30

I'm sure it does, but it's still a pound. It is a Well. Yeah, fat guys die from heart attacks too. Dude, I'm not disputing this. I'm just saying that if you look at deaths of people that are heavy, they tend to be from heart attacks.

Speaker 2: 43:47

Yeah Well, that's why you got to be like me Not too fat, not too skinny, you know, right in that middle.

Speaker 1: 43:53

Yeah, I agree. I agree that's. That's the better deal, Because if you're too skinny, that's problematic too. Yeah.

Speaker 2: 44:05

Then you might get confused for for a a gazan yeah, did you watch the Gavin Newsom interview, which one he's been doing so many, the Sean Ryan four hour interview oh, I know, I only saw.

Speaker 1: 44:20

I saw a few clips from that. I did not watch the whole thing, though, but he's been doing him with a lot of people. Yeah, he gave him a gun, didn't he? Few clips from that. I did not watch the whole thing, though, but he's been doing them with a lot of people. Yeah, he gave him a gun, didn't he?

Speaker 2: 44:31

Yeah, yeah, he gave him a Sig P365. Oh, too bad he didn't give him a 320.

Speaker 1: 44:40

Wah, wah.

Speaker 2: 44:42

Oh, too soon, Gene, too soon. Oh okay, gavin's a gun guy? I'm sure he is. He shoots and you know he.

Speaker 1: 44:51

He just wants common sense gun reform yeah, common sense, gun reform is what everybody wants get rid of all of it.

Speaker 2: 44:57

That's common sense. So it's funny because this week we're we're doing the podcast on sunday and not thursday evening because I I had to travel. Dc yes, we know, I wasn't in DC, I was in Virginia, oh yeah, let's pretend, okay, yes.

Speaker 1: 45:11

That's much better.

Speaker 2: 45:12

I had a layover at Dulles, that's it Uh-huh, uh-huh. But anyway, I had a conversation with my boss who's you know, he's a pretty intellectual guy but he's very liberal, and we had a conversation on everything from gun control to immigration and demographies.

Speaker 2: 45:35

And it was a pretty interesting conversation. But you know, my opinion is no, no gun control. I ought to be able to own anything I want, up to a warship and probably a nuke. And you know, if you don't like that, then get a constitutional amendment. And he said, well, that'll never happen. And I said, well, that's not my problem. And then the other thing I said that I thought was kind of interesting that he hadn't thought of was and actually, yes, you, if, if, if all the liberal states wanted to, they could amend the constitution right now, this year, very easily. And he said, well, how would that happen? And what I pointed out to him is there are so many states, republican states, that have signed up for a con con that all it would take is a handful of Democratic states signing up for it and we would have a constitutional convention quicker than the.

Speaker 2: 46:33

Republicans could repeal their positions on us, which is insane, because the last time we had a constitutional convention, we had a bunch of traitors go in there and rewrite the Articles. Ofederation, oh I mean, actually just start fresh, create the constitution, you mean yes yeah, and you know it's sad, but I hate to say it, but george washington should have been honed for treason after that. Like no, this is not what you were supposed to go do.

Speaker 1: 47:03

Yeah, which is a hot take, I know, but you know well, and look I I brought this up about a year ago on the podcast said hey, so we should do a series of episodes where we go through just from first principles and decide what, what should be in the constitution, forget about the current one. If we were to do it right, what would we have in there? And then you said, well, that sounds cool, but it'll take a long time, so maybe let's talk about next time then.

Speaker 2: 47:32

We never got back to you yeah, I started an outline, but oh, you did yeah, okay it's, it's, that's, that's rough I don't know, dude, that's okay, I think it's.

Speaker 1: 47:42

It's not rough because there's it's wide open, there's no limits. You start off with anything and argue either for or against it. It's pretty. I think it's not rough because it's wide open, there's no limits. You can start off with anything and argue either for or against it. It's pretty. I think it's fun to do stuff like that. It's world building.

Speaker 2: 47:55

Yes, but who's going to do the research and think it through and take the time to do it? Research?

Speaker 1: 48:01

No, no, no, no, no, you use what's in your head. No, no, no, no, you use what's in your head. I'm not a big fan, as you I'm sure have noticed, of quoting people. It's like I don't care who said what. If I come to the same conclusion independently, that's just as good. It's a pet peeve. I hate it when people say oh in the famous words of George Washington blahdy, blahdy, blah.

Speaker 1: 48:32

Well, why don't you just say blahdy, blahdy, blah and not have to say in the words of George Washington because it's people wanting to back themselves up yeah, it's stolen valor. It's like saying look, it's not me saying this, it's this famous dude who's always right. So you got to listen to me.

Speaker 2: 48:50

Yeah, anyway, point is, the conversation with Gavin Newsom was very interesting he cussed a lot. I watched the or I listened to the vast majority of it on the plane.

Speaker 1: 49:03

Okay, all right yeah.

Speaker 2: 49:06

Well, I had oh my flight home, oh sure I had a layover and then another long flight.

Speaker 1: 49:12

Oh, you didn't do it direct.

Speaker 2: 49:14

There are no effing direct, so there is a to Norfolk from Houston there's a 6 pm flight that puts me in at 11. There is. And going back from Norfolk to Houston, there's a 6 pm flight that puts me in at 11. There is, and going back from Norfolk to Houston there's a 6 am flight. So no, on the way back I did not make the 6 am flight.

Speaker 1: 49:33

No, no, no, no, screw that shit For sure.

Speaker 2: 49:38

Anyway, you were listening to it and he cusses a lot and he is trying to come off as that.

Speaker 1: 49:45

Clinton-esque.

Speaker 2: 49:48

That's what I would say. Oh, very clinton-esque, very clinton-esque, yeah, absolutely he.

Speaker 1: 49:53

He is sorry, I'll let you get back to it, but just as a comment, I had a friend when I was in high school whose parents were very much npr listening, liberal types and, incidentally, this dude ended up turning gay in college. But the the interesting thing is that his dad was very much that type. Like, if you talk to him, you know, even though he's got all liberal ideas, he wants all the liberal stuff and, like you said, the common sense, blah, blah, blah, whatever, whether it's gun control or something else. But it was always kind of like with these little cut out, dole out things for things that he and his buddies like to do. I think that's very typical of of that crowd. It's like respect all women, but you know I'm still gonna fuck a whole bunch of them and grab them by the pussy. It's a. It's, I think, more of an idea of of politics as the modern royalty versus politics as a servant of the people. You think Gavin Newsom seems himself as a servant of the people. Hell, no.

Speaker 2: 51:05

Oh, absolutely not. No, the amount of arrogance that man has is astonishing.

Speaker 1: 51:10

Right, exactly. And remember this is a guy that shut down everything for COVID, bankrupting tons of places while having private dinner.

Speaker 2: 51:19

His defense of his COVID response is pretty astonishing, is it Okay? Yeah, well, let's hear it. Well, I don't have a clip.

Speaker 1: 51:31

Oh well, I mean, but you could restate what he said.

Speaker 2: 51:33

Well, we didn't know this was novel and actually Florida and Texas locked down before us and da-da-da-da-da, a little bit of rewriting history there, dude, and yeah, hmm, a little bit of rewriting history there, dude, and yeah, so anyway, definitely shut down way sooner than I expected it to shut down and he well, fuck abbott. He also mentioned you know, you know we made a mistake on the closing down the outdoors and that's that. You know. Admit some, but you know it's yeah, yeah.

Speaker 1: 52:11

Yeah, but I think he is running that may end up being the Democrat presidential candidate.

Speaker 2: 52:19

He's definitely making a run. He said well, if I'm, it depends on lots of things, and so on.

Speaker 1: 52:24

The people really want me to, maybe while he's running around, basically running already, yeah, exactly yeah, all righty.

Speaker 2: 52:37

So and then the other big interview this week that dropped. Did you listen to the hunter biden interview again?

Speaker 1: 52:45

I only saw clips of that on x.

Speaker 2: 52:47

I didn't see the whole thing okay, I, I tried to listen to the whole he swears a lot, man, holy like, I swear a lot but dude. But all the excuses. Oh and, by the way, crack cocaine is better for your body than alcohol, if you didn't know that.

