Episode Transcript
[00:00:00] Speaker A: In this episode, we consider the extent to which the framework of the United States government as expressed in the Constitution, is failing and also what drove it off the cliff. And later on, we react to new research that suggests that adult humans don't really age linearly, but rather have aging bursts in their mid-40s and early 60s.
Hello, welcome to the Call Like I See it podcast. I'm James Keys, and joining me today is a man who has been called by many a smooth operator, Dunde Ogonlana Tunde. Are you ready to show them how you make it happen from the north all the way down to Key Largo?
[00:00:48] Speaker B: Yeah. I got no response, bro, because that's one thing I've never been called. So you just put a smile on my face. That's great.
[00:00:57] Speaker A: So you appreciate it.
[00:00:59] Speaker B: Hey, man, that's the one thing no one's ever accused me of being smooth. So I'm gonna date myself because I keep thinking of Big Daddy Kane's song.
[00:01:11] Speaker A: There you go. But when you're 6, 4, 6, 5, you don't need to be smooth. You know, like, gotta tell it other ways.
[00:01:16] Speaker B: Cause it's cool. Because, like, the Big Daddy came and was like that cool, you know, dark skin, dark, you know, deep voice, chocolate brother. So it's like, now you put me in his light. So I feel cool, man. Feeling good, man. Now I feel older, man.
[00:01:30] Speaker A: Let's get it rolling.
[00:01:30] Speaker B: Yeah. Now I feel old. I'm talking about Big Daddy Kane. But this may be the example of why I'm not smooth. You see what happens?
[00:01:38] Speaker A: Yes.
[00:01:40] Speaker B: Let's go. Let's do a show. Let's see how that goes.
[00:01:42] Speaker A: Before you get started. Before we get started, if you enjoy the show, I ask that you subscribe and like the show on YouTube or your podcast app, doing so really helps the show out. We're recording on April 22, 2025. And Tunde, over the last few months, we've seen a pretty clear Trend in the U.S. government, the president, and the executive branch of the government. It writes laws and rewrites laws by decree, AKA executive orders. It tells private businesses who they can and can't hire and how they operate, and pretty much does whatever it wants to, including summarily disappearing people into foreign gulags, regardless of what the courts have said and so forth. Now, all this is a sharp departure not only from the idea of limited government, but also the constitutional principles. Things that are laid out pretty clearly, like separation of powers and checks and balances.
And a lot of this would seem to indicate that the constitutional system that we have in place in the United States has failed. Now, one matter that seems to really caught the public's attention is the case where the government disappeared Kilmar Albergo Garcia, a Maryland man, and just he's gone. They sent him to a foreign prison summarily. And this is done despite existing court orders saying he was not to be removed from the country and also then failing to bring him back, despite court orders calling for him to be brought back. And while this looks, of course, to be a terrible abuse of power and just a human rights issue, even if you set aside the fact that the government has admitted that it was an error, the administrative error, for this to happen to Garcia in the first place, this is really just one of countless instances where the executive branch is really just kind of stepping on the Constitution. So, Tunde, I want to get us started and ask this question to you. With the Trump administration openly disregarding court orders, including orders from the Supreme Court, and seemingly flaunting while it's doing so, are we looking at a situation where the American constitutional system is failing and, like, where we're seeing an attempt to establish something else?
[00:03:46] Speaker B: I think the answer is yes. So let me say that straight up.
[00:03:52] Speaker A: Please explain.
[00:03:53] Speaker B: Oh, yeah. So I'm trying to think, is it something else? I don't know. Right. It could turn into something else.
[00:03:58] Speaker A: Well, yeah, I mean, that's, that's, we don't know if. But the question being like is, are they, is something else being established here, you know, or is everything creating precedent for something else? A new way to.
[00:04:08] Speaker B: Time will tell on that. But, you know, and let's see, like you said about the public, right. I mean, it's been, so we are here two days after the 90th, you know, kind of 90 day anniversary of this new administration since the inauguration. And you're right, it's. To me, there's two topics that the public seems to have woken up about specifically, at least, you know, a critical mass enough that we're having this conversation. One is, like you said, the issue of due process as relates to the Fourth Amendment, which I know we'll get into that story a little bit. But then the other, to me is the issue with the tariffs and kind of the economic stuff which people are feeling because of the stock market and all that. And that also, you know, again, this idea that one man can just make all these unilateral decisions about a $27 trillion economy and global relationships and all that kind of stuff. And so I think that both events Happening after other events that we've seen that some could define as a bit chaotic. Let's say it's. It's woken the public up enough. I. I think at this point to. To just start looking in and looking under the hood more so and saying, okay, what's really going on here? And so from something you said in opening up, though, I think there's something important that we've learned over the last decade as our society, that there's laws and rules, but there's also something else, kind of like the dark matter in the universe. You know, it's. It's kind of nebulous and hard to explain, but it's there. And it's also. It's just like dark matter is kind of the glue that holds the other stuff together, which is just culture, norms, and kind of the spirit of, you know, let's put it this way, in the United States, the spirit of the Constitution, this idea of co equal branches of government.
[00:05:59] Speaker A: Well, see, but that's not the spirit of the Constitution. The Constitution actually sets that up. Yeah, that's the text.
[00:06:04] Speaker B: Well, I should say this, maybe the spirit. So Good point. The spirit of leadership we've had in the past, because you make a good point about. The courts have said something. It's one thing. It's not that an administration has never pushed back against a court. Of course, administrations since George Washington have appealed things and all that. But it's the idea that this is the first administration that appears to not care. That's, to me, the big difference that it's proudly saying we are above the law. And there was even an executive order, if you remember. I think in February we discussed it privately, where the President made an executive order that states that the executive branch, in conjunction with the Attorney General, can decide how to dictate United States law. So basically, what they're saying is me as the executive, I decide when I can or cannot be held under U.S. law. And so this is an attempt, I think, really to change the fundamental nature of the United States. If you look at it from. In that sense of. From co equal branches of government to a situation where.
[00:07:18] Speaker A: Yeah, I mean.
[00:07:19] Speaker B: Well, I'll just finish this for a situation where the executive branch is now paramount over the other two branches.
