Episode Transcript
[00:00:00] Speaker A: In this episode, we weigh in on the Biden age issue and consider whether he's being selfish or selfless in refusing to drop out. We'll consider the effort to convince people that continues to this day that the civil war was not about slavery. And we'll get into the problem many have expressed with Bronnie James, son of LeBron James, being drafted into the NBA and signing his first contract with the NBA despite the fact that he didn't have a great college season last year.
Hello. Welcome to the call like I see it podcast. I'm James Keyes, and riding shotgun with me is a man who's been known to move from side to side on the political spectrum, almost in a rhythmic way. Tunde Ogun, Lana Tunde. You ready to show the people how you go side to side like you're swag surfing?
[00:01:00] Speaker B: Yeah, but my wife used to say I had two left feet when I danced. So let's see how that goes in the conversation.
[00:01:07] Speaker A: See how that goes. All right.
All right.
[00:01:10] Speaker B: She didn't seem like too politically left feet. She just meant I was uncoordinated and couldn't dance. Just to be sure, because we're talking clarify.
[00:01:17] Speaker A: Just to clarify?
[00:01:17] Speaker B: Yeah, just to clarify.
[00:01:18] Speaker A: That's triggering for something that would trigger something.
If you enjoy the show, we ask that you hit subscribe or like on your podcast app or YouTube. Doing show really helps the show out.
Now, recording this on July 7, 2027. And Tunde, over the last week or two, really since Biden's poor performance in the first presidential debate, there's been much discussion on whether he needs to get out of the race because he's just too old for running run to run for president or too old to be president. Calls from the dropped out have really picked up, and there have been reports of private calls, there's been public calls and so forth. And this is coming from the media, from other political leaders and so forth. And Biden has tried to reassure his supporters and the american people, but his efforts don't seem to really be, have been that effective. So it really seems like Biden's performance in the debate confirmed many suspicions about the age, and there's just not a lot of evidence to the contrary that people can use to refute that. And so it's kind of, he can't make them unsee that. So to get us started, you know, what have your been thoughts on kind of just Biden, what's been termed as him bombing the debate and his efforts since then, and just the idea that, of how defiant he is, that he's not leaving the race and that he wants to stay in and so forth.
[00:02:30] Speaker B: Yeah, I mean, it's interesting as you set it up because you said something that I think we can all appreciate is we can't, no one can unsee what they saw that night, the debate. And so, you know, I'll start off with that, acknowledging that, yeah, Biden, his performance was a disaster, and he didn't give much confidence to anybody that all the negative projections about his cognitive decline aren't somewhere based in some sort of fact. You know, like, everybody could see that the guy was just struggling and that didn't look good. And, you know, forget about anything anyone wants to say about he's got a great team or he, you know, he just was tired and all that. At the end of the day, part of politics in the modern era with television and media and all that is about performance.
I think the first time that was seen in american politics was the 1960 debate between John Kennedy and Richard Nixon. And a lot of people believe Nixon lost the debate and kind of the momentum he had because of a poor performance, not verbally or intellectually from Nixon. But he was sweating all over the tv. And I was back early in the tv world where I guess they didn't realize about makeup and how hot it is going to be under the lights and all that and that, you know, and then you have this young guy, the good looking guy, John Kennedy, who looks smooth. And I think, you know, that debate between Trump and Biden was a great example of that. The optics, you know, definitely favored Donald Trump and did not favor Joe Biden. So I think, you know, that that'll be my initial response.
And then, you know who I know.
[00:04:05] Speaker A: I think you're correct in the sense that the Biden, Biden and his team underestimated the what, what aesthetics and optics mean in the modern world. And I hate to say that because he's been in, you know, he's been a politician in the tv age for 40 years. So it's not like he or 50 years. It's not like this should have caught him by surprise. But if you can't perform when it's time to perform, then that calls into question everything. I think what's really exacerbated this is that he hasn't been overly public before this. And so if you don't give people a lot of data points and say, like, if he had been, you know, doing fireside chats for the, every week or every, you know, twice a month for the past six months, and then the debate was seen as an aberration, then it's easier to dismiss. But when you skip the Super bowl interview, when you don't sit, when you don't get in and do a lot of media appearances, except, you know, very scripted and controlled situations. But if you don't do, like, open situations often, then you go out and do one, and it's all bad. And it's bad in the way that people have been wondering, hey, can this guy deliver? Then you really put yourself behind the eight ball and he doesn't. Now he's trying to play catch up and trying to create more data points, but it's like, well, look, man, you know, first impressions, quote unquote, matter, you know, and so you've given people an impression. Now, it's not a first impression from the standpoint of, have we ever seen Joe Biden? But maybe in this campaign cycle, that's a first impression as far as, okay, what's this guy looking like right now? And he didn't deliver. And so, and I think you have to start with that. Like, his job was to put on a certain level of performance and to make people believe that he was capable of doing stuff. Again, this is a leadership position. We're not asking him to crunch numbers. You know, he's not asking him to be an accountant or be this and that. He needs to be a leader, be a leader. And a leader needs to be able to stand up and get people behind him. And I, if he's over here mumbling and stuff like that, that's just not the appearance of somebody that you feel like is gonna be able to lead, get people behind you. Hey, we're going this way. Let's ride.
[00:06:01] Speaker B: No, and I think, you know, it's interesting, the contrast this really shows, I think, the contrast of the psychology of the voters of both parties, at least in today's current makeup. I don't wanna hear about 50 years ago, because, you know, Trump has definitely shown, if you listen to him and watch him talk, also cognitive decline. I mean, the guys are three years apart. And that's what I mean. Everyone acts like that. They're so different. Trump, you know, mistook Nikki Haley for Nancy Pelosi. I remember for like five minutes straight during the, when it was the primary campaign, when Nikki Haley was still running, he recently, I saw him on a speech, kept calling his former White House physician Ronnie Jackson, Ronnie Johnson many times, you know, I don't need to name all his gas, but he clearly is also an old man, that forgets stuff and all that. Now he speaks much more forcefully and boldly than, than Biden. Cause Trump understands the importance of optics and marketing and all that. And he's a great showman. So in that sense, yeah, he definitely performs better.
[00:07:02] Speaker A: He understands that what comes out of your mouth is less important than how it comes out of you.
[00:07:06] Speaker B: Than how it comes out, correct. No, it's true. He's an entertainer. I mean, he's great at it. Right.
And so that's what I'm saying. It's an interesting that it's kind of like the fans of Donald Trump, like you said, they're less concerned with what comes out of his mouth and more concerned with how the optics of the messaging are, because there's interesting questions I would have loved to have Biden ask him. Like he recently announced before the debate that he was willing, he wanted to do away with his income tax altogether and replace that with 80% to 100% tariffs.