Speaker 1: 53:07

Well, he's probably not wrong on that Right.

Speaker 2: 53:10

but that just, and he didn't want to go into dangerous places to get his crack, so he learned to make it himself.

Speaker 1: 53:19

Yeah, well, that's because regular cocaine is much easier to get than crack cocaine if you're in a nice neighborhood.

Speaker 2: 53:27

yeah, like I've never gotten crack cocaine I've never gotten cocaine, so I don't know what you're missing I. I don't think that would be better for you than alcohol. I'll tell you that much. I don't think that would be a good drug for me, Gene. Yeah, and it's Washington's Police Academy, by the way.

Speaker 1: 53:47

It's a lot of constrictor, but other than that it's great.

Speaker 2: 53:50

Yeah, it's Washington's Police Academy that Sig is suing. That's right. Yes, yes, Anyway, but no Joe Biden or Joe Biden. Hunter Biden went out. He's doing it to defend Joe, and you know, he talked about his dad being on Ambien and that's why he you know he's not really senile or anything and he was, you know, attacking Clooney and others for, you know, pushing him out and like he is really worried that that pardon is going to go away. Oh yeah, I'm sure he is. Like that was what this was all about is the pardon.

Speaker 1: 54:29

And it may. I mean, I think it's a toss-up right now On what Whether it goes away. Okay, If they can without a doubt conclude that the president did not actually sign or wasn't in the room when the auto pen was used for that pardon, I think that it'll go away.

Speaker 2: 54:56

Well, there are some that were Along with what's his face Dr Mengele.

Speaker 1: 55:01

Yeah, exactly which Rand Paul has been pushing, you know, pushing more and more. Yeah, because he's always been at odds with Fauci, like he was always the main guy that was saying Fauci's responsible for this shit. Yep, which he is. And it appears like there's more and more evidence to show that this, literally Fauci created the coronavirus.

Speaker 2: 55:31

Well, the Wuhan lab certainly did, and that was part of the discussion with my boss this weekend as well, and it's like you know, come on, man, and he agreed that Democrats have lost a lot of the narrative, and you know they're and we got into trans discussion. We had a really actually pretty good discussion on this trip, man. We did come up with a compromise that we both agreed on on immigration. That I think is interesting. What's that? So? And I floated this idea because we were debating immigration and demography and how we keep the US going.

Speaker 1: 56:07

Yeah.

Speaker 2: 56:08

And I said I'm all for brain draining the rest of the world but we have to do it in a way that guarantees assimilation.

Speaker 2: 56:16

You know, the melting pot, not the salad bowl, and we have to do this in a certain way. So what I said and I think this would be a really good answer let people apply for citizenship. We do a background check on them. We understand their skills, everything else. We have a register with the government from states saying what skills they would like to see imported into their states, with how many open positions they have and what the need is. And what we say is you apply.

Speaker 2: 56:48

The feds do a background check, make sure you're not a violent criminal. The states look at your resume and say, yes, we'll take that person. So the states have a say in this and then you get to come in and you get to work. Much like this would get rid of H-1Bs and everything else. And you would come in and you would be on parole and I do mean parole, not probation, parole for 10 years, meaning you would have to check in with your parole officer. You would have to show that you're learning the language or have a mastery of the language, show that you are assimilating into the culture and that you are doing what you need to do. And if in that time, you get convicted of a crime, and I would set that what crime bar? Pretty low if you get convicted of a crime. You're I don't know. I mean DWI is a misdemeanor in the state of Texas.

Speaker 1: 57:44

Yeah well, you want to kick somebody out just for that, you're an immigrant well, I don't think DWI should even be a law exactly that's what I'm getting to.

Speaker 2: 57:53

You've always argued against it now you want to kick people out for it so assault can be a misdemeanor in the state of Texas as well. So again, I think we put a category of crime, any violent crime out.

Speaker 1: 58:06

But my point is yeah, that's how you end up people with misdemeanors losing their gun rights.

Speaker 2: 58:11

Okay. Well, my point on immigration is that we could make it where anyone could come here. We have 10 years to try them out and make sure that they're going to be a good fit, and then they can get their citizenship. Yeah, but until then they can't their citizenship yeah. Until then they can't vote, they can't use welfare, all they can do is pay taxes and work.

Speaker 1: 58:34

Yeah, so what exists right now is like a light version of what you just described. You've got five years until you can vote. Once you start the process you have, and the process doesn't start until you apply for the green card, and then you've got which? The green card basically lets you work and do whatever. You know, all the regular activities. You technically are still on probation because if you have had felonies and you apply for citizenship, that will be considered and whether or not they're going to grant you citizenship or not, you know. Realistically speaking, the competence test for culture and literacy is fairly minimal. However, I will say that most americans would fail the the competence of american history that that the uh legal immigrants have to go through, unless you study, because this is shit that we barely covered in high school or junior high and most people have forgotten since then. Like, do you remember the capitals of all 50 states?

Speaker 2: 59:55

Oh, I could probably say most of them.

Speaker 1: 59:57

Yeah, I mean I could say probably half. I don't think I would have more than half of them that I remember. But stuff like that, do you remember some of the? Well, you probably do your history buff, but you know a lot of people that aren't into history don't remember the like, the years of various events, like what year was Lincoln elected, shit like that. It's. It's basic sort of American history. There's not too much in there. The English language testing is very minimal as well. It's just demonstrating that you can, you know, write things that you're asked in English. But yeah, you could certainly crank up the difficulty level of those, and I think people coming from Asian cultures that don't use the Latin alphabet would certainly have a tougher time and then have completely different grammar as well yeah, but a big change to the current situation is again the states having that registry of jobs and having a say and yes, we, I have a problem with that though, ben, because anytime you give something to the hands of the government like that, there's going to be corruption.

Speaker 1: 1:01:00

So what you're going to end up with is the states are going to have jobs that don't accurately reflect what the actual companies need. They'll have what reflects that the people that donate money to those. Okay, so fine, we can have the companies who are willing to sponsor someone for this, much like the h1b yeah, so you're just expanding an h1b program, then sure, okay, because the h1b you, you can't vote when you're here in an h1b, the the whole time. Correct, I don't care if you're here 20 years.

Speaker 2: 1:01:30

Right, yeah, unless you become a citizen. Yes, yeah, but my point is let's make it a pathway to citizenship, and this pathway to citizenship is this Again having the parole and the check-in process is a key thing there and the assimilation bit is a key thing there. Like no, you can't go to Michigan and create an enclave of Muslims that want and have Sharia law.

Speaker 1: 1:02:00

No, you cannot do that. Well, if it's allowed by local laws, you could. No, you cannot do that. I mean, well, you say you cannot do that, but there's a law to prevent them from doing that. Yeah, yeah, yeah. So you have to first come up with some new laws. Good luck on that. How about, instead of H-1Bs having a pathway to citizenship is? There is no pathway to citizenship for anyone. That's it, we're done. America is no longer granting citizenships to anyone who isn't born in America. But what you can do is you can come here on an H-1B equivalent type thing Permanent resident. As a permanent resident for the rest of your life, you will never vote, but the children that you have in this country are US citizens vote.

Speaker 2: 1:02:47

But the children that you have in this country are us citizens. I'm okay with that.

Speaker 1: 1:02:49

But again, there has to be forced assimilation and if you're not assimilating, you're out yeah, yeah, yeah, and that's the forced assimilation I agree with you on, but I think it is. It is hard to do when the when there are pressures to go the opposite route. So every group of people, whether it's Irish, italian or whoever, when they first, in a large group, came to the US, they all do the same thing. I mean, you know, russians did the same thing when my parents immigrated. You tend to clump up in groups where there's a significant number of you that you can all share your experience on how to best live in a new country with a new language, with new rules, with everything.

Speaker 1: 1:03:43

So it starts off with very good intention. It's the idea that if you just show up, pick a random country, let's say you immigrate to Nepal and you're the only guy there. You don't know anybody else. No one else speaks English, no one else is from America. You're going to have a very hard time living there because you're bombarded by new things that you have no idea how they work yeah, okay, like you know, drinking milk from, uh, horses, stuff like that.