[00:07:25] Speaker A: Yeah, yeah. It doesn't seem to be co equal. I mean, and that's the Constitution sets up. You have legislative branch, the executive branch, and the judicial branch. And those are supposed to be co equal branches, and they each have checks and balances on one another. And I think going down the point you were making, you know, in terms of kind of the culture that evolved around the Constitution as well, I think it's, it's not necessarily the paper work, the document written on the paper that has, quote, unquote, failed. What's failed is the people upholding it. You know, all these people, all these government officials take an oath to defend the Constitution. And apparently they just didn't mean it, you know, like they had other reasons for trying to get in and get all this power, this power that's granted to them by the Constitution. Government of limited power. You only, the government only has the power that's given to it in the Constitution in the first place. It's a new theory of government basically of, you know, he. The Golden Rule, you know, kind of who he holds the power, you know, who holds the gold, holds the power or whatever. But it's like, well, we got the power now and we're going to wield it unless it makes somebody try to stop us, as opposed to this kind of mindset of the power has been granted to us by the people, and therefore we will do the things that are specifically said. I mean, I'm not going to go all legalese on you, but the Constitution says what we can do and what we can't do and so forth. And so the people are failing the Constitution. We have people who are not interested in upholding the Constitution, who are in power. And this is not just in the executive branch, because none of this happens without the blessing of the other branches of government, so to speak, at least to some degree. Because we can look back a couple years ago where the Supreme Court grants the executive branch immunity from the, from, from the prosecution under the law. So essentially places the Supreme Court, they decided to place the executive branch out of the reach of criminal law, which is not supposed to be the case. All Americans are supposed to be subject to the law. And then you have a legislative branch. They are able to check the executive too, through something called impeachment. But if the, if the legislative branch isn't interested, won't look at abuses of power as the executive crimes against the Constitution and by the executive and say, hey, you got to go, we're going to impeach you or at least threaten that, then the seizure of power by the executive can happen and everybody just sits around and looks. And so I think it really though, the focus has to be on the people, the people that are in charge, which were voted in in many respects. So that go back to the American people. This didn't just happen to us. But the American people had other priorities essentially, that did not involve putting people in place that would understand we have a government of limited power. And I say limited power again because it's like, hey, we want to start telling you how you need to hire people and all this other stuff. We got government doing that now. And like. But the priorities of people were on other stuff, basically, you know, like, as opposed to putting in stewards who would uphold the constitutional system. So, yes, the system's failing because it seems like a substantial number of Americans don't care about the system anymore. They're out on the system. That's not a priority for them. And so. And other stuff is. And so therefore, that's where we are now.
[00:10:34] Speaker B: Yeah, no, and I got, you know, follow up to. This is interesting in my notes. I was, I was thinking about the same thing, James, because I was thinking what. What has happened here in this recent, like, let's say this recent generation. And I think that, you know, we give a lot of attention, rightfully so, to the actors right now, the people at the top of leaders, you know, the current president and all that. But you make a great point because in the end, they are a symptom, not a cause. They are the manifestation and the result of what you just laid out, which is the American people have checked out partially.
[00:11:10] Speaker A: First of all, again, we're talking about a subset of people.
[00:11:12] Speaker B: Well, enough. So.
[00:11:13] Speaker A: Enough.
[00:11:14] Speaker B: Yeah.
And so that's why it's a good road to go down. Because what we're learning watching all this is that again, whether it's a democracy or whether it's the cute way that some people say, well, it's a constitutional republic, which it is, in the end, it's a representative government. We have a House of Representatives, people that elect people to go to D.C. represent their interests, so on and so forth. So the idea is that to make this work, the way that the founders thought of it is that the people need to be able to be engaged and participate. So there's several things that have happened over the last, basically our whole lives, let's say the last 40, 50 years. One is hyper partisanship has, has really gone off the rails.
Two things like starting, you know, I would say the spirit of the Constitution, for example, you know, there's four and a half former felons in the United States that aren't allowed to vote. There's nothing in the Constitution that says that if you're a criminal, you can't vote. And the idea is that if you Served your time in prison, you're still a citizen of the United States. So that's been a decision to try and manipulate who's participating in elections and not. And I can just give that one example.
[00:12:32] Speaker A: It's jarring because you got a felon who is getting voted for.
[00:12:35] Speaker B: Correct. So that's a whole nother, Dave. That's another show we could do. So let's definitely shut down.
[00:12:41] Speaker A: But just hearing it was just like.
[00:12:42] Speaker B: I know that's the surreal reality we're in right now. Right. But my point is, though, so for you, take that and we multiply that out by, you know, gerrymandering other ways that the ability for the mass of the electorate to participate has been manipulated. You may have as many as tens of millions of people in a country with 330, 350 million people that have been prevented from participating over the last few decades. That's an example. The second example you give is some of the actors along.
[00:13:13] Speaker A: Well, I think. Hold on.
[00:13:15] Speaker B: Yeah.
[00:13:15] Speaker A: To tie that to your point, though, that that's all happened in the open and enough people have indicated they're okay with that or that they support.
[00:13:23] Speaker B: Exactly.
[00:13:23] Speaker A: You know, like, so again, this stuff didn't happen in some smoke field room. This happened in the open and people said, hey, I endorse that. I want more of that. Some people, you know, said that. So, you know, of course, you know, you could. You system in that sense.
[00:13:37] Speaker B: That's a great point because it leads me to be able to say this, which this show isn't about this. But I'm going to say it because this is where it gets very sensitive in our culture historically, the end of the day, you're right, James. This country has only been a full democracy or representative government since 1965. And since then. So this country has been okay with in the open, disenfranchising a large section of its population since its founding. And again, this is one thing that we don't discuss. This is not the direct topic of this show. But remember, during the founding of this country, people like you and I of African descent were considered property. And so. And legally. So part of the journey as a culture that we've had is figuring out some of this stuff from the beginning of the country, but with a certain energy of our. Of our population, our fellow citizens that just don't want to discuss this at all. Well, so it leads.
[00:14:34] Speaker A: Let me jump in.
[00:14:35] Speaker B: Well, I just want to hand this to you. Leads to this partisanship about what the truth of the nation is. And I think We've been like, that steers some people in certain directions versus others. And I think that, yeah, the people.