That's a big deal for a candidate for president of the United States to announce that his plan is to totally change our tax revenue system and all.
[00:07:46] Speaker A: That, especially considering inflation, is something we're worried about right now. And that's the kind of thing that.
[00:07:51] Speaker B: Would drive, I'm not even here to pick that apart. I'm just saying that that's a massive change that's being proposed, and no one seems to want to follow up questions.
[00:07:59] Speaker A: About substances, which they should. Well, let me, there's something, there was a direction you went. I want to go that, take that a little further, though, in terms of the reaction of the parties, because what is interesting to me, and I'm not saying this in a good or bad way, it's just very interesting that Trump has his deficiencies as well. You know, but it seems like the, from his party, it literally is his party at this point. But the effort and the energy seems to go towards either obscuring, covering up, you know, whatever his deficiencies are, whenever he makes a gaffe, you don't see that on replay in conservative media ecosystems. That's kind of, that stuff is not there. Whereas now this also reveals kind of that the media ecosystems aren't necessarily equivalent and mirror images. But nonetheless, when Trump has his deficiencies, those deficiencies, the effort is made to obscure those. When Biden has his deficiencies, it's like, hey, freak out. Freak out publicly about it. And so that, to me, is just interesting in the way that the reaction goes. But I honestly believe, though, that both people's deficiencies should be brought to the head. So I'm happy that at this point, if Biden, if we haven't concerned about Biden's age, I don't want that resolved in some room that nobody gets to sit in. And it's like, all right, we're just.
[00:09:10] Speaker B: Going to do this.
[00:09:10] Speaker A: I'm happy that public, public scrutiny is, as voters, that's our only way to kind of, or that's our primary way to have influence on this process prior to election day, you know, and so, like, who we get to vote for. So the public scrutiny that Biden is going through right now is healthy for our system. I would want more public scrutiny for Trump personally. And so we can get, we really vet these guys and see what's going on. So, but in general, I want to add, or, you know, switching gears briefly, I want, I do want to ask you, like, from Biden's point of view, like, what is he doing? Like, is he, does he, do you think that he's looking at this like, I'm the only one? Like, is he, has he fall into that absolute power kind of mindset or power mindset where he's like, I'm the only one that can save the country from Trump? Like, why do you think he's so adamant now when clearly the trend lines are against him, whether it be polling, polling has been saying for years that people think he's too old and support seems to be waning to. But he's so defiant right now. He's much, much more defiant now that he's not gonna come out of the race than he was making points during the debate. You know, this energizes him. You know, so what do you think is going on there? Like, why is the, why is the only thing that really gets him fired up is that he's not gonna leave the race.
[00:10:23] Speaker B: I'm gonna go somewhere you wouldn't expect me to go. Okay. I'm going to scripture.
[00:10:28] Speaker A: Oh, okay. Okay, here we go.
[00:10:30] Speaker B: I'm gonna get biblical with it. Cause I feel like Moses right now. Cause I'm just looking at a bunch of idolatry.
Because you're right. I mean, you said, I say that joke because you said something. I put it in my mind, which is the way, does he think that he's the only person that can save the country from Trump? And it made me think of that. Trump will tell everybody that he's the only person that can save the country from Biden.
[00:10:55] Speaker A: So both dudes are playing us.
[00:10:57] Speaker B: That's what I mean. It's kind of again, this, they're avatars for something else, right. That we are so kind of polarized and it's not even both of their fault. It's the whole last 2030 years like we've been talking about on various discussions about the media, ecosystems and all that. And the bottom line is that, yeah, I mean, I think to answer your question, I got no idea what's going on through Biden's head. And based on that debate performance, he may not have a hundred percent idea what's going on through his head. And that's kind of the, you know, it's a bad joke, but it's true, right, that we don't know how he's thinking right now as a human being. Of course, I can appreciate if he feels, hey, look, I got us here. I beat Trump once.
I think I'm doing a good job, even though I'm a little bit slow. I know I'm 81, blah, blah, blah, but I can do this.
I think him personally, I could see that being his attitude. But this is the whole point to me of having a political party apparatus that would be healthy, that doesn't try and anoint people, but, you know, can be a check and balance against, you know, an individual who's seeking to maybe retain their power a little bit longer than, than is appropriate.
And then, you know, just, just the reality of the situation. I mean, this is unprecedented. I mean, it's all unprecedented from what Trump's going through and the fact that he's a nominee with all these felonies to what the Supreme Court just threw this hand grenade in the situation of maybe he can be prosecuted, maybe he can at this point. And then on the other side, the alternative is a guy who, like we've been talking about, clearly didn't show up to tell the country he's ready to take this on again. So, I mean, it's just, again, if both these men, that's what I mean, it's interesting. If Biden doesn't step down, he's going to put the country through something that probably most of us would rather not go through. And Trump clearly has gotten this far and is going to put the country through something that we probably would rather not go through. Versus what I'm saying is, had he decided not to run, had the Republican Party as a party decided to, you know, maybe go the direction of Nikki Haley or Ron DeSantis or one of these other candidates? So, no. Well, I think, I don't know.
[00:13:11] Speaker A: While the specifics may be unprecedented, I'll.
[00:13:14] Speaker B: Tell you after November, how I feel about it.
