Politically High-Tech
A podcast with facts and opinions on different topics like politics, policy, technology especially AI, spirituality and development! For this podcast, development simply means tip, product and/or etc. can benefit humanity. This show aims to show political viewpoints and sometimes praises/criticizes them. He is a wildcard sometimes. For Technology episodes, this show focuses on products (mostly AI) with pros, cons and sometimes give a hint of future update. For Development episodes, the podcast focuses on tips to improve as a human spiritually, socially, emotionally and more. All political, AI lovers and haters, and all religions are welcome! This is an adult show. Minors should not be listening to this podcast! This podcast proudly discriminates bad characters and nothing else.
Politically High-Tech
277-Reshaping America: A Bold Vision for Ethical Politics With Charles Thompson III
Charles Thompson III shares his journey from inner-city gang member to political candidate and his vision for ethical, non-partisan governance focused on people rather than profits.
• America's political system heavily favors incumbents and wealthy candidates, making meaningful change difficult
• Citizens United decision fundamentally altered campaign finance, allowing outside money to dominate elections
• Foreign news sources often provide more objective coverage of American issues than domestic media
• Basic human needs like healthcare and housing should be socialized while wants remain capitalized
• Implementing term limits and age limits would create more representative government
• Anti-corruption laws with severe consequences would ensure ethical leadership
• American exceptionalism should be questioned as we fall behind in key metrics like education
• Charles approaches politics as a public servant rather than a typical politician
• Social media and fundraising techniques have transformed how campaigns operate
Find Charles Thompson on Facebook (Charles Thompson) or Twitter (@TheRealCharlieTruth) or email him at LLABESAB1@gmail.com - he welcomes questions from anyone across the political spectrum.
Follow your host at
YouTube and Rumble for video content
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCUxk1oJBVw-IAZTqChH70ag
https://rumble.com/c/c-4236474
Facebook to receive updates
https://www.facebook.com/EliasEllusion/
Twitter (yes, I refuse to call it X)
https://x.com/politicallyht
welcome everyone to politically high tech with your host elias I have a brand new guest here. You know I'm not gonna always throw in the repeats. I like to switch things around. We got to bring some new faces. You know I'm sure some of you love the established faces or some of you get tired of it.
Speaker 1:I heard this guy long enough. I like this person, but regardless, I like to switch things up. So we got a brand newcomer to this podcast. Name is Charles Thompson. I want to be more specific. The third there's not Charles Thompson. I want to be more specific. The third there's not Charles Thompson out there. Let's be clear. All right, you probably, you know, I, probably, you could probably confuse a Charles Thompson from back then. Whoa, you can't confuse that, because he's dead, like a hundred years ago. This one is alive and if you somehow mix that up, go get help. Don't tell me that you need help. Okay, just to protect your integrity. Whatever you got left. Okay. Now, with all the seriousness, let's introduce Charles Thompson III.
Speaker 1:He has political experience. He ran for the 5th District of Alabama and, for all you political nerds know, alabama is a solid red state. It's probably one district that's blue. The last time I checked I gotta recheck it because always change these darn maps. But the fifth district I checked out, it's solid red. The average they went about 30.
Speaker 1:But hey, the old bash will say oh, why are you anyway? That's super republican. They take that back. A cooler even kills them. He tried, okay, you know, sometimes, sometimes people go to magGA because they're desperate for change. I'd say that's the certain appeal. You know the so-called, you know the populace. If you will change, that gravitates some of the voter base, don't get me wrong. Now, all Republicans like Donald Trump, let me just be clear about that. Like Donald Trump, let me just be clear about that. There's Liz Cheney, adam Kinzinger and others that are just anti-Trump Republicans. He's ran as a Democrat for that particular race, but before I let him introduce himself more, I'll let him tell the interesting parts, because I don't want to misrepresent him. He did run as a Democrat for that particular election. I mean, look, the system is rigged.
Speaker 2:I've said it before you have a much better chance winning as a.
Speaker 1:Democrat or a Republican more than me, independent, even libertarian, even though it's the largest third party, but you still got no shot at winning it. That's how rigged it is. All right, so let me be quiet. Let me let this guest introduce himself.
Speaker 2:Let's welcome Charles Thompson. I believe in honesty and everything. You know my youth. I grew up an inner city kid and I was a drug dealer, an enforcer. You know I worked with gangs, as you know, as a member. And then I grew up, went to college, got two college degrees, one in biology, one in chemistry. And then, you know, I've been working doing different jobs, been a football coach, I've been security for many years. I've been a bartender for many years. I even teach bartending. I even teach security. I've been well-rounded. I've owned my own companies. I've worked for other people. So I ran into politics because I want to see change. I'm a different voice than everybody else.
Speaker 2:I don't know when I'll be running again because it's going to take time to build the money and I'm still trying to work on getting the social media, because when you want to win a district even if, no matter what the district is, you need more donation than just from your district You'll never get the amount of money to compete, especially not with Citizens United and the way that the politicians work.
Speaker 2:I mean, if you want to go and run right now against the incumbent of a Republican or a Democratic Party, you're going to need two to four million dollars just to have a shot at them. You know that's just to get your name in the race for real and you know that's one of the things. Like I got my name in the race, I got you know through a race and I lost and now I've got to rebuild because I mean I already have a base for what I've created but I've still got to build to increase my uh demand and the amount of uh, you know, information I can get out there, the amount of myself I can get out there. So more people will gravitate to the things I'm trying to do to benefit this country.
Speaker 1:Now, yeah, it's funny, I talk to one previous guest about that, about why it's rigged, and he also wrote a good book on it about the counterfeit democracy, about how money really runs politics. Now just don't get me wrong my listeners and viewers it happens from the highest, federal, to the lowest of locals. It happens in so many maybe a little less on local depending but some races if a big, big donor wants to get involved, let's use another, let's use a Democrat right that lost because of AIPAC. There were two Democrat candidates that lost because of big money and these were the incumbents. They only had one term in and the AIPAC saw Jamal Bowman of New York and Cori Bush of Missouri. They both got cleaned up because they're more moderate, because he put a new well, new in terms of their first time running for that particular seat, and it was more moderate, more pro-Israel, and it was campaign. There was campaign money thrown to them and they got cleaned up even though they had their little incumbency advantage.
Speaker 1:But once big money gets involved, especially if it's your enemy, you could kiss that incumbency, the being an incumbent advantage, goodbye. That incumbent advantage is cleaned out and it can be cleaned out in special circumstance. That don't normally happen. Normally happens is, you know the party supports the incumbent, the incumbent is more likely to win. That's why you have people in there for 20, 30, even 40 plus years in there and we're not getting some change because of that. Charles Thompson has tried to bring that change, but it's not.