[00:14:48] Speaker A: What I wanted to get back to, because I know that you had mentioned it, but you kind of went in a different direction, but. Because I think that, like, I've been asking for. I've been asking you for a while, you know, like, can you hold a system like ours together? You know, government with the consent of the governed? And on all that stuff and this rule of law, you got a document that is everything's supposed to be centered around not a person. You know, documents don't have charisma. You know, things like that. Can you hold something like that together if one side wants out? And the reason I asked that is because I remember, you know, just the lesson we had like in the 90s when the US comes in and, you know, Kuwait gets invaded and then we go in and then we take out, ultimately we end up taking out Iraq, Iraq's leadership. And we're like, hey, we're going to give you guys a democracy. Here you go. You know, you can have this democratic system, this great democratic system. And the question was, is, well, can you give that to people or do they have to demand it? Because if they don't demand it, then as soon as you try to give it to them, then the people who want to oppress or the people who want it more are just going to take over anyway. And if the people don't, then fight back against that at all times, stay vigilant to say, no, no, you're not going to take my liberty. No, no, you're not going to take my representation. No, you're not going to take that person's representation either, because we're all going to be doing this.
Can that system even hold? And so, like, you look back in the 1860s and, you know, like, part of the country wanted out, they didn't want to do the constitutional system anymore. That as it was set in place, they didn't want to do, you know, all men are created equal or, you know, whatever you want to say, which wasn't even lived up to at that point. And it was held together by violence, you know, like in the 1860s, you know, it was absent a war, conceivably one side would have split already at that point. And then also you look at, if you look at like the Jim Crow time in the United States where one side said, hey, you know, this stuff that's here in this Constitution, we're just not going to do that stuff, you know, like, we're just, we're not going to do that stuff. We'll do some other stuff. We'll still do a lot of it, but we're not going to do all of it. And so there's always been attention on how much of the document, so to speak, people are going to buy into. And what I see now is, and this is where it's really, it really gets kind of technical because we've had levels of partisanship and we've had levels of, you know, two parties. We've had two parties pretty much the whole time. Our system, the way our system is set up with winner take all elections kind of forces a two party system. You have to kind of form coalitions before the vote because you want to get the 51%. And so ultimately your best chance of getting the 51% is to join up with a bunch of groups beforehand and then the other side joins up with a bunch of groups. And so it coalesces and now coalesces in that way. But what we've seen, I think more significantly is that historically we've had different political parties that have been more diverse in their views. But what we've seen right now is that one party, the partisanship lines tend to be along things that are about kind of what the country's or is the country going to be about the Constitution anymore. It's like, well, no, we'd rather, one party might say, hey, we'd rather just have a country built around this one person and whatever they say, you know, and so we'll do a presidential campaign and say, hey, we don't have a platform. Our platform is just whatever this guy says. And so our partisanship lines now aren't over issues that are like, oh, okay, yeah, but the economy, how high should taxes be? How low should taxes be? Things like that. It's like, okay, should we have a system where Congress is a check on the executive, where the executive has to follow the law? And so our partisanship issues are issues that are fundamental to the Constitution now. And so, yeah, we're fighting over those things. And that's why I think it's important that we just, that we acknowledge that. Like, hey, we're not all saying let's operate under this construct of this same Constitution. Some of us are saying, let's operate under the construct, construct of the Constitution, which is slow and boring sometimes. And others saying, look, let's get, let's find somebody we really like and then just do whatever they say. And that's kind of a, that that's one of the parties. And it's like, okay, well, that's not the American system anymore, because that is not separation of powers. That's not checks and balances. That's none of that stuff.
[00:18:45] Speaker B: Well, I think that's why this moment now maybe is just hitting people. Because, you know, I went in preparation for today and I looked up the Fourth Amendment because I wanted to really just see, okay, what does it say versus what has happened to this guy? I believe his name is Abreu, like you said, the one who's been taking the famous case. Apparently, though, let's just say this for the sake of saying it. Apparently he's one of 240 people that have been taken to this concentration camp in El Salvador. And when I say concentration camp, because apparently 80% of them have no criminal records here in the United States. So they're not necessarily prisoners. They were kidnapped and taken.
[00:19:23] Speaker A: Yeah, they're not being imported either. We should.
[00:19:25] Speaker B: Yeah, exactly.
[00:19:26] Speaker A: Like, it's like.
[00:19:26] Speaker B: Hold on.
[00:19:27] Speaker A: This is. They're not just getting set off in here. Here. Here you go, man. Yeah, so it's like, no, we're locking them up and throwing away the key.
[00:19:33] Speaker B: None. So here's the thing. I'll just read it. The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures shall not be violated. And no warrant shall issue but upon probable cause supported by oath and affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized.
So the government of the United States has admitted. That's the other thing, too, that these people are so incompetent, because I just think real authoritarian regimes just wouldn't admit they screwed up. So these guys have admitted that this guy did nothing wrong, that they basically kidnapped him by mistake. And so then they play the cute game that, well, we can't get him back after the court tells us because the president of El Salvador doesn't want to. But I just read.
[00:20:21] Speaker A: Well, but that's silly, though, because I know he's a contractor of ours, of them. That's what I am paying him to lock people up.
[00:20:27] Speaker B: That's my point of saying it's a waste. It's incompetence, let's put it that way. And it' sad.
[00:20:32] Speaker A: It's not. It's just a lie. It's like.
[00:20:34] Speaker B: Well, it's just silly. It's.
[00:20:35] Speaker A: It.
[00:20:35] Speaker B: It makes it unserious, the position they're in. Meaning that it makes our government look unserious because I just read you the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution.
They violated that, like many things have been violated.
[00:20:47] Speaker A: You're missing the point, though. It's not silly. It's not incompetent. It is a say. It's saying, what are you going to do about it? It is a strong arm. They're saying, we know you said this system. Who's going to make us do it? Nobody. So it's not happening. That's why they had the guy up in the White House yucking it up. Because it's. The point is to flaunt in the, to dangle it in the Supreme Court's face. You're not a co. Equal branch with us. It's us. And then you guys do your stuff over there. But we're. We're superior to that. You're subordinate to us. And so it is, like I said, it's a direct attack on the constitutional system. And they're doing it because they know that Congress is. Won't hold them accountable. Congress has the tools to end that. You know, like, oh, you're going to do that? You're done. Congress has the tools to do that, but they won't do it because Congress, the leadership in Congress, wants to have a government where this guy leads everything or the executive branch leads everything, and they just sit on the sideline. That's what Congress. That's what the leadership.