[00:13:18] Speaker A: But what we're seeing, though, definitely seems to be kind of normal humanity type stuff. Like this is that, this is the hubris. This is the, you know, like I, hey, you know, like you said, I beat him before. I can beat him again. I'm trying to prevent this and so forth. And what's interesting to me about it is that almost in a movie sense, and I'm going to, I'm going to throw it in a direction that I know you'll appreciate, this is kind of like, like the way Biden is behaving is in a sense, almost makes it more likely to bring about what he's trying to prevent. And that reminds me of, you know, Star wars and like, like the Jedi. You know, you go to episode three and so forth, like what the Jedi had become at a certain point, the way they operated actually enabled the dark side to take over. You know, like it was, it was, it was part of what the dark side had needed to take over. And so, and I see this also, like this analogy and the analogy has been made with, with Ruth Bader Ginsburg and with, with Biden and so forth. And, but it, that fits in that analogy as well. It's just like, well, Ruth Bader Ginsburg was, you know, a champion of reproductive rights and so forth, but by her when dealing with the Democratic Party when Obama was in office and her when they're saying, hey, you know, you might want to resign now so we can replace you with someone who's like minded to you. And she refused to do that. And by her doing that, she helped bring about the overturning of Roe, you know, like, with people who wanted to overturn, like, I'm not blaming her for that. Like, I'm not going to blame the person who failed to prevent something in the same way that I look at the person who caused it. But at the same time, if that's something that's important to you, then I would think you would almost be willing to do anything that would help, anything, you know, legally above board and all that that would help prevent bringing about what you're trying to prevent. And so in this case, Biden weakness as a candidate, inability to perform the show trappings of the presidential job, like, wait, he might be able, I'm not saying he can't perform the, like the technical stuff and, you know, get in and do whatever needs to be done with his advisor and make the decisions. I don't know. I'm not in those rooms. But he's not at this point, it doesn't look like he's able to perform these showy parts of the job, which is a part of it. You do need to be able to make people feel good about their leadership, feel good about what's going on in the country, feel like you're in good hands and so forth. And he does it right now, based on the limited sample size they're giving us in the campaign, doesn't seem like he's able to do that. And so by that, he may be setting himself up to run in a race that he can't win, not because the other side is so strong, but just because he's so weak, which would bring about what he's trying to prevent. And so to me, it's interesting that you see that, but that's kind of a human thing. Like, you see, it gets talked about in movies, you know, like, it's a theme that you see throughout humanity, where people, oftentimes with power and leadership positions, will begin themselves, to center themselves so much in that struggle that they lose sight of the bigger picture and what they may have been. And, you know, Biden says this is about democracy being on the ballot itself. Hey, man, you being on the ballot doesn't give democracy his best chance.
[00:16:16] Speaker B: Yeah, well, it's, and it's interesting, too, because you see it in sports as well, where, you know, great players, you know, that, that I'm not comparing, you know, Biden to a great athlete, but what I'm saying is when a player that was really good or great kind of stays in the game too long in terms of the amount of years.
[00:16:33] Speaker A: Yeah.
[00:16:34] Speaker B: And it's hard because, you know, I can appreciate that, you know, you think you got it and, and you don't want to acknowledge that you missed a step or you lost a step. I should say, as a funny joke, I remember playing in, because I played NCAA basketball just for the audience reference, because I remember when I was 33 and I was playing in the Monday night league in Boca, and it was still like a competitive league for over 30s guys. And I remember I saw this gap in the defense. I was on the wing with the ball, and I made my move, my quick first step, and I remember I saw the defense close, and there was two guys standing there, the basket, and my brain really, like I'm talking in a split second. I had this whole conversation with myself, and I was like, man, what the hell are those two guys doing there? And then the other voice came in and was like, dude, you lost a step, man.
[00:17:22] Speaker A: Yeah, you would have already been there. You had already been passed, like ten years ago.
[00:17:26] Speaker B: If I was 25, I'd already been at the hoop. But I'm not. I'm old, and I'm working in corporate America, and I'm playing in a Monday night league. So it was like one of those where my mind was like, hold on, man. This can't be real. This can't be happening. So it's like, you know, I get it, but I wasn't trying to.
[00:17:42] Speaker A: That's a hard. That kind of self honesty is difficult. And then just being able to see it, and I think the people, you.
[00:17:48] Speaker B: Know, it's funny, though, just to finish number one, I wasn't trying to run the country. I was playing in a Monday night league. Yeah, yeah.
[00:17:53] Speaker A: The stakes are a little low, so there.
[00:17:54] Speaker B: But you know what? You know, what ended it for me, honestly, is later that season, that same season, I tore my Achilles tendon and I had a six month old kid. My youngest kid was six months. And I remember sitting in a hard cast with a six month old baby sitting on the couch, and it was like, you know, in my head, I'm like, okay, I'm too old for this now. Like, I can't be playing in these leagues and getting hurt. I got a family to take care of. So it really was an actual injury that forced that decision for me. And I think going back to the conversation at hand, that'll be the sad part with Biden, if it takes something like that, like, he physically has to either, you know, get worse in front of our eyes or he just something, you know, he doesn't do this on his own type of thing.
[00:18:33] Speaker A: Well, but that's the thing. Like, the people around you sometimes can be the ones that can help you see before it's too late. Like, you had to suffer the down in order to see, you know, and right now, I guess Biden hasn't suffered enough of a down in order to see what's happening, you know, and so. But the people around him, you know, maybe could get through to him, like, the people that are close to him. But a lot of times, what I think what's happening there is that because this has been a line of attack on Biden, the age thing, for so long that they've been conditioned themselves to kind of think that any attack on his age is some partisan hit job or whatever, and so they may not be able to see clearly in terms of, okay, well, this guy's lost the fast, lost his step, but maybe losing the step isn't the end of the world. But again, I get back to the whole thing of, can you perform the kind of show duties of the president? I think back to, like, FDR, you know, and like FDR, remember when he's campaigning and so forth, he hid his partial paralysis that came from polio and so forth because he understood the optics of, hey, I can't face if people, when I'm doing these appearances and this is before tv, you know, but if I'm doing these appearances and people see me as not vigorous and strong, that they're gonna have a negative mindset about me, about that. And so he hid that. Now, his mind wasn't affected with that, so to speak. So that's a little, the stakes, I say, are a little lower, you know, with, with aging necessary than like a disease that affects your body. But nonetheless, it kind of reminds me of that in the sense that, well, with FDR, he decided to hide, you know, that and, you know, like, and so forth. And I wonder if this is with Biden, if they've just, and the reason why we don't have a lot of data points of Biden being vigorous is that there has been the decision to hide up until now. And then when they couldn't hide anymore, he was kind of exposed. And then now what do you do? But again, they have, you have the bunker mentality that, oh, well, whenever they say this, this is just right wing talking points or whatever like that, and then they can't have honestly evaluate the situation anymore. So you're in this tough spot where it's like, well, you know, and again, are you going to, based on your conduct, bring about, you use you, the person who's telling me that democracy's on the ballot, are you the person who's going to bring about or lesser the chances of democracy being able to win because you can't see clearly what's going on, you know, so to speak. Yeah.
[00:20:49] Speaker B: Well, and you make a great point with this term bunker mentality because I would say this, number one is, that's, again, where both men are the avatars, in my opinion, for how people feel. I mean, this really is about, I think, for the voters, I would say, you know, people got to look and reflect because you're right. What a great point you make that because Biden's age and his kind of feebleness and all that has been an attack from the right for so long. A lot of Democrats, or let's say, Biden supporters even, cause I know a lot of Democrats right now do think Biden should step aside. But those who think he should stay, they may be clouded by the history of those attacks on Biden, by his opponents and now feel like the bunker mentality, like, we got to fight this and all that. And I would say again, it's a direct mirror and avatar to certain fans of Donald Trump who feel like the legal pressure and all the stuff he's been through is just another attack. Like, they felt like the Russia hoax and the Mueller report.