Speaker 2:Just say it this way Look how much remember the race for senator of Georgia between Herschel Walker and the other gentleman. That was a $500 million race for a job that pays $180,000 a year. Why? That's how much money was put in by big-time donors and because it's super PACs are involved. These can be from outside the US, which are supposed to be completely against the Constitution. But just because of the situation and the way we're playing the game now since the Citizens United decision back in the early 20-teens, this is what we're at. It's a money game, not an intelligence game, not a change game or not an ideal game. We're supposed to be working for the betterment of the people, but we're really working for the betterment of the American dollar and whoever's got the most of them.
Speaker 1:That's so true. This is one of the points I actually agree with. The more progressive even more, the alternative Democrats, the ones that will go against corporate funds and all that. They got a really solid point when it comes to these dollars here, especially for big donors, big corporations. They really influence the elections, I mean significantly, and if you're against them you have a decent chance of losing, I mean unless you're very creative. You know, you got this super out of the box thinking which is very rare, and I would say that was rare like a alc versus joe crawley. Joe crawley had that seat for 20 plus years. That was an exception to the rule. What happened with the alc when she first ran does not happen often and, trust me, the democrat machine was supporting joe crawley, but she was able to be so charismatic and creative and I think she had a little bit of support for bernie, but that's speculative. Um, yeah, she had a demographic.
Speaker 2:That also benefited her because she was in a Latin dominated community. That really helped for her.
Speaker 1:If you're compatible with your constituents' demographic, that's also huge.
Speaker 2:Very good point.
Speaker 1:She's very good at social media. She's really good Whether you like her or not. I'm not a big fan of her, but she is really good at social media. She's really good at social media. I give her that I don't support all processes. I agree with some things she say. I disagree with some things she say, but she's really good at getting attention through social media and I think that partially helped her as well. You already said that, and social media savviness helps a lot as well.
Speaker 2:You've got to be social media savvy now because your traditional ways of raising money, like call time, they're time consuming and they're only effective with larger donors. With small donors, call time is very difficult. You've seen the change now and interesting. My personal campaign was one of the first ones that started and I will apologize to everybody come campaign season every time now because of it Text messages. I was one of the first campaigns that came with the idea that you could raise money through text messaging and now you see that in every race now and I will apologize for that because I just kind of I was trying to think of new ways to get money for my campaign. I should have known that it would kind of give everybody a new idea how to look at the world.
Speaker 1:I don't need to hear the complaints about oh, texting, texting, texting being so annoying, you can opt out. You text capital, opt out or something, or just say out or no, depending on the instructions, and you could get out. So that's what I'm going to say Toughen out, toughen out. I'm going to say tough it out, tough it out.
Speaker 2:So I'm going to say go right ahead Like that was one of the things I even ran on was changing campaign finance laws to make it to where it was not a dollar driven but more of a person driven experience again, like it's supposed to be. I'm also for term limits and age limits, which were things? Age limits were in place until Reagan. You look now at all these people in politics for 20, 30, 40 years. Why are they there? Because the limits were gone and I would like to see those put back in because I don't feel like our country, I don't even feel like our state's houses really represent the amount of the people in their states.
Speaker 2:Like Kay Ivey is my governor in Alabama. She's in her 80s and she talks like she's missing half her brain cells because of age and dementia. These people, when they run for office now, are running for you know, governor and president, in their 60s, 70s and 80s Used to, you ran in your 40s and 50s. You were younger men, younger women or adapt to what is happening in the world right now, not people who've been basically retired for 10, 15 years where you don't really have a connection to the average person on the ground, trying to get their boots into the workforce and getting their lives together and getting houses and stuff. You're way past that. It just doesn't represent what America has to be and what has to be going forward.
Speaker 1:Yeah, you're exactly right, and this is why we've been stagnant in the class of country, because we still we got a lot of policies are still operating. If, like 1960s, 1970s, we are 2025. A lot of these policies do need a revision and update, or even destroy, depending on the on the usefulness and the practicality of these laws. And you think the ones that have been in the system for decades are going to change it? No, because to them that's like voting their power away. They're not going to do it.
Speaker 2:Absolutely, not to mention when you have 40 years up there. How many connections do you have? I mean, what does your bank account look like for your elections? You probably haven't ran as an incumbent and haven't had anybody challenge you in five or six elections. You're sitting on tens, even twenty hundred million dollars. Maybe that if somebody does come against you, you have all that money to throw at them and they have whatever they can get that cycle. That's all they can get. That's the incumbent advantage.
Speaker 1:No, yeah, yeah, and they, they're just sitting pretty. I don't much for those years. Some of them I'm not saying I will all, because some of them do work, but some of them, especially those incumbents, have been deep in the system for decades. They say, ah, I don't even need to run a campaign and they win because of their name ID. They do the bare minimum.
Speaker 1:Elliot Engel, who I thought used to represent, but this shit kind of near me, but they did so much changing so I get a little confused with that. But he was. But he was in the system for 20 years. But the reason why he lost because he got too careless to the point that the public just says toss some guy away. I thought he was good, but the thing is he had that establishment you know, he's been there for a long time that was working against him and he got arrogant, said oh, who cares, who gives a? I call I, was caught the mic and he was in that seat for 20 years. The newcomer beats him. But that normally doesn't happen. What normally happens is, I would say 80% of the time is the same person has won for a long time.
Speaker 2:I think the statistics say it's like 82 to 92% incumbents win, even in their own party. Just because they have all that protection from the party itself, they know they have a win. It's like 82 to 92 percent incumbents win, even in their own, even in their own party. Just because they have all that protection from the party itself, they know they have a win when they have that person. So they have all of the strategic advantages yeah, so again.
Speaker 1:so to just reiterate this point as majority of time, the incumbent is going to win. You know, ras 4 to 5, 9 to 10 ratio. Yeah, you know, I think we definitely need some changes and we definitely need more 30, 40, 50-year-olds in there. They could use an increase.
Speaker 1:Yes Even 20s, true, even some 20-year-olds in there, definitely not. I won't say 21,. The youngest that's as young as I'm willing to go, younger than that. I said just finish your schoolwork, kid, then you can get a shot. But run for something local and smaller. I think one of the youngest mayors that I've read at the time he was like a 19-year-old somewhere in Oklahoma. I said yeah, I can see that happening. It's like small town.
Speaker 2:Simple, you know, not to master somewhere and it's like a multi-time incumbent. Nobody will run against the dog because the dog's doing a good job.
