March 8, 2025 • 16 mins
America is in decline. And while politicians are doing everything they can to assist in the decline, ultimately the fault lies at the feet of the American people.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:01):
Today, I'd like to speak briefly about the decline of
the American Empire and do it in a nonpartisan, non
antagonistic kind of way. The United States as a global
power is experiencing a period of decline. This is not
in debate. This is something that has been occurring gradually
(00:22):
over time. Our nation's economic dominance is diminishing as other
established and emergency emerging economies around the world continue to
grow and expand. On an individual level, most Americans are
struggling to adapt to these changes. The United States government
(00:43):
has not responded effectively to these changes either, largely because
there's very little political will to do so. In many ways,
those people that are empowered benefit from the trajectory as
it is happening. Historically, empires in decline follow a very
familiar path. Wealth becomes concentrated among us select few, while
(01:04):
the majority of the population faces increasing economic hardships. This
invariably leads to fighting and bitterness and infighting between those
at the bottom because quite simply, they're powerless to fight
those at the top. While this trajectory could potentially be
slowed reversing it would require a level of collective awareness
(01:26):
and action that it seems at present very unlikely. One
of the most significant challenges we face is that Americans
would need to reject policies, regardless of which political party
enacts them, that disproportionately benefit the wealthiest at the expense
of the broader population, policies that disproportionately benefit the powerful
(01:46):
at the expense of the broader population.
Speaker 2 (01:49):
This is not a partisan issue.
Speaker 1 (01:51):
Both major political ideologies and parties contributed to the problem
in different ways. So the following two examples are just
some brief summaries. It's certainly far more in depth and
broad than this, but I think these are some things
that both sides can easily identify and to some degree
understand and even agree on. On the right side of
(02:14):
the spectrum, the trend manifests through tax structures that often
place a lighter burden proportionally on the wealthiest while shifting
more responsibility to the worker and middle class. At the
same time, social assistance programs for our weakest and most
vulnerable are framed as being wasteful, while subsidies and financial
(02:34):
advantages for the wealthiest among us are portrayed as being
noble necessary. On the left side of the aisle, policies
designed to provide social support sometimes create long term dependencies,
and it makes self sufficiency seem less appealing or attainable. Additionally,
(02:55):
regulations that are placed on larger businesses intended to promote
fairness and safety, among other things, often place disproportionate burdens
on the smaller businesses, while larger corporations they're much better
equipped to absorb the cost the infrastructure changes needed to comply,
(03:17):
and this caused us the smaller upstarts to fail and
further consolidates the market dominance of those who are the largest.
At the core of this issue is a well documented
historical truth. A society divided against itself cannot stand. This
is wisdom that is as old as time, dates back
(03:39):
to biblical times and beyond. For much of its history,
America's political discourse revolved around policy. Americans would debate things
like the merits of taxation, regulation, education, infrastructure for relations,
and we'd often always have disagreement. They were frequent, but
(04:02):
compromise was the mechanism through which governance functioned. One side
had to get a little bit of what it wanted
to the other side to get a little bit of
what it wanted, and we would have a compromise. Compromise
prevents extreme swings in either direction, either far ideologically to
the right or far ideologically to the left. It's changed
(04:26):
though in the past two decades, especially in the last
ten years, political discourse has shifted dramatically. The nation is
no longer debating policy. Instead, the United States is engaged
in ideological warfare. Each side used the other side not
merely as an opponent with different views or different opinions,
but as an existential threat to the nation. The result
(04:51):
of this is an uncompromising all or nothing approach to governance,
where governance is driven by the belief that only one
side can be right and the other side is not
only misguided, but they're actually malicious and evil. If this
trajectory continues, the outcome as predictable sustained decline. What else
(05:11):
could happen? This is a sobering reality, particularly those who
have been through all the times that we've experienced as
a nation. We view it through that lens, especially the
older generation. Future generations, they likely experience a nation where
economic power and influence is concentrated among a select few.
(05:32):
The majority contend with increasing limitations. That's the reality that
we all up until recent times only observed from a
far distant lands, high concentration of power, wealth among a
very select few, and everyone else basically fighting for scraps.
Speaker 2 (05:54):
Now, could we change this?
Speaker 1 (05:55):
I mean, in theory, yes, but it will require fundamental
shift in public consciousness, one where we, as individuals across
the political spectrums, acknowledge past missteps, reconsider our long held beliefs,
and embrace meaningful change.
Speaker 2 (06:07):
But not just change, but compromise.
Speaker 1 (06:14):
History sadly suggests that such transformations are rare.
Speaker 2 (06:18):
Human nature tends towards.
Speaker 1 (06:20):
Entrenchment rather than reflection, and more often than not, human
nature wins out.