[00:21:50] Speaker A: Trump is a master at creating that, though. Like, we've seen you and I have talked about this as it was happening over the years now, like, everything that happens to him, he's really good at communicating to his people, like, hey, this, they're doing it with me. They're doing this to you. And every, we gotta circle the wagons and so forth.
[00:22:07] Speaker B: Yeah. And it's a victim mentality thing. And I think it's interesting to see now Biden and his kind of, the people that are still supporting him and saying nothing to see here are begin, are taking that same victim mentality as well.
[00:22:19] Speaker A: Like, oh, circling the wagon.
[00:22:21] Speaker B: Yeah, circling the wagons and trying to say there's nothing to see here. Right. Like, just like, you know, the defenders of Donald Trump. So again, that's why everybody thinks they're so different, which they are very different men, obviously, of how they're made up and how they behave. But it's, it's just the way that we as the public kind of throw arrows and try to protect them is very similar. And that, to me, is, is interesting here. And so, but, yeah, I think, you know, just to finish it off with, with Biden is Isdev, you know, it'll be very interesting to see where this goes because like I said, this is unprecedented.
[00:22:55] Speaker A: Yeah. This isn't done yet. And just to be clear, I mean, like, and I'm not, and I know you're not trying to draw an equivalence in terms of the character of the man of Biden and Trump. Like, I would say, speaking for myself, I mean, I think the character of Biden is a much, Biden has much more character than Trump. You know, and I'm not saying that Trump is the answer if Biden is too, Biden is too old. My main point is just to look at what's going on with Biden and say, hey, you know, you are saying democracy is on the ballot or that Trump is unfit and yada, yada, yada, which I can agree with that stuff. But your behavior, your actions by staying in the race at a point when you can't deliver the goods on television the way you need to suggest that. Either you don't really think that or you don't know how bad you look. You know, like, so to me, it's more of a looking at Biden and say, hey, I can. You're saying this, hey, the stakes are high and all that. I can agree with all that.
[00:23:50] Speaker B: But dissonance that you can't solve easily. Right? Like, it's like, okay, well, if it's this existential, the threat that Trump's going to cause a democracy, then what the hell are you doing? Trying to be.
You can't get people out of this mess.
[00:24:04] Speaker A: Exactly. Exactly. So to me, that's really the kind of point to really, that really catches my eye. Is that, okay, well, like, I can agree with all that stuff that he's saying, but then his own behavior undermines that because it's like, all right, so if all of this is the existential threat, but all we got is this 81 year old dude who can't really perform on television. Like, that can't be the case. Like, those two don't match up. And one or the other, you know, either it's, it's that serious, and we need to get somebody that can at least, again, perform the optics of it, or it's not that serious, and you can kind of, you know, go up in your, your walker and just kind of do appearances, and we're all good. So, you know, this is not over. So we'll continue to see, you know, how these different factors play in. But, you know, I think it's helpful when you're looking at this stuff to not reflexively just say, oh, well, I like Biden, and so therefore, I can't see any of this, or I dislike Trump, and so I can't see any of this, or I like Trump. And so therefore, everything Trump does is, okay, I'll excuse it and, or whatever, you know, like, so it, part of it, again, as citizens who vote, is we got to be able to look at this stuff and kind of think about it beyond just picking teams and all that. And this is an example of that. So. But no, I think we can wrap this topic from there. Please join us for our second two topics today, and we'll talk to you then.
All right. Our second topic this week we've been seeing pop up from time to time. And this is something that goes back to the late 18 hundreds, but just the efforts to retell the history of the Civil War and the conflict that led up to it. And then the why the south seceded and. And so forth form the Confederacy. The traditional understanding and kind of the baseline understanding has always been that this was primarily about slavery and maintaining the institution of slavery, spreading the institution of slavery, but going back even to the daughters of the Confederacy and then even continuing to this day with, like, prager University and all this other stuff, there's been efforts to throw doubt on that and to say, oh, it was about all this other stuff and states rights or, you know, economic differences and all this other stuff. And this is in contrast, really, or in direct opposition to the contemporary writings of the people who led the Confederacy, you know, by the way. But nonetheless, I wanted to ask, throw it to you and kind of just address this issue head on, you know, and not just what is going on, but the why, you know? So why do you think there has been a persistent effort, you know, amongst people who either sympathize with the south or relate to the south or maybe, you know, were I were, you know, sympathetic? No, I mean, consider themselves kind of the descendants of the Confederacy and so forth to make the civil war about something other than slavery.
[00:26:44] Speaker B: All right, so I'm going to draw a line from kind of those who are true descendants of southern Confederates who can trace their lineage in America to prior to 1865, which is not that many people at this point in our story's nation's story, because you had about 100 million Europeans immigrate to the United States from about 1880 to, you know, let's call it the 1950s. You know, let's say that it's the people who came here who now have offspring that are Americans. So let's separate the kind of cultural meme for a lot of people today to support maybe confederate ideas or to think that, you know, the history was different. I. That a lot of them aren't real descendants of people that actually fought in the civil war, that lived in the south prior to 1860s. So let me talk about those people that do share a true heritage and lineage to southern confederate states is because I was thinking about things like the way that the german nation reacted after World War one. They were one of the causes of the war, and they lost, right? And then they had to create a mythical that turned into, you know, what happened in the thirties. And the myth was that they were the victims, that everyone else, France and England and the United States, were all the big bad guys, right? And the Japanese, the same thing after the war. They're trying to cover up all the atrocities they did to the Chinese, for example, and they become the victims. Right. Maybe make movies like Godzilla because it was, you know, everyone else was bad and attacked them. So I think that if we look at things that happen within the decades after the civil war, let's say, from myths and propaganda like the lost cause, all the way to media events like birth of a nation, the famous movie in 1915, there was a narrative created after the civil war that the south was the victim of northern aggression. And there's people today that still call it the war of northern aggression. And just like we see non Iranians.
[00:28:51] Speaker A: Like, not tongue in cheek.
[00:28:52] Speaker B: Yeah. They really believe it. And just like we see in today's, even to some of today's culture wars, right. People that instigate certain behaviors. Right. Once those behaviors don't play out the way they were planned, and maybe they, you know, they kind of lost their, their quote unquote battle, then they become the victim and they try and change the narrative. So I think there's part of that. I think there's also just some people are just racist, right. And they don't know. Maybe they're not comfortable.
[00:29:19] Speaker A: But if that's the case, okay, because that gives a.