Speaker 1:I don't why you owe me. Don't run against the cow. The cow is more powerful the guy. They're having more cows than people over there. You know, support the cow. If you want to maintain your power and not get out, you're gonna be kicked out. Rather, rather, you want to not, but but uh, what policies did you ran on during that time? Because I think you're for weed, right, you for legalization of weed. I saw some of your posts and I I agree with weed legalization. I just wish they put more at mandatory education clauses in there.
Speaker 1:That'll be my little critique of it instead of just, you know, smoking pot I mean pot was becoming such a big issue. I I'm in New York. The smell it was getting crazy, but I think the trend died out. It's not people smoking as much because of the cold weather and it's a lot of rain. I want more rain to come. So watch the stink people, watch your way. I don't care if I sound like a snob. I really do not care, because people just smoke weed without any regard regard to that in the park, somewhere you know where there's air. Don't do it in such a closed environment like a subway yeah, I get that.
Speaker 2:I mean you're in public. You don't want to be getting second hand high off of somebody you know I have gotten second hand high coming from where I'm having to shut down the weed business right now.
Speaker 1:I worked there because I was getting secondhand high, especially when it was real popular man like 20 smokers that fumes was coming to me, and even when I was taking care of my parents. At times I was like, are you high? I was like, oh crap, my eyes were so red, almost bloodshot, and just for smelling all that I did not puff the thing. But yeah, there is a secondhand high and I thought I thought people was crazy to say, ah, I just think people were crazy. But until I experienced it clearly, as well.
Speaker 2:You know, that's just one of the things I should have listened to these people, but um, you know, so I was going to say, I was going to say, like you know, that's that's.
Speaker 2:You know that was the thing. Remember when secondhand smoke they were talking about cigarettes, secondhand smoke being so dangerous to people around you, and a lot of people didn't listen to that and it's still the same thing is you can't have this happen. I mean, a lot of people need things to happen to them before they believe it. And I think sometimes you need to listen to the experts, because the experts aren't here lying to you, or at least they're not supposed to be. There are unethical people in everything. Let's not ever think that anything's clean, because that would be just false.
Speaker 2:But the majority of the scientific community does try to be honorable and ethical and if you follow them, they're usually trying to lead you down the right road. They don't, because it saves money in the long road long road to do things the right way to begin with. It just does. If you take care of yourself as healthy, you'll be healthier later and it'll cost you less in health care later. You know that's? That's all this goes down to is how to? How to be a good person and save yourself money, and you do the same thing by saving the country money, and it's. It's just the same process. It's just a lot of people don't prescribe to how to do the process based on their beliefs and who's funding them and you know who is their supporters and who's their donors and who their friends are.
Speaker 1:You know what my big issue was? I was listening to just random people out there, the scientific community. I actually value what they say. Most of the time I do. When I see scientific study, then I'll take the information in, because I studied it. It answers all my skeptical questions. I was hearing from people out there and these people have known a lot of me, whatever. So their credibility was already compromised. So I was like, ah, I'm not listening to these people. See, my point is the reason why I'm saying this listeners and viewers, you need to examine the quality of your source. The quality of your source does matter. This is why I bring this point up. If you listen to random people on the street and that's how I was seeking I was just seeking, it was a test. I was seeking that advice just to test them and they said, oh yeah, you could get a secondhand high. I said why should I trust you when you lied to me 10 times?
Speaker 2:I'm not listening to you. Even a blind squirrel finds a nut. That's just that.
Speaker 1:And for once, these people were telling the truth.
Speaker 2:Rarely.
Speaker 1:So I'm not that hard on myself because these people have destroyed their credibility. That's why credibility matters. Yes, is doing his darndest, I could say, to maintain that. You know he's being truthful. It matters a lot. It really matters a lot because once you say something truthful, when your credibility is compromised, nobody's going to listen. Until you're lucky if it's the last minute or until it's too late, because your credibility is damaged like the boy that cried wolf. I've said that a few times about politics.
Speaker 2:If you believe everything a politician says, either he's lying to you or you're lying to yourself. You know, it's just that simple. Very few times you're going to find an honest politician who's just going to be honest about everything. That's why I pride in myself I am that honest politician. I don't.
Speaker 2:I don't consider myself a politician because I think I would say that the definition for me a politician is a person who uses their position to get power to benefit them and their donors and themselves. I consider myself a public servant because I tell you the truth, so you'll elect me, so I can go out there and actually do the things I say I want to do to help you, to make your life better. It's not about I'm not trying to enrich my life. If I make the system better, my life will be enriched because of it, because everybody else will have money, because more people will have economics, because it will lower prices, because I've done the proper things in this country to make those situations occur. It will benefit me in the long run, just doing the right thing.
Speaker 1:Yeah, but that's so hard to do. Do the right thing, especially those who know Spike Lee and his old movie. We got that time to do the right thing. Great movie, by the way.
Speaker 1:Look, I know some of you think, ah, you're promoting leftist. No, there's some more behind this one and not everything has to be politics. But some of you're gonna think politics anyway, this is a political podcast. I get it. It's like trying to separate water and oil, you know. It's like trying to get water, oil, oil together. It's impossible at this point. So you may think I'm pushing left wing here or I'm trying to give them a handicap. Well, maybe I well that one you could kind of say I am. I'll take ownership of that because I'm trying to bring more left-leaning guests into the show more often. So don't be surprised if more are left. But the right wingers, they naturally come here. I don't have to go to them. I don't have to go to them. They want to come here for the left. But some of the left leaning people, some are skeptical, some cautious, some reject me outright and some come like I just guess here you know this is what I've been doing.
Speaker 2:Even when I ran, I actually, as a Democrat, went into a Republican stronghold and it was a. It was a debate, and it was all the Republicans running for my seat because it was an empty seat. That was why I took the chance to run that time. It was like there's no incumbent. It gives everybody at least some form of a shot they didn't have. And so you have all these Republicans and me. And at the end of this discussion, at the end of this debate, the entire crowd actually came and thanked me first.
Speaker 2:Even the other politicians said it comes down to you and Dale Strong. Dale Strong, of course, is the most strongest Republican because he had all of the corporate donor backers, you know, because he was the connected one. They were like we'd actually vote for you over him. And these were other candidates who are running for the same thing I am. They're like you might be a Democrat, but we really respect you as a person because you don't just sound like a Democrat, you sound like you. You come up here and you're like this is who I am, this is what I'm doing, and I'm like, yeah, because I don't think if you're actually doing the right. The right thing doesn't have a political side, and if the right thing has a political side, then you know the other party has a problem. The right answer, what is actually good for the people should be the outcome that should be the benefit of every party, is they're trying to do the best thing for the people. So that was always my viewpoint of this.
Speaker 1:You know what you know. To get that kind of respect from the other side, it's pretty darn valuable, you know, even though you didn't win. But hey, you tried and did you maintain your integrity. I can't say the same about a 101.