[00:21:42] Speaker B: You're right. And I think that's where, as you're talking. It just makes me, again, more and more realize that because it's a democracy or representative government, however one wants to define it in order to change this, the only way is that more of the population needs to just wake up and participate.
[00:21:57] Speaker A: No, for sure, because the point is, you're right. The point is we have a people problem. We have a people problem. We've elected people to Congress who don't believe in enforcing the Constitution. And it's like, well, hold up. You guys kind of got to believe that you take that oath. But if you don't believe in enforcing the Constitution, then Constitution's not going to get enforced. You know, again, you can't just give people rights and liberty. People have to demand them and fight for them again, not just for themselves, but for everybody else. And so we're really in this situation. And I think the partisanship. I wanted to get more on that because that explains it, so to speak. Like the way that Donald Trump was able to take over the Republican Party completely, like make it a. Remake it the party of him. And so therefore the path to power in that party is through him and through his good graces. That kind of revealed a weakness in the system. If he can take over that party, which is much easier than taking over a government, so to speak, if he can take over that party and then have that party have wins in an election, then the people who would be in place normally to serve as a check on his power in the legislative branch, they'll all feel like they're under him. So the partisanship in itself, and so therefore the reason to follow what he is saying and doing becomes just an issue of partisanship. And I know you've brought it up to me several times. You know, as far as the George Washington's farewell address and talking, he's specifically talked about how partisanship is a. Could be and would be a threat to the system because it changes people's loyalties. And this. I want to kick it back to you, but because what you actually see here, and we've seen this play out over years, actually, we've seen this even going back to, again, public statements by officials going back to Obama when they're saying, hey, we want. We would rather the country fail while he's the president than have him succeed in the country succeed. And it's like, whoa, what are we doing here? Once partisanship becomes stronger than loyalty to the country, then we're on this road where it's a road where there's a cliff and we're heading there and we're not going to be able to maintain our system anymore. Because if the part. If maintaining and servicing the party is more important to people than maintaining and servicing the country, then you can't keep the country because both sides have to be in on at least the Constitution.
[00:24:19] Speaker B: Yeah. No, it's interesting because I have George Washington's farewell address here, but it's long enough that I won't read it. But I really recommend that the audience check it out, because here's the thing, and it's a great point you make, Jane, because when you read it, you realize, number one, it's George Washington. So there's a certain reverence. We all have the first president. Yeah.
[00:24:40] Speaker A: I mean, we can't take that for granted anymore. Again, we thought everybody was in on the Constitution too, didn't we?
[00:24:45] Speaker B: Yeah. It was all a lie, right?
[00:24:49] Speaker A: We did a show on that book.
[00:24:50] Speaker B: Yeah. No, but, but, but what I'm saying is it's, it's. Now I understand it. Maybe I didn't when I was in school learning this stuff for the first Time. He spent so much time in his farewell address addressing this issue and this concern of partisanship and the excitement of passions of men and to watch out for a demagogue, you know, and that. And that there will always be men in a society that want to excite the passions of others. And basically he basically calls out the tactic of divide and conquer and partisanships, biases, all that. And it's very real.
[00:25:26] Speaker A: Quick, I'll let you finish. But the thing that really stands out about that is, remember at the time there were plenty of people in the country that were like, hey man, you just be our guy.
[00:25:36] Speaker B: You just be the king.
[00:25:37] Speaker A: We don't need you to leave. You just stay here and govern us forever. And he was like, no, no, that's not what we're doing here. You know, like. And so then he, and he leaves a warning like, hey, this is a constant threat because of our human nature.
[00:25:50] Speaker B: Yeah. And so even on top of that, which is interesting, is so the, the history goes that all the European countries and monarchs.
[00:26:01] Speaker A: Yeah.
[00:26:01] Speaker B: Thought that they were being like the United States was trying to do some psyop game.
[00:26:05] Speaker A: Yeah.
[00:26:06] Speaker B: When, when George Washington step down and they had like an election and Thomas Jefferson became president through a peaceful transfer of power.
[00:26:16] Speaker A: Well, Adams and yeah, sorry, yeah.
[00:26:19] Speaker B: The Europeans never imagined that someone, a leader of a nation would actually just step down and hand over to the next leader. And so that's something that again, we, maybe this is necessary for the people to see, to appreciate. This is what other words can be called a self corrective mechanism within a society, within a democracy. The ability to turn over the leadership every four to eight years so you're not stuck with a President Xi or President Putin. I mean, think about this, James. I've thought about this just thinking about it. What if George W. Bush was still President of the United States right now in 2025 and he was 25 years our leader? I bet you even people that loved him back then would be tired of him now just because it's too long. The ability to refresh that tree of leadership in the United States system has been a benefit. And again, that was challenged in 2020. Hyper partisanship was one of the reasons why a large enough portion of Americans were able to be maintained in that false reality.
[00:27:25] Speaker A: Well, we know hip partisanship too, remember, because in the beginning it was the majority, the vast majority of accepted the election. And it was only after time, after being told these messages and then being sold this partisan solidarity, that eventually more people in the Republican Party began to believe the big lie. But initially, Fox, everybody was out there saying, oh, yeah, yeah, you know, yeah.
[00:27:48] Speaker B: So here's the thing, James, and that's what I want to get to. And I want to get your input on this, too, because there's something called the.
The unitary executive theory, right? I mean, we've talked about this. That came out after the Watergate era, when a certain slice of, I guess people in elite circles decided we want to be able to have an environment where if a president really were found to be doing something wrong, that enough of the public would be kind of disturbed by that information, not the fact that the Constitution or the norms or whatever was violated, that maybe that president would be able to maintain his power even though he's been found to do something really egregious. And so that started a lot of things that we've discussed in various shows people can go look at from the think tanks and all that. But long story short, yeah, I was.
[00:28:38] Speaker A: Gonna say that was. To me. I mean, I'm not gonna get into that, but that was kind of trying to come up with a justification. You already knew what you wanted to do.
These are people who were unhappy with the way that Nixon, once he got found, committed a crime, got moved out of office. They were unhappy about that. They did not think the Republican Party should have. Should have went along with the idea that, hey, man, you did the crime, we're going to move on. They thought the Republican Party should have stayed behind Nixon, and therefore he could have survived it if partisanship was higher. And so they set out on a course. Roger Ailes is one of these people. They set out on a course to try to create a situation where partisanship was high enough that no matter what happened in the party, in their party, that public pressure wouldn't come from in the party, that they would have partisanship high enough that they set out to make it so that partisanship exceeded country loyalty. And I think we. We see that they've succeeded with that.