Speaker 1: 1:04:14

But so everyone naturally tries to clump up with like a community of people that have already a lot of common bounds. The problem from that is that community becomes almost like a little micro country with its own government, and again this happened with the Italians. That's how we got the mob. We got the Italian mob from the early Italian immigrants because the leaders of those clumpings of Italian immigrants no-transcript, and then you know it kind of went from there into all the other activities the mob does.

Speaker 1: 1:05:06

But you know what's happening in michigan, what's happening with somalis in minnesota, with the huge population somalis they got there was completely predictable. I saw this happening and you knew exactly where it was going. They weren't the first groups and it all depends on the size of the group that you let in, because the you can think of it this way the size of the group determines the diameter of the sphere of influence, and so the larger the group, the larger the diameter of influence means that there are more people that are inside the group, that don't have to interact with anybody outside the group, and that's how you end up with. You know whole cities that have nothing but Somalis living in them, and then Sharia law becomes the law of that city. It's because they don't have to interact with anybody outside of that group. So if you want to break that up, I think the only way to really do it is to, like you said, to Not let them move into certain areas and overwhelm local populations.

Speaker 2: 1:06:14

Well, you could do that, but I think, Hence the whole parole.

Speaker 1: 1:06:17

We have to know where you're living and we get to tell you what to do, sort of thing. Yeah, but we know where everybody's living. Knowing where you're living has only been an issue with complete illegals. But you know, the somalis are totally legal. They're not illegal immigrants.

Speaker 2: 1:06:29

they came here right, but don't dump them into one area and put the restrictions so right, like when you're on parole and you want to move, yep, you have to get permission to do so, yeah, yeah, that's what I. That's the level I'm talking about yeah, yeah, but then you're like.

Speaker 1: 1:06:46

This works, I think, for the people like the Somalis that are effectively friends of us refugees, the same thing with like in here in Austin I've had multiple Ubers driven by Afghans or Afghanistanis, I don't know which is the proper terminology for them, guys from Afghanistan and cause. I always ask the Uber drivers drivers, you know where they're from and how long they've been here and everything in each case. This is actually pretty funny they they're. They've been here basically ever since biden shut down our military bases in afghanistan. Because these guys one of them was a translator for Americans. So when they shut down the base he was on the list of people that are allowed to immigrate to the U? S for the services rendered in country, and so you know he moved here. He was a Afghan English translator there for the U S military. Obviously he can't stay there with the Taliban taking over the government, so he moves to the US, to Austin. I have no idea why Austin. Another guy was a. He was like a supplier guy. He was a wholesaler in Afghanistan that was selling a lot of the food to the US bases. So he ended up getting on this list of people out to move and for whatever reason, they end up in Austin here.

Speaker 1: 1:08:07

But I think I kind of know the reason too is typically it is cities and states that designate that they are willing to accept a certain number of not immigrants but what do you call it Like? They're technically, I mean, they are immigrants, but they're actually refugees, I guess is the word I'm looking for and those places tend to be liberal. So the cities that usually accept people which is why Minnesota has gotten so many people and Michigan has they're liberal run cities with this idea that, you know, we, we take the poor and the sick and the, the people that have problems, blah, blah, blah. So, whereas other cities push back against that and say, you know, we're kind of full. So what you end up having is this migratory transition of people from a different culture, not even the liberal culture. You think those somalis are liberals? I mean they're, they're in their voting democrat party.

Speaker 1: 1:09:17

But, dude, sharia law is not liberal no covering your women head to toe is not liberal, so they just utilize whatever is available there yes, I understand.

Speaker 2: 1:09:29

So the whole point was a possible solution. How can we fix this? What do we do? Well, you can. I think this would not a fan of creating a big government administration to do this.

Speaker 2: 1:09:40

I'm more of a fan of just saying stop and also well, I would like that too. But also the other thing I would say we need to make a part. Part of this is we need to go back to the guarded gate mentality and the immigration policies in the 1930s and saying we're only going to allow immigration right now from countries that will easily assimilate yeah, yeah, I agree, I agree.

Speaker 1: 1:10:03

I think h1bs should have no path to citizenship. It should be purely a opportunity for somebody that is an expert in their field to come and work in the us, get paid money, live here for some period of time while they have that one single job. So two things I would give and I've dealt with a lot of H1Bs over the years. I always try and get rid of them. I know that comes out sounding wrong, but it's always a mistake for a company, in my experience, to hire an H1B. It just means you haven't sufficiently searched for that person in the US because they exist, and if you're doing it to save money, then fuck you. That's not what H-1Bs are supposed to be for. They're supposed to be for bringing in someone who has a particular talent or expertise that does not exist or isn't available in the United States because they're already working somewhere, and that's almost never the case. So H-1Bs if they had no path to citizenship whatsoever and if they could not be transferable meaning if you lose your job right now with an H-1B.

Speaker 2: 1:11:13

So, what you're saying is we're basically becoming the UAE.

Speaker 1: 1:11:17

That would be so much better man.

Speaker 2: 1:11:20

Now you know, so for those who don't know the UAE, for example. So for those who don't know the UAE, for example, 98% of its population is a non-citizen, just there on a work visa. Yeah, and if you lose your job and don't find another job at a certain time, you're out.

Speaker 1: 1:11:47

Yeah, but I would get rid of the finding the country, because all of them, within a matter of a month or two, find some other company to sponsor their h1b and take over. And it's like the way it should work if I was running. It is that h1b is in effect until the day that your last day of work. That's it. Once you hit that last day of work, you have 48 hours to leave the country before you become a fugitive.

Speaker 2: 1:12:14

Well, 48 hours is a very short period of time if you're not expecting to. You know, if you just got fired, then no, no it's easily solved.

Speaker 1: 1:12:23

When you get your H-1B, you have to have a return flight, pre-booked and demonstrated.

Speaker 2: 1:12:32

Yeah, but again, if you're living here you've got to write. Let's say they bought a house or done this.

Speaker 1: 1:12:37

I wouldn't let them buy houses. You can only rent.

Speaker 2: 1:12:40

You shouldn't be able to own property in the United States, so truly a slave class.

Speaker 1: 1:12:43

If you don't, if you're not a US citizen citizen being the key word. You should have no business owning property in the United States. That would be a hard line for me.

Speaker 2: 1:12:53

Okay.

Speaker 1: 1:12:56

You want to work here, that's fine, but there are conditions to that. You can't ever be a citizen. You will never own property. Okay, now let's talk about corporal punishment while we're at it. Okay, I was gonna say let's talk about south park and star trek, but oh, okay yes, we could talk about south park, star trek and then a couple other movies or tv shows I've been watching so let's start with talk about corporal punishment that was a joke, dude, dude.

Speaker 1: 1:13:26

I was saying, if we're going to go towards slavery, let's really go hard on slavery, okay, I mean, if your employee isn't performing, you ought to be able to beat them, right. Let's work on being able to have corporal punishment in the house first.

Speaker 2: 1:13:45

Uh-huh yeah.

Speaker 1: 1:13:51

So what did you think of South Park? You watched it, right.

Speaker 2: 1:13:54

I did, and it wasn't funny, it was just, it was just stupid. Like I like South Park, you didn't get it, okay. Okay, what didn't I not get?

Speaker 1: 1:14:09

All right, so you have to have the context of what's happening to understand that episode.

Speaker 2: 1:14:14

I do have the context of what's happening in the world.

Speaker 1: 1:14:16

I don't know that you do. That episode wasn't about Trump and Jeffrey Epstein. Jeffrey Epstein what that episode was about was that they've been in a negotiation with what's the name of the company, the channel that that streamed on.

Speaker 2: 1:14:39

It's Paramount.

Speaker 1: 1:14:40

They've been in negotiations with Paramount for literally a year and a half and they just got a one and a half billion dollar contract with paramount. Okay, they don't have particularly high opinion of the decisions that paramount's made in the past and the the types of censorship that paramount's imposed. Their. Paramount's actually been pretty, pretty strong on the politically correct uh censorship bandwagon and so as part of their contract they've got all this you know stuff laid out that if, if paramount shuts them down, they get their full payout, no matter what whether so you think they were trying to get paramount to shut them down.