Speaker 2:You absolutely can't. There's been a lot of protests lately against Dell Strong and against his, the policies he supported, the things he should have done, that he didn't, and the fact that he won't hasn't been doing any kind of uh a time with his constituents. He's very much one of the true corporate pocket republicans. He's in their pocket and he's going to just vote for what they want. He's just going to go along and follow party lines and it's really pissed off a lot of his constituents here in North Alabama.
Speaker 1:Oh, you know what I want to build up your base. Well, you know, when I gets hot, I'll be your time to strike. You know, just because you know the income. The incumbent advantage don't always last forever. That's expiration date. Either that incumbent dies, god forbid, or they've been recalled. I prefer that one.
Speaker 2:They lose touch with their constituents that's a common one or they end up criminally indicted.
Speaker 1:Oh and that. Oh, is there any dirt on him, any criminal dirt on him, potentially?
Speaker 2:I don't know. I'm not an investigator, so I mean I've heard rumors, but rumors are just rumors, you know. Yeah, yeah, it's just second secondhand garbage and it could be coming from an enemy or anything. I've heard people who were friends of his talk really bad trash about him as a person. You know, even when I was running, there was people coming to me who worked for him. I was like man, I don't like him and I worked for him and I'm like, wow, that's, that's that says a lot about him as a character and a person. But then again, how's that? You know that they're not going to see that in the ads, they're not going to see that if there's no public debates, nothing like that. So he was able to hide behind, you know, hide that from the public, because that's behind the scenes kind of talk.
Speaker 1:Yeah, that's not something. You get cool cameras on, unless a real journalist wants to snoop around and dig, and that's my other thing. I think journalism in America has gone downhill.
Speaker 2:It isn't ethical anymore. That's one of the problems I have. The entire point of journalism in America was supposed to be a magnifying glass on the government to see what the problems were. But if the magnifying glass is dirty, then how do you know if the problems are the government or the magnifying glass? So this lack of ethics that we have in this country and, let's be honest, this is from top to bottom it's a lack of ethics. You see in who they voted for. You see on how people are voting. You see on how people don't care about other human beings and if they're suffering or not. You're seeing a lot lack of ethics in America and that's, I think, causing the biggest part of our division is. You see, in the media they're pushing certain agendas. Well, that that means I can't trust the media. If you're pushing something, then you're not just being. I just need you to be objective and honest with me and let me make my own decisions. That's the best way to inform the public.
Speaker 1:You get left-wing news, right-wing news.
Speaker 2:Yeah, it's all really propaganda. Yes, you know, we're propagandized in every way. I mean I think George Carlin said it best what is America's?
Speaker 1:actual number one export Bullshit, and I think he's correct. That's a spicy.
Speaker 2:Take Maga. You want to attack him on that. You want to roast him for that? If anybody wants to attack me, bring it, because I am a shit talker. I'm not going to lie. I'm the one person that would go at Trump one-on-one and I would destroy him in a debate his way, not even the right answer I have seen his post.
Speaker 1:People, you can back it up. I talk, I've seen, I've seen the post. I was like, okay, we gotta look. I like interesting characters. I don't like this corporate fake thing. And both democrats, republicans, got those. Let's be clear, none of them are pure from that. Um, unfortunately, and I could tell was who's this corporate, dem or republican. They normally turn me off unless the other person's too loony like too maga or too progressive. It makes me sadly choose a corporate or I either sit out, but you can tell who they are. They will not interact with people. They act only great in front of cameras. Once the cameras are off, once you got that person with the smartphone, catching them saying a bunch of crazy stuff oh, real, juicy, juicy social media content this person set the heart edward. This person says something bad about hispanic people, about how you know, about how dumb they are oh, juicy stuff. Or this one who worked for trump hates trump. Oh, juicy, you know the journalism in words. They just like the tabloids yeah yeah, Tabloid.
Speaker 2:Once the tabloids got, you know, economically famous, you know they made money. You don't get to think they made newspapers to make money. These were not made to be informative. They were made to make money. It's a business. So if being juicy tabloid makes me more money than being an ethical newspaper, then it's my job as CEO for my shareholders to make as much money as possible, which would mean become more of a tabloid. It's a business.
Speaker 1:Ebony as an attention is the most valued currency. You get more attention.
Speaker 2:That's why they have sweet tweaks. That's why they have these, that's why they have their leadership viewership numbers up, because that's where they get their ad revenue.
Speaker 1:While we criticize the journalism, all that, trust me, there's a lot there, believe me. I mean, I got to trust my own source. I do my own data analysis. I've pushed ground news so you can at least see where the left is coming from. The right is coming from where the center is coming from. On that same issue, because you go to Fox, you get more right wing. You go to MSNBC that's more left wing.
Speaker 1:And MSNBC. That's more left-wing, and while we go to NewsNation, well, they're the centrist representation. That's the one I turn into, but I gotta criticize the information.
Speaker 2:Personally, I like to spend a lot of time on foreign news sources about America because they'll kind of give you a much more objective look, because they're looking from the outside. They're like, look, we have no cards in this game. So from our view, here's what we're seeing, like bbc and al jazeera. Yes, I know I'm going to get some propagandists to muslim ideal, ideologies and this, that, but when they're looking at america they're trying to look at objectively because it doesn't really have a card to them or maybe if it does have a card, you'll see how they'll twist it because it does benefit them, especially with this Israel Hamas conflict that's been going on for over a year now.
Speaker 2:You can see where BBC because you know, america and the UK put together Israel when they were making the League of Nations, and you see how Saudi Arabia and Al Jazeera look at. Look at it because it's a Jewish versus Muslim thing and it's a and it's a land grab from World War II, you know, and all of that on their what they considered was their world and it pushed into their thoughts and ideologies. So you can see that and it kind of tells you about how things are working. Sometimes, when you see those biases they tell on the news themselves, not just about the news being biased, but also what these countries and groups are thinking, based on their history too. So sometimes their biases do tell truths.
Speaker 1:I mean, you bring up a good point, even though I haven't been listening to well, I've been. I always pay attention to foreign sources. I'm going to be honest, cause I, I want to see what their take is, because they don't got a you know skin or horse betting. Because they don't got a skin or a horse betting a horse in the game. So they're allowed to be more objective about what was going on in American politics, as opposed to you know, no, no, we right-wing, no, no, we clean up all the bad by this Republican and you just bash the Democrat. The only thing we twist is saying the Democrat's doing it. Instead, there's a lot of ways you can twist it, or vice versa as well. So foreign sources, I say, are pretty good.