[00:29:23] Speaker B: They're not comfortable to express it that way. Like, they think. They probably think that it's too harsh to say. I agree with everything Alexander Stevens said in the cornerstone speech. So emotionally, whether they're conscious of this or not, I think this is more of a subconscious thing, because I think the people that are constantly racist and are okay with it are the ones that say, yeah, I think blacks like James and Tunde are inferior to me. And it like, to me, I'm like, okay, that's honest. I can deal with that. I don't have to agree with it, but at least we can now have a conversation and know where we stand. I think it's, people need these emotional off ramps, and and there's enough people that want to give it to him and say, oh, it wasn't about this or that. It was about something else.
Well, I think that's it. It's that simple.
[00:30:01] Speaker A: To me, the the answer is embedded in the question, and you kind of, you danced around it, but I will just come out and say it in the sense that people went after these world events. Oftentimes, people like to create or hold on to kind of what's their story? You know, they either can create a mythical or if there's enough reality to it, like, for World War Two in the United States and Pearl harbor, they didn't have to create a myth. It was just like, but that's the thing. Like, hey, we were not all about it, but then we got attacked, and then people declared war on us, and then we went at it, and we didn't start it, but we finished it. So the american myth for World War Two, that I didn't have to create one, it kind of fit, but it plainly that the people that are doing this don't think that slavery and white supremacy are a noble enough cause to build their myth around. Like, they just don't think it is. They don't think that they can sell that to the masses and say, hey, that you should have, you know, warm feelings about the Confederacy because this is what they stood for, and they ended up losing, but it still was a noble cause. Like, they just don't think it's a good enough cause. And so from. From a perception standpoint, and, I mean, they think that. I guess they think that more people are. And I think this is correct, that people are decent people. And if that's what you say your cause is about, then you're gonna turn off a lot of people with that, you know, again, despite the fact what the leaders of the Confederacy at the time said in contemporary. So they create this other thing, you know, to kind of say, okay, and this is the. You can get it from the daughters of the Confederacy because they would want to kind of, oh, yeah, let's. I look at my dad or my uncles or whatever as part of some. Again, they don't think slavery is a noble enough cause, at least that you can sell to the public. So, you know, I want to do that. The more interesting thing is the people now, when we're 150 years, 160 years removed, and, you know, because they don't have any, even if you're a descendant, you don't have a direct connection to that. Like, your self worth and your kind of presentation in society isn't affected based on, you know, oh, that was a, you know, that's a granddaughter of the Confederate, or that's a, you know, that's a son of a. Like, you're not taught that doesn't. Will follow you around wherever you go. You know. So it's very revealing, though, on what they really think about the nature of what the Confederacy did stand for, that they feel the need to obscure that and make it about something they then, okay, well, what can. What does sell? What can we get people behind? Oh, yeah. Northern aggression or economic stuff or, you know, whatever. You know, whatever you. You come up with these, you know, these tropes that you think you can get people behind. And so to me, it is revealing. It reveals what they really think about that stuff more. So they may, they themselves, as you said, may be okay with that, but what they think they can sell to and try to bring more people over and have sympathy like they do for the cause, so to speak.
[00:32:43] Speaker B: And, you know, it's interesting, too, he says here, because he basically, this is. And this is really interesting to me about american history, because they basically, the Confederates called out the founding fathers, like Washington and Jefferson, as woke in today's term. And he says here again, and, quote, I admitted that the fathers, both of the north and south, who framed the old constitution, because that's what they call the American Constitution. They had their new confederate constitution or constitution of the Confederacy, while recognizing existing slavery and guaranteeing its continuance under the constitution so long as the states fit to tolerate its limits, were perhaps opposed to the principle. And he cited that in his original speech, where he basically was saying, like, hey, those founders were too squishy because they didn't want to go all the way and put this stuff really in there permanently. They kind of, they knew deep inside that slavery was an illnesse.
[00:33:35] Speaker A: Yeah. And, I mean, in this, Alexander Stevens just, you know, so everybody's clear is the vice president was the vice president of the Confederacy. You know, like, so, you know, Jefferson Davis was the president. You know, vice. The vice president was Alexander Stevens. And so, you know, this is, you can look at the contemporary writings, but also, this isn't just when you look at the Confederacy. You know, like, you can look at the conflicts that led up to the civil war as well, you know, and other conflicts in the United States. Like, you. You've sometimes talked about the conflict between Missouri and Kansas because we know that was a place where this. There were several compromises. And, you know, like, a lot of the things that were happening between the states in the run up to the civil war reflected this simmering tension over whether slavery would expand, whether it would be kept into the where states, where it was. And this battle bubbled up. And I have to get your comments on this, because, like I said, you've thrown it up to me. You've brought it up to me several times, so I don't want to be the one to talk about it. But just.
[00:34:29] Speaker B: Okay, no, there's actual battle, you know.
[00:34:31] Speaker A: An actual battle between. But go ahead. Go ahead.
[00:34:33] Speaker B: So let's go through the history, though, because this is very important. This is a part of our history. Most Americans don't appreciate which is we were a country after the revolution, but we were those 13 colonies, or 14 if you had Florida eventually. But it was after the Louisiana purchase that you had now the ability to expand west. So what happens is you had northern states and this was really the whites in those states who wanted to expand west. For exactly what we all know, the history of expansion west was land, resources, all that kind of stuff.
What happened was the southern planters who had extreme power in the government because they had a minority rule situation with the three fifths compromise clause were expanding west as well. And so they were in Texas, for example, and we did a whole show on that which caused the mexican american war. Then, like you're saying, there was a war between Kansas and Missouri because Kansas had put in their state constitution that slavery would be illegal. And this is a thing I think that is not well discussed is not because they were abolitionists who love black people.
They were tired of the planter class. They were actually like against oligarchy and they didn't. Because wherever you had slavery, you had extreme white poverty because there was like no jobs for the white folks because you had unskilled labor.
[00:35:52] Speaker A: You pay a white person to do a job if you can just get slaves to do it.
[00:35:55] Speaker B: Exactly correct. So you had unskilled labor in the field, but people don't talk. You had the skilled labor too, which, you know, our governor tried to put into thing that this is what benefited slaves. You have slaves that did very highly skilled work. So the planner class could rent those slaves out. So you had, you know, if you wanted someone to be an architect or build a dam there were slaves that could, that could do all that. So there was no room for whites just to work.
[00:36:19] Speaker A: And so Kansas, you know, put this in their constitution.
[00:36:22] Speaker B: Yep. And then, and then what happens is Missouri did allow slavery and what you had in one instance was 5000 people snuck over from Missouri to Kansas to vote in one of their elections because they were trying to vote in state legislature that would change the constitution and, you know, all that stuff. So it's a long story, but long.
[00:36:39] Speaker A: Story short, there was people who talk about. That sounds like the people who talk about sneaking in people to vote. That's kind of a projection, I guess because the people who snuck over to vote were the people that were pro slavery.