Speaker 1: 1:15:26

No, so, literally, yes, this is. This is not just me, this is a lot of the internet. Theory here is that. So what they do for their season opener, for their first episode under the new contract, is to do something that is highly likely to get trump to sue Paramount, which he's been suing a lot of other media and winning, incidentally, like he's won all these lawsuits against different media for calling him a rapist, for doing all kinds of things, which is great. I mean he's getting good rulings coming out of those. But this is more of a fuck you to paramount than it is about jeffrey epstein or trump. And the thing you got to remember these guys, they they're anarchist libertarians. These are not republicans, they never have been, and so it is. Trump is absolutely fair game for them, especially when he starts to act like the swamp. He was fair game to them in his first administration plenty of times. They just had a different guy playing him. They had Mr Garrison playing him. You know, the guy with the rodent in his ass.

Speaker 1: 1:16:41

Yes, I am well, yes, I have seen South Park. I'm saying that for your benefit, but for people that may not watch south park so the trump was portrayed by somebody that was already, you know, a very blatantly gay, like extreme version of gay kind of character. And now, as we saw in that episode, they show up at gison's house and then he's sitting there with his husband watching TV.

Speaker 2: 1:17:08

No, I haven't done that in years, yeah.

Speaker 1: 1:17:10

What are you talking about?

Speaker 2: 1:17:12

And then they pulled, made Trump the Saddam Hussein character from the movie.

Speaker 1: 1:17:16

Exactly exactly which I think is. I thought it was hilarious. I had no problem with it. I didn't think it was a bad episode the facial expressions that they used on Trump were pretty funny they literally showed his penis. Well, are you admitting he has a small penis then Well they're just saying I have no idea, dude.

Speaker 2: 1:17:37

They portrayed him as that with the AI generating stuff at the end.

Speaker 1: 1:17:41

Well, back in the day, Comedy Central wouldn't let show muhammad's penis, so okay so they do it that like okay so I think that this is a lot more to do with.

Speaker 1: 1:17:56

We're gonna push as far to the edge as we can, and if we get a million or sorry, a billion and a half for one episode because they cancel us after the first episode, it's a win. Now the alternative is they don't cancel. And now this establishes the new normal right. This establishes what South Park can do for all future episodes, which is just wow.

Speaker 1: 1:18:22

Yeah, so was Trump happy about this? I'm sure he wasn't, and you know, I don't know if Trump's going to end up suing Paramount or not, but if he does, those guys aren't going to be at all sad if that happens. I think they will kind of see that as a victory. So if you look at the world through polarized glasses that only have up and down and left and right, republican and democrat, this was probably not a funny episode. But if you look at it from their perspective, this achieved everything they were going for. Okay, cool. So that's what I was referring to about all the you know, know, backstory and stuff. And they've had episodes in the past that you really kind of have to be a South Park aficionado to really think are funny, because they otherwise they just don't seem all that funny. So they kind of vary. I'm sure the next episode will probably be something more mundane, like Ozempic was, and by mundane I just mean, you know, not political, all right, and then Star Trek. So watch that. What'd you think of Star?

Speaker 2: 1:19:36

Trek. Well, the first three episodes of the season were really good yeah.

Speaker 1: 1:19:42

It's not technically Star Trek, it's Brave New World Strange.

Speaker 2: 1:19:46

New World. Strange New World, sorry, yeah. And it's Strange technically, star trek, it's brave. New world. Strange new world. Strange new world, sorry, yeah. And it's strange new worlds, it's is it star trek?

Speaker 1: 1:19:51

because I, when I was searching for it, I I think I just typed in strange new worlds and I right, but that's like star trek voyager, star trek ds9 you know, voyager was also star trek.

Speaker 2: 1:20:02

Yes, the only Star Trek to not have Star Trek in the title was Enterprise. Oh, the best one. Okay, got it. Okay, uh-huh, I like Enterprise.

Speaker 1: 1:20:16

I still like it, the best Vulcan of the bunch.

Speaker 2: 1:20:35

Anyway, it was good, the Gorn episode wrap-up was good for season opener. The q-esque episode slash tie back to the original series was great.

Speaker 1: 1:20:40

Yeah, I think well, a lot of their stuff. Yeah, the gordon was also tied back to the original series, so they're they're doing a lot of their stuff. Yeah, the Gordon was also tied back to the original series, so they're doing a lot of these tiebacks Right, right, right, right.

Speaker 2: 1:20:47

But the point I'm making is the Continuity I'm sorry, continuity, yes, it's great continuity whereas they they're not rewriting canon Correct. Whereas Discovery sucked because they did Right, yep, lighting canon Correct. Whereas discovery sucked because they did Right, yep, yep, but they. So one of the things that's always been a theory, and I can't remember the name of the character, but there's a Q like character in the original series, but it was never expressed in next generation or Voyager or any other series that that was a Q being well. This episode literally ties that together.

Speaker 1: 1:21:25

It's pretty obvious, yeah, yes, was a Q being well, this episode literally ties that together. Pretty obvious, yeah, yes, exactly. And I have to say that was also kind of a problem for me is that immediately from Reese Darby's appearance I was like that, that's acting like a Q, like I knew right away that that's, that's probably a Q and you know so. Really, the rest of the episode to me was just sort of like yep, yep, that makes sense. That so I wasn't surprised at the end is what I'm getting to, and I think maybe somebody who is less of a, you know, trekkie probably would have been more surprised like you, you figured out it was q immediately.

Speaker 1: 1:22:05

Right, of course, yeah, yeah. So I almost kind of wish they made it a little bit harder to figure that out. Like, maybe the actions would have been, you know, somehow explainable, like, but maybe there was just a different explanation for it, but it it seemed like the way that he was just sort of using magic, as it were.

Speaker 2: 1:22:29

Just so trillane was the name of the character in the original series and if you go look at trillane's character in the original series and then that was also a child right, no, no, no, no, I thought it was no. Go look, just look put-O-S and go to images and you'll see Trill.

Speaker 1: 1:22:48

Lane.

Speaker 2: 1:22:49

And then compare that to the way they dress the character in Strange New Worlds and it's like boom. Obvious tie-in.

Speaker 1: 1:22:56

Mm, mm-hmm.

Speaker 2: 1:22:57

You see what I'm saying.

Speaker 1: 1:22:58

Yep, yep, yeah, it's a similar fashion, for sure.

Speaker 2: 1:23:06

Yep, yeah, it's a similar fashion, for sure, yeah.

Speaker 1: 1:23:08

But even I think one of the Q Next Generation episodes Q was dressed like that too.

Speaker 2: 1:23:14

Yes, yeah, if you Google what I said, you'll see what I'm saying and then, if you Google Q Strange New Worlds, there's a side-by-side photo of tru lane versus this character.

Speaker 1: 1:23:27

Yeah, well, and I, I think that the, and I don't know why, you.

Speaker 2: 1:23:32

You said they were making nurse chap when nurse chapel look worse or whatever.

Speaker 1: 1:23:38

I think she looks worse with the hair she's got right now. Is she like they change her makeup and change her?

Speaker 2: 1:23:43

hair. Yeah, but the all right, the the last episode, the wedding episode.

Speaker 1: 1:23:47

She looked good like in the wedding. Yes, yeah, yeah. No, she looked fine in the wedding. I'm just I. I was a fan of her in the first episode. She was a little less chunky. She was very black and white she is by no means chunky right now.

Speaker 2: 1:24:03

A big ass. Do you just want a flat? Just no, no ass Like I just don't get this.

Speaker 1: 1:24:12

I just don't like pear shaped.

Speaker 2: 1:24:16

I agree.

Speaker 1: 1:24:18

So you know, and her, her chest is not big enough to have a big ass, okay, so, uh, no, not big enough to have a big ass, okay, so, uh, no, it just needs to be, you know, toned, not big. But I think that the and I'm in a minority here, I recognize that because most, most women now are trying to create huge asses. That's what the Black's like, and so that seems to be the in thing right now is all the exercises and I see this on the other TV show that I'll mention as well once we're done, talking about Star Trek what else we got?