[00:29:28] Speaker B: Succeeded.
[00:29:29] Speaker A: You know, one of the people who built Fox News, you know, like.
[00:29:32] Speaker B: And so that's why I wanted to bring it up, because it's. It's like this modern era of our politics is where we've seen this. Like, it's like there was a decision.
[00:29:40] Speaker A: We've seen the fruits of this. The fruits of this.
[00:29:42] Speaker B: Yeah, exactly. That's why I say that. That this current leadership we have in our current administration is really a symptom of all this, not a cause that America suddenly went off the rails.
[00:29:52] Speaker A: Well, it's a symptom. But see what it is though also is that they are, they've decided to push it to the, to push it to the limit. Like let's, let's test this new power. You know, we've had this kind of this alternative approach bubbling up inside. Let's test it out. Let's see how strong it really is. And you know, like that's. So we're seeing now the testing out process. And so this is going to get worse. This is going to continue down this path un. Until there's a kind of self correction.
[00:30:17] Speaker B: James, I'm very resigned to the reality that the only way we get back to an America you grew up and I grew up in and I don't want. I know that sounds probably to a lot of people listening a little bit hyperbolic. What I mean though is we have just explained here in this discussion that the United States is different, is not three equal branches of government. The Supreme Court last year gave the executive branch an elevated status above the law in many cases.
[00:30:45] Speaker A: So and then Congress that is more partisan than, well, at least the leadership in Congress that's more partisan refuses to put on the table the other job.
[00:30:54] Speaker B: The President checked the executive branch.
[00:30:56] Speaker A: I mean, and the thing really is is that it's because the partisanship has created this situation where people feel good about being an American either because of their party, their party gives them pride, not their, not not as. Because they're an American, not because of the Constitution, because of their party or because of their race or because of their religion. There's all these other things that the party has told them to put primary in terms of their feel good for the country. And even now we're even saying, hey, feel good about the country because of this guy. You know, here, buy this, you know, buy this gold coin with his face on it and you can walk around like it's all these things to feel good about besides the Constitution, besides the fact that we. What makes America exceptional? You actually said a big part of that at the very beginning or you know, when you were speaking before about how the idea America is an exceptional nation because it's an exception. The European leaders, when George Washington steps down and John Adams takes over and there's a peaceful transition of power, they couldn't believe it. And then when John, when Thomas Jefferson takes over after John, they couldn't believe it. That was an exception to the way that power is transferred in the world. That's the kind of stuff that makes America an exceptional nation. But people aren't sold that at least people in the current GOP party aren't sold that that's what makes America exceptional. They're sold all these other reasons that make American exceptional up and into and including the Dear Leader that they're like, yeah, that's what makes us great, is we got this guy, or hey, we got this religion. We got. We got this. We got all these things that other than the country. And so when their feel good is tied up in that, then that's the stuff that they have loyalty to. And then you end up in a situation where the party will not enforce the Constitution. The party, the people who took the oath of office saying that they will protect and defend the Constitution weren't telling the truth. They will protect and defend their party. And that's it. And so, yes, the system's failing, but it's not the system about. It's not about the system that makes it fail. It's about the people that makes it fail and the people that are in place right now. And so the remedy to that is people as well. And so we'll just see to the extent to which things have to happen if there's any fight left in the people, because you can't be given liberty. You have to fight for it. So we'll see what fight is left amongst the general American public at this point, and we'll see.
[00:33:07] Speaker B: So it's gonna be painful, bro. But. But I just want to finish on this, too. Is.
[00:33:11] Speaker A: Is we gotta close this up, though, man.
[00:33:13] Speaker B: Yeah, no, but I just want to finish on the point you just made that. That, you know, it is about the people. I mean, at the end of the day, everyone needs to pay attention, which is why it's probably gonna get more painful before the critical mass we need begins to pay attention. So we'll see how.
[00:33:29] Speaker A: Yeah, yeah, yeah. So. But no, I think we can close this up from there. We'll have a part two of this topic or part two of this show as well. So check that out and we'll talk soon.
All right, Tuned in for our second topic today. Wanted to discuss. We saw a recent article talking about. And I've seen this a few of a few places lately, talking about how adult humans age in bursts and not that you go when you go from 30 to 70. It's kind of like this slow progression that kind of proceeds at a steady pace, but actually in that same range, maybe you'll age some, but then there are bursts of aging. At around 44 years old, there'll be a burst of aging where Things will change. Your body will change on a cellular level. And then again in like around 60 or so, give or take, your body will change and you'll become kind of enter a different stage of life, you know, like, in that sense. So your thoughts on just kind of generally, you know, on this idea that. That humans would age and burst like that, as opposed to. I think most people would think, kind of it's like a linear thing. Like in the same way that, like, your hair doesn't burst into gray. You know, like, you kind of go a little bit slowly into gray, and then you look up after 15 years and you might be gray. But it didn't just. You didn't just go from, you know, 43, no gray, 45, head full of gray type of thing. It's kind of, I think, our perception.
[00:34:53] Speaker B: Well, some people do, but I mean, I've got some friends that went great pretty fast. And it's interesting, but. But even with that, as you're saying it, because, like, my gray has come at different stage, right? It started with a few strands and then sometimes there's a bit more comes out and then it slows down for a bit. But not. It makes sense, I think, look, it's interesting because even as you say it, it makes me realize that time is somewhat of a construct of how we perceive our own existence. Right. The idea of.
[00:35:26] Speaker A: I could think, oh, man, you're going philosophical on that today.
[00:35:28] Speaker B: Gotta go. Gotta go 30,000ft.
[00:35:31] Speaker A: Oh, yeah, I see you put your glasses on now. I get it.
[00:35:34] Speaker B: Yeah. So remember, when the glasses go on, the IQ goes up by about 50 points. So it gets up to 70, so you're in trouble.