Speaker 1:I, I, I'm not against that, because if I know well, not if, when I know I'm being bullcrap, I'll go. It is not a matter. If it's a matter of when, let's be, let's be honest, then I'll just tune in. So, okay, what is india saying about that? Heck, I even checked a few chinese stories. Okay, what is India saying about that? Heck, I even checked a few Chinese stories. What is China saying about this? You have to understand globally what people are thinking. Some of you might not care, especially more right-leaning people. I don't care. They're not going to vote, but it's good to see how we're doing.
Speaker 2:Right now, a good question is look at world events through Russia's lens. Remember, russia is state-owned media, so all of their media companies are going to basically tell you what the Kremlin's thinking, which is kind of an interesting way to see international relations and what's happening with Russia and Ukraine, what's happening with Russia and China, russia and the US, and how we're working together against each other's wishes, because you can follow their state media to get that information and they're going to give you the propaganda side, but it tells you what the Kremlin itself is thinking. Thank, you.
Speaker 1:You said it very well. You got to know what others are thinking. That's what I'm telling you. Listen to it. Not for you to be, I don't know, a Putin minion Hell, no, I don't want that. Oh well, you are a treasonous traitor. And look, and this is why I support government execution under that law. Yes, I will go that extreme just to say that I don't support Putin. I don't even support Zelensky either, which is a hot take. I don't support either of them. They both corrupt for different reasons. But you've got to understand what the others are thinking. Just have an idea. So, just in case, you want to go tour, you want to be a tourist of the nation? You wonder why they hate us?
Speaker 2:Yeah because we have no knowledge of the world. We really go out there and think it's our way and we treat people disrespectfully. You know, if you're going in Rome, act like you're in Rome. You know, learn to be Roman. You know, I'm not saying you need to change who you are, but I'm saying respect their customs and their style of life. You're a guest. You know. If I go to a country or any other place, I want to feel like they feel. You know, because they created this idea for themselves. You know, that's learning who they are and I think a part of that is kind of assimilating a little bit and seeing how they look at the world different and how they view themselves versus how America views themselves or Alabama in general. You know.
Speaker 1:You know that backs the idea of, you know, self-determination for each nation. I always say respect the other culture. I'm going to start traveling to other countries, so this is like a good prerequisite for me really and study who they are, research who they are, what are the good spots, what's considered bad or taboo, what's considered good, because you know one nation could consider burping a blessing. Yes, in america we consider it pretty gross, but if you burp you may get some thumbs up. You know it depends. Or slurping the soup is super disrespectful, it's equivalent to the middle finger. Don't slurp, oh, this filthy, dumb turd, this american. It's disrespectful way of life. Or, you know all. Vice versa, let's be real. There's disrespectful to our way of life. Or vice versa. Let's be real, there's some tourists who are stupid and disrespectful to us as well.
Speaker 1:I see some from Great Britain, Spain, even the Germans.
Speaker 2:I see a lot of people travel trying to buy a vagina. Let's be honest, I've had a lot of people ask me. It's like this is America we don't sell. This is a country that doesn't have sex for sale except in very few locations, and I'll see people coming in, like, you know, in hotels hey, do you know where I can buy this or buy that? I'm like not in this country. We just can't do that. That's just that's our laws. You know there are other countries that do do that. This is just not one of them.
Speaker 1:Yeah, well, yeah, that person got to go to a different continent. Yeah, I mean absolutely. And continent, yeah, I mean absolutely, and you know, that's all I say. Look, you do whatever you want. Your life is none of my business. I'm not gonna dig, dig deep into that, because really none of my business at the end of the day. So if you ain't, you ain't hurting um, anybody else or it becomes public news, hey, I, it don't matter, it doesn't matter to me. I, I, you know, and you, yeah, you brought some very important respect and respect other people's cultures and especially YouTubers. You ruined this, by the way. I'll give you a few examples off the top of my head. One is doing good with it, I would say I Show Speed is doing good with it with China. Logan Paul has messed up twice, one in Egypt, one in Japan, because the trees.
Speaker 1:Right you know the dangling corpses in the trees. That's what I'm going to say. I already spoke about that a little bit in the other episode about how YouTube and social media is bad and this is bad international political capital for America. This is just us selling bullshit or even vomit packages gold. Yeah.
Speaker 2:But you saw it got over. I mean, look at Logan Paul now. Now he's doing what $100 million box seat matches Like he did something absolutely horrible and something that should be disdained, and he's making more money now than he's ever made before.
Speaker 1:That's the horrible truth. Let's not lie to ourselves. We have some sick people here. Oh no, no, we do. We do sick people here. Oh no, no, we do we do it. I'm not, I'm not gonna even, yeah. But the business side, he's very successful.
Speaker 2:Yes, you can't knock the economic. Now engaged to some, to a beautiful speed skater who's an olympic silver medalist I mean he's having a great life for a guy who did some very questionable things. You know and not you know I don't hate legan loke legan.
Speaker 1:Here we talk. I can't even talk now. Logan Paul, I don't personally hate anybody. It's too much energy for me anyways. But I bring that up because this is how the world sees us and we fall apart. I know some of you are going to say I'm going to sound lefty on that. I don't care about how some other people think, but I do care if it gets out of hand to the point that we almost universally hate it. And to care if this, if it gets out of hand to the point that we almost universally hate it and to some extent we are heading that direction. I mean, look our relations with canada. All time low I never thought this was gonna happen as quickly. But again, I shouldn't, because it's trump. He's willing to do crazy things yeah, it's true, just just it.
Speaker 2:Just the rhetoric alone is enough to cause a division. If he actually does take steps to make canada a first state or anything like that, you're talking military then. And then we'd just be looking horrible on the international, in the geopolitical scene in the world, like the whole world looking at us like, wow, these are monsters. All of a sudden it's like, yeah, it doesn't take long with the right system in play, with a system that doesn't have checks and balances on its present, like it's supposed to, a system that doesn't, you know, doesn't try to work for the moderate answer, but tries to work for an extremist answer. If we get this or we're going to take you over, type of you know our way, or the highway type way, that just doesn't work for most of the world.
Speaker 1:And I think, if I'm going to be honest look, I love America, but I'm also a tough lover, and tough lovers are afraid to give criticism we need to drop the American exceptionalism. That was fine, probably a century ago, but we haven't done anything.
Speaker 2:It wouldn't be a problem if America was exceptional, I wouldn't have a problem with it if America was actually exceptional. But the average person in America now has an IQ under 100, which means we're under average, which means we're not teaching our kids to be smarter. You know, we're not one of the smarter countries in the world anymore. So saying American exceptionalism, if we were exceptional and we're the highest IQ, the smartest country, best GDP, but it was best GDP while everybody's needs were met that would be one thing. But we're not even average anymore in an intellect as a country. So why can't we say we're exceptional because we say so, that's not. That doesn't make sense. No, no, I can make us exceptional again. I know how to do it. I absolutely know how to make us exceptional, make us an exceptional country again.