Speaker 2: 1:25:02

No, I just think it's Strange. New Worlds is doing good. I hope they don't cancel it too soon.

Speaker 1: 1:25:07

I think it is canceled, though Didn't we already hear that this is the last season?

Speaker 2: 1:25:10

No, no, no, no, no, no, they've renewed for another season. They have and they've renewed actually all the way to their fifth season, and so we'll see. And this is the third season.

Speaker 1: 1:25:22

Correct, so they got two more of them. Oh, that's awesome. Yeah, because I well, jesus, are they gonna have kirk show up then? Kirk's already showed up in this, I know, but I mean like more, you know, as his first tenure I don't know.

Speaker 2: 1:25:35

I think that will be the handoff at some point, and so at some point we've got to get to pike's accident, right. So anyway, uh, yeah, good tv.

Speaker 1: 1:25:43

So yeah, yeah it's been good, and then on my, my other podcast with Darren O'Neill what the hell is it called Unrelenting Jesus, unrelenting that show. I had to do that because I couldn't remember what this one was called either, so Unrelenting. He had mentioned to me that there's a show I would probably enjoy watching called Landman, takes place in Texas, and I like Billy Bob Thornton I, you know, I think he's. He's been in some good stuff, so I started watching that as well and I've been pretty much the entire first season of that and I like it. It does have, you know, it certainly has some stereotypes about texas. There's no two ways about that that are not really accurate. They're just more stereotypes. But it has hot chicks and it has a pretty good storyline and it takes place in Odessa and Midland, and I remember being out there as well when I was working for this.

Speaker 2: 1:26:52

Israeli oil company.

Speaker 1: 1:26:54

So it's a. It brings back some memories. It's kind of neat seeing places that you've been in TV shows, right. Okay, I think they're trying to kind of make this into the this generation's dallas which okay, you know I watched some of dallas.

Speaker 1: 1:27:14

I was a little young to really get into dallas when dallas was running on tv because a lot of the storylines were not really interesting to me as a kid. But dallas was hugely popular, you know, even now I'm, I think when people say well, dude, do you remember or do you know who shot jr? Like that, that phrase still means something to people, even if they're way younger.

Speaker 2: 1:27:41

I yeah, I just okay. I'm not a soap opera kind of guy. So yeah, I hope that that's not what it is well it's.

Speaker 1: 1:27:50

It's certainly soap opera-ish. In the same way it takes place in the oil fields, right and I have not watched land man yet yeah, and I you should. You should definitely check it out, the and I look, if nothing else, you you're gonna like the chicks in it. There's guaranteed, guaranteed they, they really go. The whole, like texas, is all about the blonde hair and the big tits.

Speaker 2: 1:28:15

Good, yeah right, there you go so I'm not, I prefer the red heads, you know no, I yeah, but no, actually I have no preference. If you look at my dating history, it's blondes, brunettes, everybody.

Speaker 1: 1:28:30

I definitely like the red, like the actual redheads, not the fake redheads, the ones that are born with red hair. I like those more, but there are few and far between man.

Speaker 1: 1:28:40

They are hard to find, hard to find ones that actually have good bodies and good, you know, look good well, it's a very small percentage of the population small percentage of population, combined with the fact that these days most women tend to ruin their bodies with tattoos and you know other things that make them look ugly like nose rings. Have you seen that meme going around, like to the question of what is the most unattractive thing a woman can do to her face, and the number one answer put a nose ring in?

Speaker 2: 1:29:16

Yeah, yeah, it makes you look like a cow, I don't know. Face tattoos, I think would be the number one answer.

Speaker 1: 1:29:22

But I think most people there's so so many. There's so fewer of people with face tattoos. I think for a lot of people that doesn't even come up as an option. It's like you know that that's right along, right along those lines of like branding marks, like people do it, yes, but the percentage of people doing it is tiny, and a lot of women, especially older women, have facial tattoos.

Speaker 2: 1:29:50

They're called eyebrows. What I'm hearing is Gene would not be into Lily Tiger at all.

Speaker 1: 1:30:00

I don't know who that is. Is that a cartoon character? There's a Google search out there for you, gene. Okay, this better not be a Rickroll, because I know how you think. Lily tiger is a cocktail. Okay, google search is showing me flowers and butterflies.

Speaker 2: 1:30:23

I don't know what a lily tiger is. All right, hold on, let me open up an incognito window. Yeah, you're going to have to Google it for me. Hold on.

Speaker 1: 1:30:27

Because I have no idea who you're talking about. Lily Tiger is also a bar name in Austin. Okay, so there you go.

Speaker 2: 1:30:42

Hold on, alright, anyway, keep talking.

Speaker 1: 1:30:52

Alright. Well, the bottom line is I I think we're seeing more and more little movements out of the direction that the country's been going for the last 15 years, which is the crazy lefty fucked up body, fucked up head mentality people, and more towards getting back to what was the normal for most of my life, which is this idea that, like there is a, a beauty standard, and when you start fucking things up you, you start moving away from it, not towards it. You know, suicide Girls certainly made a push in the opposite direction, but even there, the pinup chicks on Suicide Girls tended to be at least attractive with unattractive things on them, whereas I think the modern, kind of like as of a couple of years ago standard was literally that that there is no objective standard of beauty, and that's just bullshit, because obviously there is.

Speaker 2: 1:31:58

Yeah, beauty has an objective standard and it's tiger lily, not li Lily Tiger.

Speaker 1: 1:32:04

Oh, that's why. Oh, so it's a totally tattooed chick.

Speaker 2: 1:32:07

She's got that horrible look on her face and she wouldn't have done. If you go, look at some of the other images.

Speaker 1: 1:32:14

Is she on OnlyFans?

Speaker 2: 1:32:17

She's a porn star dude. I don't know. She's all over the place, yeah. Yeah, I mean, I don't think she's attractive, but she's not ugly, it's unfortunate because she has a very nice body. But it is literally head to toe covered in tattoos.

Speaker 1: 1:32:31

Yeah, yeah, except this little bit doesn't seem to be. That's strange. Oh yeah, but yeah it's.

Speaker 2: 1:32:44

That's an older photo that you just sent me.

Speaker 1: 1:32:47

Well, it's from suicide girls. I've got a membership. On there, you laughing at membership? Oh, I need to check out what people are doing. I used to be a photographer, remember? Uh-huh, uh-huh.

Speaker 2: 1:33:07

Uh-huh, okay, oohhuh, okay, oh, that's, that's, that's funny. Yeah, that's funny, right there anyway.

Speaker 1: 1:33:16

So yeah, I think that. But I've always said I'm not opposed to tattoos. I don't dislike the idea of tattoos. I dislike what 99.99 percent of people end up getting ass tattoos. What I don't dislike like if you've seen those full back or full body japanese tattoos that that you know, they've been around way longer, which is essentially what she has. Just which is yeah, and that's why I said like for her. The tattoos she have are not a bunch of random crap everywhere except for on her left arm.

Speaker 1: 1:33:49

She does have some random crap that's ugly, but other than that it's, it's like one piece of you know it's. It's a painting. That that I don't mind. Now she also has a something written under her forehead which is stupid. Stupid. Shouldn't do that, not into that at all. But I don't know, I mean it's if you've got tattoos that are not visible when you're wearing clothes, does it really matter, you know Well anyway.

Speaker 2: 1:34:24

So there was a pretty good little data breach that's going to impact a lot of women.

Speaker 1: 1:34:30

Oh, yeah, yeah yeah. This reminded me of the data breach for Ashley Madison. Mm-hmm, Remember that one. Yep, I do.

Speaker 2: 1:34:37

Or were you still in kindergarten? No, I remember it. I just wasn't involved with it because I've never been on that website. Yeah, yeah.

Speaker 1: 1:34:45

No, that definitely leaked.

Speaker 2: 1:34:47

I remember that well gene got doxxed a little bit. Yeah, the so the t app, which apparently is, you know, pretty man-hating app in a lot of ways. Yes, I I, by the way, if anyone had caught the pace bin or something before it got taken down of this data I would love to have it If.