And so. No, but that's what I'm saying is that obviously our. From a mental aspect, we perceive time in a linear way. And, and we're conditioned to like, you know, know what, minutes and seconds and hours and days and weeks and months and years and all that. So that creates a feeling in our mind that time is always linear in that way. But you're right, the. The lot of things in life we talked about, you know, recent discussion we had about history behaving more in a wave pattern than a linear. You know, and it's. So there's areas of reality you can even go to. Then I go galaxy Brandon here. Even string theory, right. Not everything is linear. And so the idea that the body would age in different ways at different parts of the human journey, you know, let's say if the average lifespan in the United States is mid-80s, that you would age at different rates and your body would break down, let's put it that way. Right. The entropy of being alive at different rates, at different times. That, to me, makes sense. It's realistic. And I think, like we're saying, since we're. The article we're citing cites two ages, specifically 44 and 60. And I'm going to drag you up with me. We're Both above age 44 now. I think we can speak on this.
[00:37:00] Speaker A: Well, yeah, I definitely want to get. I would say we'd be able to speak on some experience on this. But to me generally, though, what's interesting to me about this is that. That it's kind of like. Of course, you know, like, nobody questions whether the I A. The younger people age in bursts. Like, puberty literally is a burst in aging, you know, like where your body changes on a very specific level or on a lot of different levels. So you are. You could be go from being a child body to an adult body, you know, when you go through puberty and that's occurring over a set number of years. And so. Or even looking at the animal kingdom, you know, like when you look at, you know, certain animals, that they'll have these bursts of aging and so forth or bursts. And some animals, like you got like, butterflies and stuff. Like you have metamorphosis and stuff. So the idea that this would happen to us is not something that, like, it's sound because I think the visual appearance, because that tends to go in a more linear way, I think is why we assume that on the inside it's happening in a linear way as opposed to, like, when kids. Like, kids will have growth spurts. And so visually we see that it's a spurt. It's not like just a slow progression. And so I think that the visual of an adult seems gradual, but the concept that on the inside it's happening in different ways is definitely something I think that aligns with other areas of our experience. You know, and so that. That they've kind of identified two areas. It's just kind of. That's the ability of science to just measure things better now. Like, you know, they're sticking probes in people and taking blood samples and all that. And so they just. They're able to measure things now that maybe they couldn't have measured 100 years ago. And so I think that's the. The inevitability of something like this. But it's pretty cool to hear. And I mean, yeah, as a person who's in my mid-40s, I was very interested to see. Okay, well, so what exactly has. Is supposed to have been happening to me or have happened to me over the last year or two? So, I mean, I'll kick it to you first, though. So, like, as a person who's crossed that first threshold, you know, what do you think? Do you think this is some BS or do you think that they may be on to some.
[00:39:07] Speaker B: Well, I just want to correct you, sir, because I just celebrated the 17th anniversary of my 30th birthday, so I'm technically not over 44 right now. Just letting you know. Okay.
So, yeah, I mean, look, it's interesting because I think, like everything else, I mean, puberty you mentioned is a good example because we have a certain range that it's like a bell curve, right. We've got 8 billion humans on the Earth, so not everybody experiences everything at the exact same time, but we kind of generally say, you know, 12 to 13 to about, maybe, you know, 18, whatever, is kind of the puberty range of a human going from a child to a young adult. Like you said, the metamorphosis, if we can use the butterfly.
[00:39:53] Speaker A: We don't grow, though. We don't go into a cocoon.
[00:39:57] Speaker B: You haven't raised a teenager yet. That cocoon stage is pretty bad. So, you know, I got two under my belt and a young one now. He's just about to be 14 in a week. Oh, yeah. So now you're right.
[00:40:08] Speaker A: Yeah, I have to defer to you on that.
[00:40:09] Speaker B: Yeah. That cocoon stage is interesting. You know, the two older ones have blossomed and beautiful wings, and they flew away. Nice. And it's all. And they come back sometimes and pick at the. At the milkweed. You know, we're good. But, you know, sometimes they come out of the cocoon and it's a disaster. So.
[00:40:29] Speaker A: Hey, man, we got esoteric tunde today, man.
[00:40:34] Speaker B: But no, so kind of like. But the reason I bring it up, just the puberty thing, is because some kids do go through puberty very early, right? Like at 9 or 10 years old. And that's a bit of an outlier. And some kids, you know, starts very late. Like 14 or 15 is. And that's an outlier. So I think with. With, as we say, age 44, for me, I didn't feel it then. I felt it honestly, more at 45 and 46.
So I'm. That's why I'm not going to say it had to be 44. I'm just saying.
[00:41:05] Speaker A: Well, no, I mean, it was around this give for the fact that it's kind of around that age, you know, kind of mid-40s type of of thing, so.
[00:41:12] Speaker B: But I do feel it. And I think, you know, it's the jokes that we have, right? Like. Like, I joke around that, you know, hey, I got low teeth. You know what I'm saying? Like. Like, that's just, you know, I mean, I joke around, you know, girls think I'm looking at them when I go out and stuff. Sometimes I just joke and say, I mean, I ain't looking at you. I got low tea. Relax, you know, I'm married. I'm good. Like, I don't have energy to be looking at too many things anymore. And I'm happy about that. Like, it's good. So. So. So, you know, humility is great, James. That's why.
[00:41:38] Speaker A: So is that something you say is different than you three years ago?
[00:41:41] Speaker B: No, not three years ago, but 20 years ago.
[00:41:44] Speaker A: Yeah, that's what I'm saying. So are there things that. And I want to. I want to give some thoughts, but are there things that you can feel differently than you right now than you might have felt?
[00:41:53] Speaker B: Yeah. So on a serious note, the three years ago. The answer is no. Because I'm married and I'm happy in my marriage. And I'm not a teacher even.
[00:42:00] Speaker A: Not just that, like, you're also.
[00:42:01] Speaker B: What I'm saying is that I've been single all the way till now, my 40s. I probably say, yeah, in the last few years. There's a difference. I feel. And I'm gonna be honest, James. I had a prostate infection when I was 45. That was the first time I dealt with some stuff like that. Right. That was a change in my body. I could feel different when it comes to stuff like that. I had a heart attack last year, Mild heart attack. Learn I got advanced artery disease. I'm learning at this stage of my life. This is what I mean by the entropy that my body is breaking down. And what I learned and what I realized is it's like climbing a mountain. This middle age is like, we're at the summit. So I've been going up this hill and my body's been kind of, you know, dealing with that. And now I'm in my, you know, tipping into my late 40s and be close to 50 in a few years, right? Or I will be 50 in a few. I'm getting close to 50. And so my point is, is that I'm never going to be 25 again. And I've accepted that. And I think that's something that, from a societal and cultural standpoint, as Americans, we. We have a hard time coping with aging and with death. So I think that there's a whole nother part of this that goes along with that, too, is our own emotional state as we age. You see what I'm saying?