Speaker 2:But right now you see where I'm sitting. I'm not sitting in the halls of Congress, I'm not sitting in the office of the president, where I'd like to be. I'm sitting here in my bedroom talking to you, hopefully building this, so that I can one day sit in those chairs and make those decisions to make America great For the first time. I'm not even talking about again, I'm talking for the first time. It's never been great. It might have been good economically or this or that, but it's never been great.
Speaker 1:And I agree that a lot of changes need to be done. And I always have said this about Trump I think Trump domestically I'm not surprised he's doing a pretty poor job. This is why I think Obama did pretty well. But domestically, I think Obama did better. But when it comes to yeah, we need so much change I mean healthcare system this is one of the few issues I'd probably say. I'm closer with the progressives than ever on one issue the healthcare. Healthcare is trash. It's trash we pay so much for if you're lucky and this is, if you're lucky moderate care. If you're lucky or you piss, poor care despite throwing money into the system, what are you going to say?
Speaker 2:I have a belief and I think all of my politics stem from a certain belief, and it's about wants and needs. You know, I think the biggest problem is, as long as we have greed, we'll have need. You know, and that's one of my biggest issues is, I think all wants should be capitalized and all needs socialized. So I'm saying we need drinking water, everybody in this world needs drinking water, right? So we should have federal drinking water, state drinking water, which we do. Everybody needs protection from a fire. That's why we have federally funded, state-funded, locally funded fire departments. If you look at the history of fire departments, there was a time they were capitalized and when they were, they didn't do their jobs. So there are some things that need to have a socialistic backing to protect the people. Health care is a need. As a need, it should be socialized. Now, wanting a giant yacht or a billion dollar plane or a half million dollar Lamborghini, those are wants, those should be capitalized upon. Those are wants, not needs, but needs should be socialized. We should be looking at a way to make healthcare affordable so that if a person breaks their arm, breaks their leg, they're not trying to avoid care because they can't afford it. They can go get care, because what's going to happen?
Speaker 2:Let's look at this as a Republican viewpoint. What do we want? We want workers, right? Well, if all our workers are injured or maimed, then they're not efficient and we're not making money. So if we're going to look at this as a Republican, we need universal health care to supplement the health of our people so that they can be good workers and we can be a profitable nation.
Speaker 2:As a liberal, the idea is we just need healthy people, because healthy people cost you less money in the long run. But if you notice, both Republican and Democrat, if you actually say it the right way, get the same answer universal healthcare because it's a need. But you notice, you see one party and the other party, neither one to work on this for multiple different reasons, multiple different donors, let's not lie. Unified healthcare. All the insurance companies have put in money, hospitals have put in money to stop it. We what's happening? It's systemic, so they can be for profit and make as much money as they can with as little healthcare as possible, and that's just bad for the community and as a country, we have to consider ourselves one community.
Speaker 1:Yeah, exactly. Let me talk about Luigi Mangione real quick. I mean, look, rather you consider him a hero or not, he just through his violence, he highlights a major issue. Do I support the violence? He did no. Since violence, he highlights a major issue. Do I support the violence? He did no, but it does highlight a major issue that's happening in this country. That's why I think he's getting some of the support. I personally don't think he should be getting some support. Why I think we should have is conversations and reforming health care. But you already said it, both Dems, for their different reasons, more subtle reasons don't want to do it, and Republicans, they're obviously saying we want socialized, we want socialized universal health care.
Speaker 2:Socialism.
Speaker 2:Yeah, the socialism which is the same people on that side screaming socialism are all for tax cuts for the rich and socialism for large companies that are failing, which is backwards. It's capitalism for the poor and socialism for the rich, whereas really a proper system. When you have a socialistic system at the base, just to make sure that no one really starves, because you'd be surprised if everybody's needs are met, you actually give a chance for exceptionalism. Then Think about it this way. I'm going to set like a little business example, because I'm a businessman first and Republicans are traditionally business. I'm traditionally business.
Speaker 2:If I go to build a company right now, I know for the next few years I have no money because that's just what it takes. That's investment in a company. You know, I have a house, I have a family, I got friends, I've got people I'm going to take care of in my life. Well, that makes that much more difficult. All right, but I know that if my company fails, that I at least go back to a minimum wage job. But a minimum wage job will at least pay for my family, my house, my health care and at least guarantee that I have a quality of life. Then I'm more likely to take the risk, knowing that if I collapse I don't go into bankruptcy and lose everything.
Speaker 2:I go back to a starting point, but it's a starting point where you can live. At least it makes you take more chances, which gives more opportunity for people to be bold, and fortune favors the bold. That's the whole point of my idea of socialism. At the bottom is to give people a platform to try to make their own companies, to try to grow themselves. Right now you've got people who are going to work two and three jobs and not even making ends meet, which means they have no chance to open up their own thing. They have no chance to try to evolve themselves and their family.
Speaker 1:Yeah, no, you bring a lot of good points. Look, I like how you said it Socialism for needs and capitalism for wants. I think that's the most. I think that's a fine system. It's hard for me to argue against that. Housing, I think, should be a need. You're not getting a mansion.
Speaker 2:No, no, no, You're just getting a place to live.
Speaker 1:A room over your head is a need, obviously land and property, that's a want, that's a need, but mansion, that's a want.
Speaker 2:Yes, mansion, that's a one. You're not going to socialize mansions.
Speaker 1:Let's be clear. I just want to say to the listener and viewers that he's not talking about you getting a free mansion. You're just getting a roof over your head, enough for you and your families to have a bedroom, water, food, basic stuff, Basic stuff so you don't have to be struggling. This is a problem in America. We may be the richest country economically for now, but we are struggling with basic needs. So this is a sign that we are becoming a poorer and poorer nation. We can't even take care of basic needs. Wake up people. We're not going to be the richest country for long. I'm telling you that that much.
Speaker 2:When you see the amount of wealth in the top 1%, what you're seeing is greed, and the problem with this is you end up with all the money at the top and nobody in the bottom has money. Then you end up in a system where money's not moving. When money doesn't move, that's when you have economic collapses. So this greed to have the most money is a zero-sum game that destroys all of us. Even if you end up with all the money yourself and nobody else in the world has any guess what? Nobody else is taking your money. Now you have it all, so no one cares. So you end up broke too, because you have it all but nobody else cares.