[00:36:50] Speaker B: Yeah. So, but then, but then in the end, there was a war between Kansas and Missouri and 10,000 people died in this war. That's what I mean. Like, like this is, you know, american history is pretty, pretty, pretty amazing, actually. And so this stuff was all going on as well prior to the civil war. And there was also a group called the Knights of the Golden Circle, which was an elite group behind the scenes also trying to dismantle the Union and create, basically a slave holding area that included Cuba and Mexico and other parts of the Americas. So basically, you had a lot going on.
[00:37:27] Speaker A: And so that's about whether slavery can expand. And this is like a couple of years before the civil war. Like, this is not like something completely remote. And so when you look at the overall arc of the history, like this was simmering, the expansion and the continued existence. Many in the south believed that slavery didn't expand and eventually would get rooted out. And that was kind of the. They looked at it not just from the economic standpoint, but as something that in order to preserve the existence of the institution, it had to expand. And so this is. This really was a fundamental piece of the first 70 or 80 years of the history. You know, 60, 70, 80 years of the history of the United States. And so to try to boil it down and to look at, yes, there were other things that people argued about at those times. You're looking at, you know, if you throw a percentage on, it's like 80 or 90% about the institution of slavery and the expansion of it and the nature of the economies in the places where the United States is expanding. And, yes, that affected the economics, or, yes, that affected this and that. And so what we're seeing with these efforts in modern times and what the daughters of the confederacy did and so forth is either making up stuff and. Or saying, okay, let's look at these smaller factors that basically were resultant things as a result of the fights over slavery. Again, the economics. The economics weren't about the economics. The economics were about what happens whether you go for a slavery based economy or not and make it about that. And again, it must be because the only reason I can think why you would do that was because if you put. If you lay down, you know, draw the line in the sand that this is about slavery is that you just don't think that people will look at it in a favorable way or enough people will look at it in a favorable way, and you want people to look at it in a favorable way, understanding that once you can get people to choose sides, and if you can get them to take a side on it, then maybe at that point they can go all in for. For the other stuff as well, you know? So. But, I mean, I think that we have to be careful with when we do this type of thing, because oftentimes, and if you look at, through history, what you'll see is when these types of histories are obscured or whatever, what you end up doing is setting the stage for another fight, to fight the same fight again in, you know, and so the, the concern I have and the reason I bring this up today is, is because if we're going to take all these efforts to obscure the nature of the, the fights over what type of country this would be, is this going to be a country where there, there's a level of equality? Are we going to move towards equality? Are we going to move toward or try to either restore or go towards more of a hierarchical system where there are certain classes of citizens and, you know, caste system or whatever you, you want to call it a. Or not. And the battles that we'll end up fighting those battles again, and whether it be through rhetoric, whether it be through voting or in the case of the civil war or the war between Kansas and Missouri, actual gunfights. And so the way to learn from these things that happened in the past is to know about them and know about them honestly, not know about how you think it'll make people feel good.
[00:40:19] Speaker B: Or something like that, you know? But my analogy would be like if, if someone who's of japanese descent, living in America was, like, really having an argument with me that the bombing of Pearl harbor was not part, you know, the main reason why the United States entered the war, and they tried to bring up all these other quotes and stuff like that and just try to say, look, that the fact that Pearl harbor was bombed really wasn't the catalyst for this and all it, like.
[00:40:44] Speaker A: And anyway, like, the US joined anyway in the future. And it's like, well, yeah, maybe all that.
[00:40:50] Speaker B: Yeah, it's like, okay. Like, you can believe that. But, you know, it just happened the next day.
Exactly. Yeah. Like, yeah. Like, so, yeah, I think basically you.
[00:41:02] Speaker A: Can play all the hypotheticals out and everything like that, but that was clearly the line in the sand based on what everybody said at the time. And again, you're much more reliable looking at what people said at the time than you are. Well, it's also, we do got to get out japanese.
[00:41:15] Speaker B: I just want to say this, that a Japanese American should not be offended by someone stating that fact. Right. And I'm thinking, like, I don't know why certain Americans are offended today, like you say, 150 years later, that we just state facts that were verbalized at the time of the civil war.
[00:41:30] Speaker A: Yeah.
[00:41:30] Speaker B: And that's to me, the curious part.
[00:41:32] Speaker A: Yeah. So, yeah, for sure.
[00:41:33] Speaker B: I know we gotta go.
[00:41:34] Speaker A: Well, yeah. Yeah. Well, thank you for joining us on part two of this discussion. Please definitely check out part one and also join us for part three as well.
All right, our third topic this week recently, I guess, the NBA draft at the end of June, Bronny James, son of LeBron James, was drafted by the Los Angeles Lakers. And LeBron James, you know, one of the greatest basketball players of all time, plays for the Los Angeles Lakers. And this will be the first time in NBA history where a son will play with it, with their father. It's happened in other sports. I know the Griffeys, Ken Griffey and Kirby junior did this a while back, but just in general basketball, this will be a first. But there's been a lot of reaction about this. Say he was a second round draft pick and, you know, and then ultimately signed a rookie minimum contract for a few years. And there's been a lot of discussion, a lot of people reacting to this and some saying, oh, it's not fair, and being really upset about it and others saying it's not a big deal or whatever. So I want to throw it to you, man. Just. Are you offended? Or what did you think about the idea of Bronny James getting drafted? And this is, I should mention, despite the fact that he didn't have a good. He only played one year in college, and it wasn't a particularly a good year. He also had a medical issue last summer, but he did overcome that, and that's not supposed to be an issue anymore. So what are your thoughts on the charges of nepotism? And this, is this something you should be offended by, or what's your thoughts on this man in the outrage?
[00:42:55] Speaker B: Well, I think it would have been more controversial if he drafted Caitlin Clark, but. And so I just said that for the algorithm, since she's so popular.
No, on a serious note, look, it's interesting. I think, you know, myself, I'm a father, so I think it's cool, you know, that he got. He's, he's that from. From LeBron James standpoint, that he's been able to hang in there and stay healthy enough to have a long enough career, that he has the ability to even think about playing with his son in a sport like basketball. Like you said, baseball, you know, that the body tends to go a little bit longer than basketball and football, so I think that's cool. And the fact that his son is good enough to even entertain the conversation is all good. And I think, yeah, obviously, if this was not LeBron James son and he didn't play a full one season of college basketball and he's 19 years old, what he have gotten drafted? I don't know. Probably not this kid.
There's other 19 year olds have been drafted and kids younger drafted out of.
[00:43:57] Speaker A: High school, some that haven't played full years of college too. You know that.