[00:43:19] Speaker A: But I took something completely different from the article and just in terms of, like, things to look out for where you might have a noticeable change over the course of a short period of time. Like, so not comparing it to 20 years ago, but saying, when I was 40, did I. Was. Was I feeling a certain way? And then when I'm 45 or 46, am I feeling something different? Yeah.
[00:43:38] Speaker B: So let me give you an example. Let me.
[00:43:40] Speaker A: Let me. Let me get in.
[00:43:40] Speaker B: Okay.
[00:43:41] Speaker A: In your case, though, you. Because you. You're talking about some major health issues, like, yeah, that might have. Like, your ability to perceive those things might have been thrown off even if. If it did happen, like, who knows? But if it did, because it's like, okay, you had, you know, a major infection, you know, a mild heart attack, like, those type of things might dominate your perception of your body around that time frame. For myself, I've noticed, you know, different things that some of the things that they've talked about or that they mentioned, you know, saying just, like, you get a little less efficient in burning calories, you get less efficient in processing alcohol, things like that, you know, like, you. You. Your sleep requirements might go up, at least in terms of getting your best self compared to, you know, when you're 35 or 40 or whatever. And so those types of changes. And then there's changes that. That then would follow in your 60s and so forth. And now the article we read was. Was in Men's Health, we'll have it in the. In the show notes, but that talked about the things you could do about it. I know for myself, you know, I've always been very active and, you know, working out, lifting weights and so forth, but I kind of. Without even, like, without being aware of this at the time around, you know, my early 40s, I kind of got more committed to that stuff because I just felt like if I, Like, I know that as you get older, it gets harder to. To hold or to build muscle and to maintain muscle. So I was like, all right, well, I better get on it more, because if I'm gonna start, if it's gonna be harder to hold on to, let me try to get more of it. And so I have more of a buffer to kind of keep it keep. It keep what I can keep poured.
[00:45:08] Speaker B: In all that testosterone, man, like the toilet paper during the pandemic, bro.
[00:45:12] Speaker A: Hey, well, that's the other.
But the thing that really stood out to me about this, that I'll. Before I kick it back, was that even you mentioned with the puberty and how there's a range on when people can go through that, some of it, sometimes there are environmental factors with that, you know, whether it be food or things going on around you. And so I've considered, and even reading this, like, I bet you there's environmental factors and I've seen some. Some other things about this as far as what you eat or your activity or the air you breathe and things like that that can influence the severity of this kind of an aging burst and how, you know, like. Like how hard it hits you and then how.
How much it expresses, you know, like, there may be ways to stave off. Like, people talk about lifting heavy weights. You can stave off some of the muscle. Muscle loss that you have and so forth. So I don't look at this as something we have no control over, but I would say definitely that my energy level is something where I have to make sure, like, if I don't do right, and then alcohol, too, if I don't. If I aren't care, if I'm not careful enough, I don't do right in terms of watching what I'm eating. And when I'm eating it, then I'll feel it more than I did even a couple of years ago, you know, like, so it makes me try to be even more disciplined because I can. I have a narrower path to walk. If I want to be. Feel at my best, I got to walk a narrower path. Whereas I feel like just a couple of years ago, you know, I. It was not that narrow. And that was before I read this, that I kind of felt like, okay, hey, yeah, this. I feel like I need to be a little bit more on top of it. And I kind of adjusted in advance, you know, again, I got more discipline with my workouts and stuff like that. So, you know, it's interesting to me to read something like this, though.
[00:46:49] Speaker B: Tell your wife, be careful because I know where you live, that if there's a big dude sneaking in your room in the middle of the night taking samples from me, that it's just me. She shouldn't be scared.
[00:47:00] Speaker A: You try to discover, see what's going on.
[00:47:02] Speaker B: No, I'm gonna be up there taking a syringe with that testosterone you storing.
[00:47:06] Speaker A: Up, you Know, hey, that's a big part of it, man. Lift heavyweight. I don't want to lose.
[00:47:10] Speaker B: I'll eject it into mine, my low T. I just. Because I'm lazy, so I won't need to work out. I just steal your stuff. But now, it's funny you bring it up because, yeah, I. I definitely can say the exact things that I feel a bit different in the recent years. Definitely the alcohol. I love whiskey and bourbon, and I love it since probably my mid-30s when my palate got off the fruity drinks, you know, And I find that, honestly, man, I can't.
I gotta be so bougie. It's gotta be a hundred proof, 50% alcohol, which is terrible for you, but that's because that's the only way I don't get a headache for, like, three days. Because if I drink something that's 80 proof for three days, I got the foggy head. And like you, I gotta be on point mentally for my profession and, you know, deal with numbers and stuff. And I don't like having that foggy head feeling where I can't recall information and I can't do calculations quickly. So I've had to adjust that, right? And even with what I shared with, you know, everybody here on the show with my heart and that stuff last year, the cardiologist, like, dude, stay off that liquor, that heart, you know, so, you know, forced me to go more to red wine and do all that and, you know, just change the lifestyle because of some real physical changes that have happened in the recent period and the other. I'll say this, and, you know, I'm a humble guy, that. That. That is not insecure and fine with Sharon, you know, that prostate infection I told you about the first time in my life I really dealt with Ed, and it probably was about three months that it wasn't working, man. And that was tough. Like, that was a real psychological bridge to cross. I feel fortunate, honestly, that I'm married to the woman I'm married to. That was.
Made me feel okay. Didn't make me feel like I wasn't a man, you know, like, I'm serious. Like, I realized at that point how vulnerable as a male, emotionally I was, that if I had a different wife that belittled me, that could have been a whole different thing. I mean, so, you know, I went to the ridiculous.
[00:49:11] Speaker A: You probably have a Porsche now, or something like that.
[00:49:13] Speaker B: Was that.
[00:49:14] Speaker A: Yeah, or something like that.
[00:49:16] Speaker B: I could have been. I could have had a convertible, you know, had all this insecurity and Stuff, you're right. Banging a bunch of 25 year olds now.