Speaker 2:So it's a system where we can't win Like I'm all for capitalism and I'm all for what capitalism brings, which is innovation, creativity and ambition, because ambition is a driving point to better your life when used properly. But once you've gone to the greed section, where you've got yours, now you're just taking food off everybody's plate, and I know it's just a couple of cents here and there. But when you get a few billionaires to add them together, it starts taking food really off of everybody's plate and that becomes a problem. And it's a problem then, when those people can't afford to live, so they're not buying, now the system isn't getting money flowing through it. That's when you have economic collapses. When an economic collapse happens just go look at rome, go look at the byzantine empire, go look at ottomans. Just go through history. You don't want this and that's what we need to be trying to get away from, but, as see, it's getting more and more top-heavy instead.
Speaker 1:Yeah, man, that's a sad truth. Look, I don't care where you lean politically, but some of the points you have heard here just cannot be argued. Once you get rid of the political Kool-Aid, once you see reality for what it is, change is needed. I don't care if you're democrat, republican, independent, centrist, libertarian, green, wherever the heck you believe you know, wherever the heck your ideology um lands on change. Change is needed, and having this income and quality grab just get wider and wider and wider as time progress. It helps no nation. You already said the collapse of all those major empires. I'm throwing another one the mongolian empire, the largest of them all.
Speaker 2:Even that collapse so america can't collapse to carnates, and then each one of them collapsed economically because of it yep, so that's all I'm going to say about about that.
Speaker 1:I mean, to be honest, this has actually been. I didn't, I did not know what to expect, but this has been a great, great conversation. I just I know the basis of you, I'll see where it goes. And it went out well. We talked about the place for socialism and capitalism, that two actually could work together. I mean China's kind of proven that, even though it's not communism but it's more authoritarianism, true communism is everybody got equal whatever, it's never really happened.
Speaker 1:And I got gotta say that point more often. True communism never happens. It always turns to authoritarianism, for some reason so let's just be clear Russia. Yeah, that's not communism, that was authoritarianism, stalin authoritarianism, hitler authoritarianism.
Speaker 2:They get to mostly authoritarianism true capitalism never happened except back when we had, like, the feudalist system. You you know, because slavery is the ultimate outcome of a capitalist system, because the whole point of capitalism is to maximize profits and minimize losses. Having a slave system minimizes your losses. So reality is you've never had a true economic system of anything anyway, because you always have the human element, and that is the donors and just the minds. You know, stupid people make stupid decisions. Smart people can make stupid decisions and all those voices just clutter sometimes. So we've never really had these systems economically to test them. But we can test individual parameters of each, and we found ones that have worked on socialism. We found ones that worked on capitalism. We found both on socialism, capitalism and communism that have failed too.
Speaker 2:It's really a thing where you need to be studying, and a lot of people in America only study capitalism, and so they have this thought against everything else. Well, I've studied all three and I want to take the best of each, because there are certain details that this detail might work here, but for the most part, I'm a capitalist. I was a street dealer. I grew up with money being the only thing that mattered to me, so I came from a capitalist-only background and I kept myself out of poverty by being a capitalist. But even I understand. I want the best system that benefits everybody and is ethical. The key to my system is how ethical can it be? If it's really ethical, then it will work for everybody, regardless of your socioeconomic situation.
Speaker 1:So yep, you know people are hopefully really paying attention here. This is not a left and right. This is more of a cry, or even a yell to change because a lot of things need to change.
Speaker 1:I don't care where you lean politically, a lot of things need to change, and you know. And greed, I always say greed was a very big issue. I'm going to reiterate that again. Even with corporate policies. I generally agree with Dems on that, but I think they could push a little further on that. When it comes to the right, I do agree with well, I agree with fiscally. I always agree with the right. I thought their policies made sense. Crime I generally agree with the right, even though if it goes too far, like police immunity, like qualified immunity no, I'm not for that part. It's to be held accountable If they mess up. They got to be held to account.
Speaker 2:That part? Yes, I'm not. That's. One of the biggest problems in America in general is the lack of accountability. Is what's allowed? The unethical, unethic, the lack of ethics in this country? Like you know, you have a president who's a criminal. You have a. You know what are you telling the rest of America? Hey, if you're a criminal, who cares? I mean, you're saying that we don't really have consequences for the wealthy and we don't have consequences for the powerful, but everybody needs to be held to consequences. In fact, I think the powerful should be held to a higher standard. You're in a position of power. You need to be held to a higher standard.
Speaker 2:My idea and I will put this out there, this is something I ran on.
Speaker 2:If I got elected, I wanted to change, I told you, I wanted to change the economics of elections and I wanted to put in term limits. One of the things I wanted to add also is is by changing these things, I was going to put in anti-corruption laws. One of the biggest anti-corruption laws is if you were caught putting your dick in your hand and money in the jar, or selling your vote or this or that or anything that would, you would be considered unethical. You know something that would be a criminal in your position. You go 20 years in jail, minimum 100 percent loss of wealth, and you can never run for office again. The outcome would be so great that you would not want to do negative. We want people to run for office because they want to do the right things, not for people who want to benefit themselves, and putting an anti-corruption laws that would force a hugely negative outcome would give us a lot of that outcome that we want, where we would have more ethical politicians who do a better job at fixing America's problems.
Speaker 1:Yep, the only thing I want to say is right as a hot take or not, it doesn't matter. We need to elect a lot of new faces for these policies to pass, because the way they're doing right now, they're just rejected, because they know that's voting their power away.
Speaker 2:That's why change is so hard. Yep, exactly.
Speaker 1:I know a lot of people are going to say Pelosi because of Josh Powell, but also Dan Cranston, on the right as well. The right, don't act like you're all high and mighty. On this issue. Both parties have been doing an inside trade. That's how they enriched themselves. So he wants to be the cure against that kind of corruption that's been running rampant the more time progresses. So that's all I want to say about that. I mean we had such a great conversation. I mean a lot of substantive points we covered. I think we could even go more for another hour, but sadly Migno got better things to do, so I'm just going to wrap it up right here. Before I officially wrap it up, You're the only person that I can't even do a shameless plug-in. That's how ethical he is. See, I try to be comically unethical, not a criminal sense. It's more like shameless plug-in just sell the product kind of thing, More like a stupid cheesy capitalist kind of unethical, Not the criminal one. I don't support that part. I'd be serious. I won't.
Speaker 2:I understand everybody's got to make a little bit of money Might as well have a little fun. You gotta hustle. Think about it. You got these socialist policy ideas from a guy who's always been a hustler, just saying.
Speaker 1:He's not looking out for himself. Ok, you start to see the big picture. He cares about America. Ok, absolutely no, no, no. If you call him a communist, you're an idiot. I'm going to say that I will fight you for that.
Speaker 2:I'm a capitalist by nature. I was born and bred American capitalist.