[00:44:00] Speaker B: Yeah, so that's what I mean. So, and he got, you know, he looks like he got paid what the, you know, the kind of league has and their regular stuff for a rookie.
So I'm kind of, of no opinion of it in a positive or negative way. But I do see, like, I can recognize how some people could look at it as nepotism and, you know, have an issue with it. But I just think that, you know, that's, that's more of what we see in today's world and just way people consume information that they want.
[00:44:29] Speaker A: I think it is more of what we see in today's world. But what it is is that the more you know about basketball and the way the NBA works, the more bothered you'll be by it. Or, excuse me, the less both. Let me, let me say that again. The more you know about the NBA and how things work in the NBA and basketball, the less bothered you will be by the idea. LeBron James, junior, Bronny James getting drafted in the second round and pick 55 of the NBA draft. The reason being is the second round picks, like, that's not a high hit rate of one. So it's not like if it was, if he was a top ten pick or top 15 pick or something like that. And it's like, okay, yeah, those, those are supposed to be guys that come in and most of those guys, you know, make the, make the teams, play on the teams and all that. And, you know, when you're looking at the top 15 picks or so, you know, you go five years down the road, 75 of them are still in the league and playing, you know, 75%. Excuse me, when you talk about second round picks, 20% of them, five years later are in the league, 80% are out of the league. So second round picks are a low hit anyway, that those are for, in many respects, flyers, a lot of second round picks, some of them never even play in the league, you know, so. And Bronny James, what he has going for him, the reasons why this would not be something out of the ordinary, is he was a high, he was a high high school recruit. He was considered a high level high school, high school recruit, high level high school recruits. NBA teams take flyers on them all the time, whether or not they had a good college season, because they're like, oh, well, this guy was rated highly coming out of high school. You know, maybe, maybe he might be, you know, somebody we can develop in the league of. And so they take, they take a low value draft pick, relatively something that maybe has a 20% hit rate, and they draft somebody who was a high level high school recruit. And so to me, the only reason why this is a story is because it's LeBron James Junior, because it's Bronny James. And people are like all the other picks in the, in the fifties of this draft. There are some that are never going to play in the NBA, but nobody is upset about that. Nobody's saying, oh, how could you draft this person? And, you know, they, if they don't make it in NBA, I'm going to really rub it in your face. And it's like, because nobody cares. You know, nobody knows about, you know, like, NBA players that are drafted in the second round. There's generally not a hoopla about that. And so the only reason why we know about this and the only reason why people care is because it's Bronny James, it's LeBron James Junior. And it's really just something. It's unfortunate, I think, for the kid. Like, I, as a father, I'm happy for the dad, but for the kid, I'm like, oh, Mandy, you know, he's had to live under the shadow the whole, his whole life, and now even when he goes to the NBA, the discussion isn't, hey, you made it to the NBA. The discussion is, oh, you're just, you know, LeBron James Junior and yada, yada, yada, so he can't escape it. And so, you know, but I mean, that's also, you know, like, there are pros and cons to that. And would he have been drafted if his name wasn't LeBron James Junior? We don't know, but that's kind of the point. And so anybody out here speaking definitively about that is, you know, just really just, like, upset, mainly because it involves LeBron James and LeBron James Junior.
[00:47:20] Speaker B: Yeah, I mean, and it's like you said, it says, I already wrote, read something where, you know, the kid, Bronny James, it was talking about all the criticism he's received online. And, you know, look, I'm not here to feel sorry for anybody, but I was just thinking, like, this kid's 19, and he can't control that he was born into his mom and dad and that his dad became, you know, one of the greatest players in history and famous and I, and so, yeah, I think it's, again, kind of like we said in the first part by the presidential debate, like, you know, these, all these kind of things, I think not all of them, but a lot of these things that we're seeing in our media and how people are reacting, especially online, becomes kind of like an avatar. It's like a mirror for our society. And I think, again, it's just, I don't know if there's that many miserable, miserable people that don't have anything else to do except, you know, want to criticize constantly LeBron James and anything connected to him or whatever. But, you know, like you said, I understand basketball very well in terms of just the mechanics of the sport and the business side of it from the NBA and the league perspective. So, like you said, had this been hit, had he been picked number three, yeah, you could be like.
But to be picked, Lakers had, for.
[00:48:34] Speaker A: Example, the Lakers had the 17th pick in the draft if they would have picked him 17th overall.
[00:48:39] Speaker B: Yeah, exactly. That's a good point, that it wasn't even their first pick in this year's draft that they picked him with. And so, and the fact that they've announced that he's going to spend a majority of this season in the G League, he's not even developmental on the roster. And, you know, and they said it, he'll probably play with his dad in one or two games early, like in the first week. That's what they're planning, just as a symbolic, so that they can give LeBron his win, that he can play with his son on the courthouse and they'll kick the kid out to the G League and say, you got to prove yourself.
[00:49:07] Speaker A: Yeah.
[00:49:08] Speaker B: And that's it. And he'll, we'll either see him again on an NBA court or we won't. That's the way I look at it.
[00:49:12] Speaker A: Well, you know, that, that doesn't change.
[00:49:15] Speaker B: The fact he's LeBron James Kidd and always will be. So, and that's, again, I think there's a lot of haters just because of that, of course.
[00:49:20] Speaker A: And that, that's really what drives us, because part of the NBA, because players come into the NBA oftentimes, like right now, you have to be, I think, one year out of high school if you're, if you're from the United States, one year out of high school. So whether you spend that one year in college or you spend it overseas or whatever, just one year, your high school class would have had to graduate at least one year before. And so because of that, though, so much of the NBA is about projection for these people anyway, because these 1920 year olds aren't, most of them aren't ready to play in the NBA anyway, or at least be meaningful contributors. So again, the idea that he's going to go and then spend most of the time in the developmental league, which is kind of like AAAA type of thing, a minor league, but it's one that's affiliated, that's, that's connected to the NBA and one that he's going to play on, one that's connected to the Los Angeles Lakers is, yeah, he's 19 years old. He needs to go get reps, and he's not going to get those reps playing in the big league like many second round picks, and honestly, like, the trend is, many first round picks now, you know, younger ones especially go down and play in the, what's called the G League, the developmental league for the NBA. And so again, all of that is pretty normal. If this guy's name was Tunde Ogun Lana junior, then we would not be talking about it. And all of the people that are outraged about it would not, they wouldn't be saying, they wouldn't have been on their radar, you know, because nobody else is talking about any other, nobody's talking about the 54th pick or the 53rd pick or anything like that.
[00:50:35] Speaker B: And I'd be talking about it, though, if it was Tunde, we would be.