Speaker 1: 1:35:11

I'm sure it's floating out there, it's just I can't find it dude.

Speaker 2: 1:35:15

I'm like looking all over the place.

Speaker 1: 1:35:17

There's the rock. We'll have Darren check, cause it's gotta be on Torrance. That's where I would look for it.

Speaker 2: 1:35:23

Ah torrents?

Speaker 1: 1:35:28

that's where I would look for it. Ah, torrents, I guess, yeah. Yeah, it's not going to be like sitting on the website that amazon's hosting gonna be on the torrent site, but yeah, apparently, from seeing some of the images in there, there's some ugly, ugly chicks that were on this site. The reason you can see their images? Because the site required you to to put your driver's license uploads.

Speaker 2: 1:35:47

Yeah, yeah, it's, it's insane.

Speaker 1: 1:35:50

It is funny because the, the, so the point of the website which, again, it starts off innocent enough but quickly shifts away from that. It starts off with, like, if you've had a really bad experience with a guy, then you know, try and share that so other women don't have to go through it. Uh, I mean it's, it's kind of reasonable as an idea. You're not sure, like, how do you execute this safely? Well, the problem is you can't, and so what ends up happening is it starts with that idea but quickly transitions to when you don't like a guy, post everything about him on here. So it's literally a doxing site, yeah, with names, addresses, phone numbers, tons of photos of quote-unquote bad men, and I, and I will say the. There is something you can say is bad about these men is they're so indiscriminate that they've managed to be with these women. So these men should have better taste.

Speaker 2: 1:36:54

And I am not seeing it. Oh, you're not seeing it? Not on the Torrent site.

Speaker 1: 1:36:58

Really. It's got to be up there, but the idea, I guess, kind of morphed into just a, an app for man haters, and I don't remember did they say how big of a audience it had, like how many people were in it? Oh, it was not small I know it was like the number one app on the iOS app store in its category, whatever its category was.

Speaker 2: 1:37:29

Yes, the user images exposed is over 72,000.

Speaker 1: 1:37:36

Okay, well, so at least that much. Yeah, so it's a pretty popular app for man haters, I guess, app for man haters, I guess. And the immediate comparison comes up with like can you imagine a men only app that had pictures?

Speaker 2: 1:37:54

of women Actually, so 4chan has already created it.

Speaker 1: 1:37:58

Oh, have they.

Speaker 2: 1:37:58

Yeah, and body count.

Speaker 1: 1:38:01

Oh, that's awesome, that is great. So, yeah, I mean, it's one of those things that you can let a idea that starts off as not necessarily being a bad idea very quickly morph into something that is a bad idea, and I would expect, like 4chan, to have shit like this a lot more than I would expect it to be a an actual app in the app store by some company like.

Speaker 2: 1:38:35

that's kind of gross yeah, and you know well we're. We just we're tired of the the fuck boys who want to go do x, y and z, da, da, da, da, okay, well, quit, date, quit. Using apps to date, like using apps today, means the top five percent of men can get whatever the hell they want, anytime, wherever, and the bottom don't get anything, whether a nice guy or whatever doesn't matter. Yeah, so you know, we have to break that culture. We really do and do? We know?

Speaker 2: 1:39:10

yes, and I think shaming these women for their comments and how they treat men and everything else is a good thing yeah, I agree with that part of it.

Speaker 1: 1:39:17

I think that is a good thing. But I was talking about this topic with somebody else recently. Oh, brian brushwood, I had lunch with him oh, how's brian? Brian, oh, he's good, he's actually lost weight.

Speaker 2: 1:39:29

Next time you're going to have lunch with Brushwood, you've got to invite me.

Speaker 1: 1:39:32

Yeah, okay, okay. Well, you're usually out of town and sitting in DC in your office there, I don't know.

Speaker 2: 1:39:38

Actually I was sitting in the customer's office, but that's okay, whatever? Giving a financial update on a project Don't have to get into any details.

Speaker 1: 1:39:46

I'm just yeah, well, we can set up another lunch Happy to do that, but we were talking about this exact topic is that we're at a point right now where, with the dating tools that are around and the way that most people in their 20s at least, are dating, what we end up with is a scenario where it's the top 10% of men maybe even less than 10%, that are dating 60 to 70% of all women, and there's certainly a group that's probably like 30% of men are dating nobody, and you know well. Yeah, this is a problem with the way of technology, but if you start looking back historically, this is actually the natural state of being Women over the course of thousands of years, always wanted to have the top 5% of men.

Speaker 2: 1:40:42

Most men did not reproduce.

Speaker 1: 1:40:44

Most men did not reproduce exactly men. Most men did not reproduce. Most men did not reproduce Exactly. And so, historically, if you look at our ancestors, our bloodlines, we're all products of a much more discriminating group of people than what has been the case in, let's say, the 20th century. The 20th century was a lot more egalitarian, where, whether through socialism or capitalism, couples were, you know, they were expected to group up and reproduce with others in their social strata, rather than the the more of the middle Eastern variety of reproduction. So is this a bad thing? Well, it is for the guy who's not getting laid, sure, and it probably is for women that have to share a guy. But is it at all unusual? Is this a creation of the technology that we have? If anything, this is just going back to the way that it's always been for most of human history. Yes, I mean, is there a benefit to having everybody reproduce? I don't know. Maybe not.

Speaker 2: 1:41:56

Well, I think we'd like more people to reproduce than they are. That's the point.

Speaker 1: 1:42:00

Yeah, but you don't need a whole bunch of guys to have more people reproduce. No, you just need women to have kids and for women to have kids.

Speaker 2: 1:42:07

They usually want a stable relationship and so on, and that that's the barrier there, but they don't.

Speaker 1: 1:42:15

what they're genetically programmed to want is somebody that can provide for the children. The relationship of the woman to the man doesn't matter, because historically women died in childbirth, so the relationship between the two post-kids doesn't matter. What matters is that the guy is rich enough to provide for the children, even if they're bastard children.

Speaker 2: 1:42:43

Well, anyway.

Speaker 1: 1:42:44

I'm just talking about history. I understand One of the arguments I had with. Well, anyway, I I'm just talking about history, I'm not talking about.

Speaker 2: 1:42:47

I understand and you know one of the arguments I had with or not argument conversation I had with my boss was that you know, when we look at, when we look at history and we look at, you know the demography and the birth rate decline. I told my boss, you know, you and I are part of the problem. You know, because we have not reproduced enough and we are wealthy enough to have done it. So what the hell you know?

Speaker 1: 1:43:16

exactly, so I don't know. I I think it's. It's a change from the 20th century, but is it a change in the worst direction?

Speaker 2: 1:43:32

I'm not sure that it is, it is because we're going to fall off a demographic cliff. The only hope we have right now is that the millennials, my age and younger, pull their head out of their rear end and start just cranking out. Okay, I didn't say it was going to happen. I said the only hope we have. There's a difference there.

Speaker 1: 1:43:54

All right, like I'm completely in agreement that it is not going to happen doesn't mean it shouldn't yeah, yeah, I, I get it, I get it, it. It would be better for the country if it did. But I think part of it too is and we've talked about this, I think, even before is the rat utopia experiment.

Speaker 2: 1:44:19

Oh, absolutely yes, and the beautiful ones, yes. It is very sad that that is what we're living in.

Speaker 1: 1:44:29

Well, and to just give a very short synopsis of that, it's an experiment where rats were placed into an environment where they had no cares whatsoever. They had more food than they could possibly eat, they had readily water available, they had tons of toys to play with. It was a rat utopia. It was basically like the ideal, perfect environment for rats and what they find is that, and they allowed them to do drugs.

Speaker 1: 1:44:56

Yeah, yeah, but even the ones that weren't doing drugs. The end result is that, when you have everything that you could possibly want, the rats started engaging in self-destructive behavior, one of which was a side effect maybe was that they stopped having sex, and rats are something that is known for having sex a lot. They reproduce like crazy. That's part of their survival strategies, because a lot of rats will get killed, so you have to replace enough of them, so replace the ones that are getting killed so the population doesn't collapse.