[00:49:23] Speaker A: You're right.
[00:49:24] Speaker B: I need to go tell her. She should have been real mean to me and rude.
[00:49:30] Speaker A: Saved you from all that.
[00:49:31] Speaker B: Yeah, no, I got, I can say, look, I'm still young enough, I go buy the convertible and maybe some 25 year olds will look at me. So, you know, you don't think that'll work?
[00:49:40] Speaker A: Well, now I will say the one that it's still in front of us, you know, Lord willing, is the 60 around the 61. What's interesting to me about that one, that one talks about like your immune system kind of down regulates a little bit and like muscle mass. And I wonder now just real quick, I wonder if the, with when you're looking at these things like is this, you mentioned entropy, is this just entropy or is this kind of like a curve that our body just kind of goes on? Like is there some other evolutionary reason why, you know, as you age these types of things, they occur, when they occur or how they occur in conjunction together and so forth? I don't know that there is, you know, but is that make for a softer landing, so to speak, as you, you know, kind of age out or like would we have. Because you and I have talked about this like for, if, if, if the 50 year old had the testosterone of a 20 year old, like things would be a lot crazier in society, you know, like, because testosterone makes you kind of crazy, you know, so in, in, in some good ways and in some bad.
[00:50:45] Speaker B: I think about it. No, it's a great point, James.
[00:50:48] Speaker A: I never really. So just to finish the sentence, the, so the thought of like how your body kind things down or you know, whether it be your muscle mass, whether it be this or that muscle mass has a lot of caloric, you know, requirements. So I, obviously we live in an age of plentiful food in our country at least. So having a bunch of muscle mass isn't as much of a hindrance as it might have been for a 50 year old, you know, a thousand years ago. So I just wonder like what's the, what's the kind of flow of this as it fits into kind of our evolutionary thing. But you know, you can throw it, you know, react to that or last.
[00:51:20] Speaker B: Comment because I never, I never gave it much thought. So I'll say this, obviously, whatever, without having the full answer right, I'm going to speculate here, but I'm going to assume you're right, that there is an evolutionary reason for it. Like a Part of it also, I think there is just the entropy of aging and that.
[00:51:37] Speaker A: Yeah, it's probably both, you know, but it like oxidation. But there seems to be, I would say there's probably an entropy to it, but there's probably also a rhyme or reason to what gives out.
[00:51:46] Speaker B: Well, that's why, let me give you my thought because it's actually I'm thinking of it as you're saying because I never really thought of this. I'm wondering because you're right. If you think about humans evolved, let's say in the last few hundred thousand years and very small hunter gatherer bands. Right. Like maybe a couple dozen people at the most. So one would think that number one from a resource allocation, you know, like you said, testosterone does what builds muscle.
[00:52:13] Speaker A: Right.
[00:52:14] Speaker B: So you need a lot of food to, you know, like you said, if men were in their 50s and 60s, all jacked up with a bunch of muscle, you know, that's, that's resource allocation. That's more people needing to suck on resources, things like that in the society. The other thing would be maybe internal competition.
[00:52:32] Speaker A: More short sighted too.
[00:52:33] Speaker B: Well, what I'm saying is like at some point, right. The young men who are in their 20s, let's say, need to be the ones procreating and all that. Whereas so it makes sense that remember too, life expectancy didn't used to be that long. So.
[00:52:44] Speaker A: Yeah, I gotta say something at you real quick also. It also creates the conditions in those type of situations for the next generation to kind of take over and not have these old dudes and old ladies.
[00:52:55] Speaker B: Yeah.
[00:52:55] Speaker A: Kind of running the society indefinitely. Which is kind of a problem we live with now.
[00:53:00] Speaker B: Yeah. So that's a great point because think about it. Yeah, you're right. In a hunter gatherer band, probably things like physical strength mattered more. So you're right, guys and who, because I also was going to say is guys our age in the late 40s, mid, late 40s were considered older back in the hunter gatherer days. So if someone did make it to 50 or 60, they couldn't sit in there and tangle with an 18, 20 year old guy. So you're right, there's a certain level of authority hierarchy. Now the older person may have been seen as a respected elder. Right. And I think this has been documented actually as evolutionary thing with grandmothers, maybe not so much the men, but the importance of a grandmother in the village society, the hunter gatherer society. That helps with things like childbirth, rearing the children, all that. And so yeah, I could think James that there probably was some sort of evolutionary reason and really probably a life reason. Maybe this is probably most living organisms, which is also getting out of the way for future life, this idea that things are born and die and really death being a part of the journey. So if you're correct.
[00:54:05] Speaker A: Yeah, but I don't think that how you age necessarily is about dying as much as how, like, again, it's. It's when things happen and what happens first. Like, why would your immune system down regulate in your 60s, you know, like. And I'm sure there's some kind of reason for that at some point you gotta die.
That may be about other issues though, is what I'm saying. Like, for you to have more longevity or whatever. Like, it. I don't know that your body is necessarily preparing to die. Maybe it is. Maybe like, but most of the time, living organisms make adaptation choices about sustaining life, not about ending life. Like, there aren't many adaptation choices that are about, hey, you know, this happened, so now I die, you know, type of thing. So I don't know, it could be.
[00:54:45] Speaker B: Just a shelf life or.
[00:54:47] Speaker A: Well, but yeah, that there are. That there's some kind of organization to it, as opposed to it just being linear just makes me wonder, you know, kind of the evolutionary pressures that might have led to that. And I'm not even talking about 10,000 years ago. I'm talking about, you know, over the course of tens of thousands of years, you know, so. But I mean, those are questions we're not gonna have the answer to. But like I said, it's interesting, you know, this research about the, the, the aging and bursts and, you know, just how that affects us all. And you know, again, that, that we're lucky enough to make it that long, but nonetheless, we're gonna close the show for now. So we appreciate everybody on this episode of Call and See it, subscribe to the podcast, rate it, review it, tell us what you think, send it to a friend. Until next time, I'm James Keys.
[00:55:25] Speaker B: And I was gonna say, when I get to the Pearly Gates, I'll let you know.
[00:55:29] Speaker A: All right.
[00:55:29] Speaker B: Did it happen? What's this all about? So. And I'm too de la.
[00:55:33] Speaker A: And we'll talk to you soon.