[00:50:38] Speaker A: Doing a show on it.
[00:50:39] Speaker B: If his name was Tunde Ocalana. Joe, I say, hold on. My son just got a $7.9 million contract. Hold on. Okay, I'm moving in with you, son.
[00:50:47] Speaker A: So if he was Tunde Okalana junior, we'd be the only show talking about it.
[00:50:51] Speaker B: Yeah, exactly. But I'd be talking about it for sure. That's, no one would want to listen. But I'd be talking about.
[00:50:57] Speaker A: So, but the, the idea of celebrity, though.
[00:51:00] Speaker B: Hold on. I'm gonna make sure my two sons see this video.
[00:51:05] Speaker A: There you go.
[00:51:06] Speaker B: Well, the older one, I'll ask him why the hell you're not in the NBA. And the younger one, I'll tell him, this is what this how you get on the show. The younger one's only 13, so he's got a few years.
But the celebrity, he's got to start playing basketball, though.
[00:51:18] Speaker A: You mentioned how, you know, he's 19 years old and, you know, has to deal with this, you know, obviously because of who is father is. I think that's an interesting thing in our society in general. Like as 19, I mean, I don't think that's past the point where I'm going to be like, oh, you know, poor you. Like when he's had to deal with stuff when he's 13 or 14 or, you know, whatever, and that when they're that age, then I think it's a different thing at this point. You know, he, our society for all things except drinking alcohol, I guess we consider him a man. And so that comes with the territory. I'm sure he's used to it. And, you know, LeBron James seems like an involved dad and somebody who his kids are around a lot, you know, like, and so I'm sure that he has received guidance as far as dealing with that stuff and he's been able to grow and learn in that. But I think that's kind of part of the game we play now. And, you know, honestly, that gives him more opportunities than somebody who's obscure, like, so that's kind of the gift and curse in our society of celebrity is that you have opportunities. You'll have opportunities for endorsements. You have opportunities for to commercialize your notoriety, but you'll have to deal with people from the cheap sheets seats throwing tomatoes at you, you know, and that's kind of the, that's the give and take that we see that he has to deal with, not necessarily because of his own exploits at this point in his life, but because of his dad's exploits and because he's entering a similar industry. And, you know, that's just kind of part of it. You know, we see with politicians kids, you know, like, do we see that with, with Obama's kids or with, you know, we've seen, you know, things talking about with Barron Trump or, you know, whatever. And it's like how society deals with them. I think there is a line of demarcation, though. You know, like when you're talking, you know, underage, you know, I think there should be a pretty strong line of demarcation. But once they become adults, if they want to take professions that are publicly facing, like, a professional basketball player or whatever it would be, then you know, that, like, that's, I guess you're kind of signing up for that in a way that's not necessarily fair, but in a way is because you have benefits from that and then you have costs from that and to get the benefits to pay the costs you know, you want, you want the perks, you got to pay the cost. And that's kind of the cost in.
[00:53:10] Speaker B: That sense, pay the cost to be the boss. But just as we get out of here, I just want to say this as we're talking, you know, I didn't want to say it, to say it, you know, LeBron James, I'll say this senior is, you know, I don't know him personally and I don't, you know, I don't know about him. I don't hear rumors about him.
[00:53:27] Speaker A: Yeah, other than what we see publicly, basically.
[00:53:28] Speaker B: Yeah, other than what I see publicly. But I can say this. Look, this guy has been famous since he was in high school on the national stage as a bat. He was the best basketball player in high school at 1617 cover his magazine. His games were being nationally televised on ESPN, I remember. And then he went to the NBA at 18, and here he'll be 40 in December. And, you know, he's a great example, like you said, of someone who appears to be a very present parent. He's married to the same girl he was dating from high school. We never heard about him. You know, I mean, again, I don't know him, but we never seen out there in the media that he's been out there cheating on his wife or doing drugs or drinking and having these negative things. And then I, he's, you know, obviously has raised his kids well enough that one of them is now an NBA player and seems like a nice kid. Like these kids aren't arrogant. They're not out there in social media getting in trouble on the news and all that. And I just want to say, you know, because so many people throw much shade, so much shade to LeBron. And, you know, this is, this is another example where our society, you know, again, based on who people are, just kind of people can look at people and make an assumption. And I think once, once LeBron James put his thumb on a scale a bit during the last decade and up through the BLM summer of 2020, from the culture stuff, there's a lot of people that turned really negative on LeBron. And, you know, as we're talking, I'm just realizing, man, here's a guy that had the spotlight on him. He's going to be 40 since he was, you know, the majority of his life, and he seems to have done the right thing and he's a getting rewarded for it. He's being paid very well. And so I just want to give the guy props for that. No father. And as a business guy and all that stuff, you know, and a professional.
[00:55:08] Speaker A: Yeah. I mean, no, I mean, I think it's. It's pretty amazing the way you lay that out. You know, a public figure since your teen years and among the most famous people in the world and being able to do so, to walk a path, basically, that doesn't leave much from a, like a real kind of scenario. Like, oh, you quibble with, oh, I don't like the way he made this decision or he did this on television, but it's like, but nothing like serious issues, like, as far as the way somebody would live their life from a publicly facing standpoint. Like, the dude has been on point the whole time. And that's pretty amazing when you think about it, because, especially when you're young, once you get to be a certain age, it's like, okay, yeah, you kind of settle down and everything like that. But 1819, 2021, those are the times when everybody screws up. You know, it's like this guy had to be on point the whole time and was able to pull it off. And it's quite amazing. I mean, yeah, I think you're, you're right that, you know, like, that should be, that shouldn't be glossed over. That should be something that's acknowledged and, you know, give the guy credit, give the guy props. Like, yeah, this, you know, that's not easy. And it's very impressive that he's been able to maintain the, the level of kind of, you know, public facing and public facing, like stand up, miss, you know, stand up guy. And then also from the professional success and had the, you know, the personally, you know, like with his family and everything like that, all that stuff's been in the public, and he's been able to keep all that stuff moving and keep it, you know, above board in a way that is commendable, you know, again, from what we see, which, again, as a public figure, what we see, we, we see a lot of negative stuff from a lot of people, you know.
[00:56:44] Speaker B: Yeah.
[00:56:44] Speaker A: So, so, yeah, we can. I think we can wrap the show for, from there. We appreciate everyone for joining us on this episode of call. Like, I see it. Subscribe to the podcast, rate it, review it, tell us what you think. Send it to a friend. Till next time, I'm James Keys.
[00:56:55] Speaker B: I'm tuned to Guelana Sr.
[00:56:57] Speaker A: Apparently. All right. All right. We'll talk to you next time.