Speaker 1:I believe that Some people just don't you don't mess. You don't mess with okay, I'm sure your keyboard makes you feel tough, but I'm sure you mean in person, you're shitting your pants.
Speaker 2:I'll put it this I am 6'7", 275 pounds. Okay, all right. So I'm not just a small dude and I grew up a street kid, so I had to fight. I mean, I'm not the small guy, so I've told people for years bravery is about distance. On a keyboard behind a computer screen doesn't take bravery to say something, but say it to my face takes a lot more bravery.
Speaker 1:Oh, yeah, oh, so picture that in your head 6'7" over 200. That's a very large person. He could have done large person.
Speaker 2:He could have done WWE. I'm bigger than most wrestlers. I've met a lot of them and they're like good lord, you're a giant. I'm like I'm sorry, man.
Speaker 1:You could have done WWE to get into politics. That actually could have helped you out, because I need to know how to do politics.
Speaker 2:I didn't want to be a politician most of my life. It only became one.
Speaker 1:Sadly, that's one way of doing it. Wwe or whatever wrestling thing, well, they're the biggest one and you know, I know you're too ethical, you're actually too good for that, I get it. Well then, you could have done that, because that's what a lot of them happen. I mean, for some reason Republicans seem to come out of there, but some Democrats do. Kane, yeah, kane, you know he's a large dude, you know, maybe through paper you could argue with him.
Speaker 2:But that physically man is, vince mcmahon's wife and she's in trump's cabinet.
Speaker 1:Yep, I mean wrestling politics they're they're next door to each other, believe it or not. Yeah, business, so it's business. Camera. You know charisma I mean both unethical, don't get me wrong. Both of them are unethical entities. But you know that's got a comment as well. There you have it. That's a vehicle. I'm in into politics. Some of them do really really well. Of course, some fall apart because they realize they're not as charismatic about the script.
Speaker 2:It helps for them to have the script and script writers. I have to write my own stuff. I got really good at writing my own stuff.
Speaker 1:The real deal deal. If he runs again, you better vote for him. All right, absolutely drop your, drop your maga point of view. Drop, drop, drop, drop that stuff. All right, you want, you want change. Look, yes, for once, if he runs, especially this podcast, get even bigger. I said this podcast is officially endorsed. Charles thompson, the third. Let's see that's gonna happen or not. Uh, I certainly do hope so. Especially have Alabama, that district, that's not the whole state, if you run for Senate, I'll say Alabama. Come on and vote.
Speaker 2:I got a decater Five to ten million dollars. I don't know if I ever get that kind of popularity unless I can go national where everybody in the country knows who I am. I think if I literally that's what some people do.
Speaker 1:They run for president. I think it would change. Yeah, I think that's what some people do on purpose. They run for president knowing that they're going to lose, but they built that name ID and that cashflow and then they start going down down. I think Vivek Ramaswamy is a good example. Right now. He's right for governor of.
Speaker 2:Ohio. So but I think my personality and the way I think if I could get just catch that fire in a bottle just for one second, just enough to get social media to get like maybe on the Jimmy Kimmel show, cnn Fox, just something, I think it would light a match in the entire country because I think I bring something so different and a viewpoint that's so solid that it's just, it's something you would want to see. You get to see the power of a man but also the intelligence of a man. You know it's not just a show, it's. He really is that guy all the time.
Speaker 1:Oh yeah, I just feel like you just see just that one key ingredient and then you're going to start flying.
Speaker 2:Just got to get lucky. That's all it is.
Speaker 1:It's a luck thing, yeah, so you know, but anything else you want to plug in before we wrap this up?
Speaker 2:As I said, follow me on my social medias. It's Charles Thompson on Facebook or the Real Charlie Truth on Twitter. Those are the two I'm going on. I've got to get a blue sky thing. But right now, with my work schedule, my politicking schedule, even though I'm not running but just helping other organizations, I'm really very, very limited on time and I try to rest when I can, just because my job has me driving out of town right now. So I'm gone for four days a week out of town and that just is wearing me out. Find me there. I will answer any question anywhere. If you want to email me, you can just email me at LLABESAB1 at Gmail. I will answer questions. I will talk to anybody, even if you're MAGA. Absolutely, I've never. He's not that type of democrat. Every single point of view, still a point of view that's important to america, because you're a part of america.
Speaker 1:Well, he's really independent. He just had to run in the democrat ticket. I've openly said that and he.
Speaker 2:And what's funny is even the state party knows me like that and all of the democrats are like we don't care, because the person you are we just, we like having you, we understand what you are no, it's actually great.
Speaker 1:It was actually really great me. I'm happy that, um, I challenged my skepticism a bit. It was enough just for me just to work with. So I'm back because I saw I didn't want to cut off a guest that could have been great. You know, that's the thing I always have, this. I have this more cautious, optimistic feel. I'm going to cut this part, this. We had to cancel that. There were other shit. I thought they were good. I'm done. I don't care Stuff that people need to hear. I can't. I don't know why I can't say substance anymore. I got to check. I don't know if I'm going to catch a Biden brain disease or something I don't know. Is this the first stage of?
Speaker 2:it. The drinking water's changed. The brain worms man.
Speaker 1:You know RFK, the drinking water? Oh yeah, that's who? The rfk with the, with the? Oh god, I forget, for I can't even know what that card is. Let's, let's, let's, let me, let me stop. You see, I'm about, I'm about to lose it that this is a sign for me to cut the cut up. So from before, I say, look, just leave a review if you liked it or not, even if you hate it.
Speaker 1:I I got a one-star review from a hater who decided to say anything, that's fine with me, me, look, I don't need a perfect podcast, I'm not aiming to be perfect. So that actually makes me a little more genuine. Believe it or not, I had a 4.9. I thought that seemed a little fake. I'm a 4.4 now. So thank you for humbling me, making me look a little real. Why do you think I'm complimenting that? Because I want authenticity, not perfection. If I be perfect, I'll be my own worst enemy and, trust me, I'll be the most fakest thing in the world. You don't want to fake, okay, you don't? I'd rather be hated for who I am than being loved for being fake. No, all right, that's just what I live by. Leave a review like, share, subscribe.
Speaker 1:I'm on multiple platforms on YouTube, I'm on Rumble as well and I'm also on. You can follow me on Twitter. I refuse to call it X. I refuse to call it that, I don't care. Call me Petty. And Facebook also. Buzzsprout I no longer have. I'm on Apple Podcasts as well. Forget Spotify. I'm not updating there. You can leave Spotify if you're still there. I don't care for Spotify. Spotify is a little weird. They make things too difficult for me. But I think Apple is better and Buzzsprout is better. So just go there and check it out. So, from wherever you have dealt or survived this audio or visual onslaught, you have a blessed day, afternoon or night. Thank you.