Speaker 2: 1:45:32

Well, what they find?

Speaker 1: 1:45:34

Yeah, yeah, well. And rabbits, yeah, I think they both reproduce like crazy man. That's why I always give shit to my rabbit supply guy and my rat supply guy. They're two different people. Shit to my rabbit supply guy and my rat supply guy they're two different people because they've got a minimal cost to make these things and yet they charge me quite a bit of money for them. You know, I'm I'm paying over 20 bucks a rabbit, so it's anyway, neither here nor there.

Speaker 1: 1:46:03

The point is when, given everything they could want, the rats stopped having sex and started either just getting massively obese and not, you know, not to the like, well beyond the point where they're satiating hunger. They just became lethargic. They didn't want to do anything. Other rats, given the opportunity for drugs, would just engage in in activity where that was the only thing they were focused on, and in all these scenarios, the population dies out by itself.

Speaker 1: 1:46:40

So what I'm bringing up is that we are seeing elements of that not not the complete, identical scenario, but elements of that in this country right now, where people, even poor people, have multiple televisions and cell phones. So we're in a place where, if anyone ever really wants a meal, there's always a meal to be had. No one's actually starving in this country. There are a lot of actually homeless fat people and they weren't fat, or I mean they could have been. I don't know if they were fat before, but they're certainly staying fat while they're homeless. So there's a when you have all your needs met and no desire for competition because you've got everything you need. What happens? So? Is it fair to just completely say well, if rats are doing it, humans will as well? You know not. You know, hopefully we have a little more brain capacity than the rats.

Speaker 2: 1:47:44

But to some extent I take you back to the hunter biden interview oh, yeah, yeah, yeah, exactly so.

Speaker 1: 1:47:54

yeah, hunter biden is an example of somebody that you know grew up with a silver spoon in his mouth and everything that has happened that's been bad, is the result of his decisions, his own doing yeah, yeah yeah. And you could say well, he's rebelling against his asshole dad, and that's, I'm sure, part of it.

Speaker 2: 1:48:14

You mean his pedophile child-sniffing dad? Yeah, exactly that guy who most likely had inappropriate intercourse with his sister, yeah yeah.

Speaker 1: 1:48:25

Mm-hmm. Yeah, and I'm sure there's plenty to blame there. But also, had he also been poor while all that was happening, I think Heidner Biden would have probably engaged in less self-destructive activities Really.

Speaker 1: 1:48:41

Yeah, because you have a lot more stories of somebody who's successful, having grown up in a really shitty family, in a shitty neighborhood, than you have of people that were rich and that happened to them. So I think Hunter Biden, you know you can think of whatever you want about him, but I think certainly a lot of the blame for, or at least some of the blame for, his actions are the result of how he grew up no doubt.

Speaker 2: 1:49:18

I mean, there is nature versus nurture, and there is just, you know, the whole, the whole, how things you know how you respond to things.

Speaker 1: 1:49:31

So, yeah, fair enough, yeah and I think it's tied, and it's not to absolve him, but just simply to point to a cause.

Speaker 2: 1:49:42

I just updated my UniFi server.

Speaker 1: 1:49:46

Okay so that's cool All right, I was able to do it without interrupting the wireless.

Speaker 2: 1:49:52

That's pretty cool, yeah, that is good.

Speaker 1: 1:49:56

I need to do that on my wireless deal as well. Here, what are you using it's Synology?

Speaker 2: 1:50:03

For your access points. Mm-hmm.

Speaker 1: 1:50:05

Yep, okay for your access points.

Speaker 2: 1:50:09

Yep, okay, you really ought to look at Ubiquity and the Unify platform.

Speaker 1: 1:50:13

I've looked at it, dude, I know you like it it works, so does this one most of them work. There's a few that don't work. There's a ton.

Speaker 2: 1:50:23

That don't work.

Speaker 1: 1:50:25

I haven't touched this access point in probably 18 months. Yeah, it hasn't gone down. It always works. There's nothing to do. I assume it's been updating itself. I don't know because I haven't probably not pay attention. But whether it has or hasn't, the point is it's been stable and reliable, and that's the main thing in access point.

Speaker 2: 1:50:44

So in in in uh working with a client and we were looking at, like their active directory controllers and everything, and we're like, oh crap, because we were looking at, okay, are we going to upgrade these, how are we going to do and what are we going to migrate. We found active directory servers that had been up for over 800 days. Nice, no, that means it hasn't been patched.

Speaker 1: 1:51:08

That means it hasn't been like well nice that it's been stable sure but come on, man, we're talking almost three years.

Speaker 2: 1:51:20

Yeah, oh, it depends what it's doing.

Speaker 1: 1:51:24

Okay, authentication for your well, yeah, that one should probably be patched. But I mean, there's certain look. There's like if I had a, a server that was running some process that kicked off a crown job or something and it hasn't been touched in 800 days. I'm fine with that okay, yeah, well, anyway the. The idea that we should have a weekly patch happening, I think, is just an indicator of poor programming practices yeah, so we are going to hit 25k downloads after this episode, most likely.

Speaker 1: 1:52:09

Very good, yeah, so about the same as what I get on my typical gaming video For one video.

Speaker 2: 1:52:15

Yeah, yeah, yeah. Well, we just have to keep working and, you know, put out the show, tell people the best way to help us?

Speaker 1: 1:52:26

Well, there's two, two best ways. One is financial, but for most people you know, like sending money into a podcast is kind of the bottom of your list.

Speaker 2: 1:52:34

I actually have an ask to the audience and see if anyone will do this all right pick a episode that you thought had some really good commentary or really funny moment or something. Yeah, exactly, and put together a little 30 second, hey, or however long you know, let's, but not not like an hour, right, but something.

Speaker 2: 1:52:56

I can post on X with a message on promote it, Like if we can get a little show promotion reel like a best of sort of thing, maybe five minutes or whatever of that'd be cool if someone will go in and edit that, because I know what I think was funny. But I want to know what y'all like, right, because that's what we're trying to do is get the audience to grow. So by telling us what you liked, we can potentially grow that more.

Speaker 1: 1:53:22

So yeah, yeah, I mean clearly they. I'm sure everyone wants us to redo the constitution from scratch. Yeah, that'd be it birthplace, fort worth, texas.

Speaker 2: 1:53:32

What's this in reference to you? Okay, I think I think I know what gene's gonna do after the.

Speaker 1: 1:53:40

After the podcast play a video game. That's usually what I do. Uh-huh, uh-huh leisure suit larry maybe all right, you're not old enough to even know that game. I played that game, are you? Kidding me, god. That game came out in the when I was in in the 90s yeah, no, before that came out in the late 80s. Well, I played it in the 90s. Oh yeah they. Let me look up leisure suit larry there's a franchise.

Speaker 2: 1:54:06

They did more than one.

Speaker 1: 1:54:07

Let me look up leisure suit.

Speaker 2: 1:54:08

Larry, there's a franchise. Yeah, it was even on the PS4. Dude, are you kidding me? They're still making them.

Speaker 1: 1:54:17

Wow, that's great yeah 87 came out in 87 yeah, well, I played the 90s version hey, did you? That's what we got to talk about. This, then. That's a good, good cutaway. Did you see what happened with steam?

Speaker 1: 1:54:37

no so steam has just delisted 25 000 games, 25,000 games. Why? Because Visa and MasterCard said you can't sell adult video games or we're not going to allow transactions. Why? Because a special interest group that I can't remember the name of, but it's named, has been pushing the credit card companies to ban transactions for all porn related things, and one of those is adult themed video games so I can't go get leisure shoot larry on steam?

Speaker 2: 1:55:15

it's probably no longer available, yeah well, it's, it's on, it's listed on 25 000 games being delisted.

Speaker 1: 1:55:23

It's listed on bought it it's not gonna get well then it doesn't include enough pornography then. But it's a games that you know somebody developed and and clearly there's a market for that.

Speaker 2: 1:55:36

People are buying oh, this is why having these centralized clearing houses and bad idea, yeah, like we need to go back to when we bought cds.

Speaker 1: 1:55:46

So I think the way around this for steam if creating a restricted list this is what I would do.

Speaker 1: 1:55:54

I would. I would say no games are any longer available for dollars. Now you have to buy steam bits. Steam bits are the only currency that we allow for purchase of video games. You can buy steam bits a hundred dollars at a time from, you know, normal purchases of credit card, because you have to have something that washes the money essentially, yeah, I got you and then good luck to the credit card company saying, well, we just won't allow any video games. Then you would have more of a revolt from people. I mean, I think the number of people that play games that got deleted is fairly small. I think it's probably in the under 5% range Dude, I don't know.

Speaker 2: 1:56:40

I googled or googled. I searched adult on Steam. Yeah, and there's still some stuff coming up. Yeah, so these are the ones that apparently aren't are more like anime-.

Speaker 1: 1:56:46

Steam, yeah, and there's still some stuff coming up, yeah. So these are the ones that apparently aren't.

Speaker 2: 1:56:49

Are more like anime-ish, yeah, yeah.

Speaker 1: 1:56:52

Because there were a bunch of like you have to enable on Steam it's off by default. You have to enable adult gaming. So first of all, I don't think most people even know that there's a topic for that. I totally didn't yeah.

Speaker 2: 1:57:07

Where do you enable that?

Speaker 1: 1:57:08

it's, it's I think it's in the preferences and it may no longer be there anymore. Now they may have removed the toggle too because they've changed they.

Speaker 2: 1:57:15

They still have the toggle for frequent nudity or sexual content.

Speaker 1: 1:57:18

I'm looking at now adult only sexual is still there okay well, there you go yeah, so so apparently like I never bothered, but I'm doing it for the show yes, yes, the sacrifices that you go through for the show, I mean that's worth an extra donation by somebody, for sure, uh-huh come on guys, we have to, don't? You need to donate enough money for Ben to be able to buy a test game, god, just to see if this works or not, because God knows he never logged into the games I've bought for him.

Speaker 2: 1:57:55

Dude, there's still a ton on here. Okay, it's interesting 25,000 titles.

Speaker 1: 1:58:02

They've said 25 titles. 25,000 titles have been removed.

Speaker 2: 1:58:07

Huh, okay, yeah, search for rape my little pony see, if you know I'm not doing that, you can do that no, no, that's what I have you for.

Speaker 1: 1:58:23

No, you could test. You're the tester, you're the official tester. So they've removed this shit because of a special I mean, there's hentai shit on here there's. There probably is some hentai, I mean again no, there's a lot yeah, yeah, but the number of people that are affected by this is?

Speaker 2: 1:58:43

a sliver.

Speaker 1: 1:58:44

It's a tiny, tiny percentage of overall steam users. But if steam switched the payments for all their games to a steam currency that you could buy, that means that everyone who's on steve is affected. And I dare I fucking dare credit card companies to say yeah, we're not going to support steam.

Speaker 2: 1:59:07

You can't use visa or mastercard to buy steam bits well, that, or just make you know, open up bitcoin, you know?

Speaker 1: 1:59:16

yeah, but that's such a pain in the ass, man. People don't want to deal with pain in the ass, right, but my point is if steam accepted bitcoin and they said okay, visa mastercard won't allow you to transact for these titles, but you can with Bitcoin.

Speaker 1: 1:59:29

Fuck you or whatever. That's an easier answer for them. Here's the other possibility. Musk has been talking about it for a while X, turn X into a banking system which is not going to follow these stupid rules, and then Steam can basically have x as their exclusive funding source. So I mean, there's ways around it, but I I think the fact that you have the big gorilla of the gaming sales industry, steam is like gamestop used to be years ago. They are the big gorilla of video game sales. Most games that are ever sold, most of those, get their money from Steam, which is not itself a good thing. Frankly, there ought to be more competition in that space as well, but it is what it is. Steam is the big gorilla, and if they were willing to take off these games, it's the same shit that we saw with credit card companies not allowing gun merchants to use credit cards.

Speaker 2: 2:00:34

Right, Same sort of stuff.

Speaker 1: 2:00:36

Yeah, and their first step was labeling. You're no longer able. If you buy a gun, that transaction is coded as gun purchase on the credit card's back end. Yeah, like that's not good, but they can impose that because most people want to use their credit cards to buy guns. The next step is saying well, you can't use our credit cards for certain types of weapons. You can buy a shotgun with a credit card, but you can't buy an assault rifle with a credit card. And I'll use that word even though we all know that it doesn't mean anything. But that's literally the next thing to flow. The next domino to fall is what I meant. So it's a bad trend. I don't like it.

Speaker 2: 2:01:24

I think that the bigger issue Credit card companies have no business censoring anything I purchase.

Speaker 1: 2:01:29

Exactly. They're literally a clearinghouse, that's all. They are. A transaction clearinghouse, I would argue, and I would lose because they have better lawyers. But I would argue this is tortious interference. They are literally interfering between the customers of steam and steam itself in a in a commercial act. That is something you get to sue people for in the real world. But I'm sure the credit card companies you know have all this covered through their contracts. But it certainly is a very similar thing that you would somebody for sue somebody for tortional interference. It's bad no matter what. So I'm hoping something comes out of this, because it is porno games Most people don't want to admit, even if they've bought these things.

Speaker 1: 2:02:19

So they're not going to want to be participating in any kind of a protest or boycott or anything. But something really needs to happen, because this is a very slippery slope. You know, the more that they get to get away with, the more that. And it's not even the credit companies themselves Like I I don't think it was, certainly in this case they weren't the one that came up with this. We know that if you do a little Googling you can find the special interest group that has been pushing this, and it's ironic because it's a liberal special interest group, much in the way that Al Gore's wife on the conservative side was against Ozzy Os osbourne's lyrics on records. Right, they wanted to ban records like ozzy osbourne's records. I only use his name because that's you know, because we just talked about early in the show yeah, but they wanted to to have a lot of rap be banned.

Speaker 1: 2:03:20

They wanted to have things with bad words be banned, and and what they got was labels. They got labels and I think they even got like that same group was working on video games as well, so it was records and video games. And they got adult themed video game labels so that a video game, if like something like Grand Theft Auto, would have a sticker on it like the original one that said this is an adult video game. If like something like grand theft auto, would have a sticker on it like the original one that said this is an adult video game. You know, just because you get to, you know, drive over hookers and stuff in the video game so well.

Speaker 1: 2:03:59

There's no doubt that that's a adult video yeah, you probably don't want like a six-year-old playing it, for sure yeah, a fucking 12 year old dude 12 year old, I think would have fun with that game. Okay, I'm sure they would have fun, but that's still maybe not appropriate yeah, yeah, maybe, maybe, but either way, I don't want al gore's wife telling me what I do and don't do with my kids.

Speaker 2: 2:04:27

Agreed, I don't want Al Gore's wife telling me what I do and don't do with my kids. Agreed, I don't want anyone telling me what I do and don't do with my kids. It's bad enough.

Speaker 1: 2:04:32

Your wife tells you that you don't want anybody else telling you that, oh, don't get me started.

Speaker 2: 2:04:37

Oh, get me started. We need to wrap up, not go down a rabbit hole.

Speaker 1: 2:04:42

Yeah, that's true. How long have we been going here?

Speaker 2: 2:04:45

anyways Two hours A little over Are we Really?

Speaker 1: 2:04:47

I didn't think we were at two hours. We're at 100 minutes, dude. That's not two hours.

Speaker 2: 2:04:54

We got on here at 1020, so Okay.

Speaker 1: 2:04:57

All right guys. Well, ben says, wrap it up. We're going to wrap it up. We will catch you in the next episode. And remember, if you want to support the show, tell my timer about it yeah, and and, if you can, we certainly appreciate the uh donations to us via the links as well yep, and anyone out there who wants to put a little promo reel together for us?

Speaker 2: 2:05:17

I would really appreciate it and I'll spend my own money to pimp it on twitter. Perfect, all right, thanks.

Speaker 1: 2:05:25

One last thing. Somebody asked about methylene blue. I'm including a link to the one that both Ben and I have bought off Amazon and I think it works pretty good at turning your pee blue.