Speaker 2 (06:25):
Now, I don't know if I can change. I don't know,
but I've decided to try.
Speaker 1 (06:31):
My efforts to expose the lies and bullshit and nonsense
and all these things detrimental to America mostly fallen flat
ears because of these entrenched divisions that I spoke about earlier.
But is there a better way, one that can cut through,
one that might work.
Speaker 2 (06:47):
I don't know. I'm willing to try, though.
Speaker 1 (06:53):
This essay and this episode of the podcast are examples
of that. I'll begin with the following And let me
be honest, and let me be a sincere and let
me be genuine. If any of my attempts to expose
lies and the egregious actions taken by the current administration,
any administration, anyone in political office, the current political party
(07:18):
and power, or anybody else has caused you personal offense,
I offer my sincerest apologies. Now, I don't apologize for
exposing lies and malicious acts by anyone in government, no
matter which side of the aisle they're on, but I
should never do that at the expense of my fellow
Americans and humans, regardless of what they believe, and I'm
(07:39):
guilty of doing that.
Speaker 2 (07:42):
Mainly out of frustration.
Speaker 1 (07:46):
So I'm challenging myself to only speak on these issues
in a way that doesn't demean or discount anyone which
admitted It would be very hard because there's some people
that believe some very outlandish things, and it's very difficult
for me to understand how they can believe them, and
it makes it difficult for me to talk about it
without sometimes moving into a demeaning tone of voice swearing.
Speaker 2 (08:10):
Perhaps it's very hard for me, but this one thing
is true.
Speaker 1 (08:17):
People on both sides of politics are very entrenched in
some very wrong beliefs, or they're on the left of
the right, and they're not just wrong beliefs, they're verifiably
wrong beliefs.
Speaker 2 (08:29):
Which should never happen.
Speaker 1 (08:30):
Something that's verifiably wrong should never be believed. And this
has been the most frustrating thing, especially about the last
ten years in America. But the path to correcting wrong
beliefs is obviously a different path than the one I've chosen,
because I would say since twenty twenty, when I really
(08:51):
started voicing.
Speaker 2 (08:53):
My opinions and.
Speaker 1 (08:56):
Thoughts on subjects very loudly, I've affected very few people.
I've affected a couple of people, and I've had some
good conversations with people as a result of some things
I've posted. But for the most part, what generally happens
is that people on the other side only tend to
dig in even deeper in.
Speaker 2 (09:15):
It's not been very productive.
Speaker 1 (09:21):
So accept my apology, and I would ask you if
you would do some soul searching, If I could do
soul searching, anybody can, and ask yourself, just like, maybe
these things that they're saying are true are actually false.
Maybe I shouldn't just blindly believe one side or the other.
(09:42):
Maybe I shouldn't blindly believe that doing things this way
is the best way. Maybe I shouldn't believe that this
thing that they're doing, that they're saying they're doing for
a specific reason, is actually the reason they're doing it.
Maybe I shouldn't believe that this particular organization, or this
particular group of people, or this particular.
Speaker 2 (10:03):
A segment of the population.
Speaker 1 (10:05):
Is evil or harmful, or violent or wrong just because
somebody in a political party that I subscribed to says
that they were. Perhaps they're wrong, Perhaps I know crazy thought,
but perhaps.
Speaker 2 (10:19):
They're telling me these things to manipulate me.
Speaker 1 (10:24):
And these are questions we can ask ourselves, no matter
which side of the world, no matter which side of
the political spectrum world. I like to think of myself
as a centrist, although I don't think that's true. I
thought there were many, many, many issues. I tend decide
more on the conservative side of things. Now that's not
the MAGA side, because MAGA isn't conservative. There's nothing about
MAGA that's conservative. There never has been, that there will be.
(10:44):
It's a populist movement. It's not a conservative movement. It's
hijacked the Republican Party. I'm sorry if saying that offends you,
I don't mean it in an offensive way.
Speaker 2 (10:52):
But these are just the realities.
Speaker 1 (10:56):
I was a lifelong Republican, a lifelong Republican, and up
until the election that Joe Biden ran against Donald Trump,
when Donald Trump was trying to be re elected, up
until that election, up until that election, I had.
Speaker 2 (11:14):
Never once in my life voted for a Democrat ever.
Speaker 1 (11:20):
So I would say that I skew more towards the
conservative side of things, mainly only ideas that Republicans put
out about physical responsibility and smaller government and freedom and
some things that they say, although they don't do any
of those things, like nothing they do really follows up
(11:41):
on those things. But those are the things that they
talk about, or they historically talked about.
Speaker 2 (11:45):
Nowadays they don't.
Speaker 1 (11:47):
Nowadays the Republican Party is the Maga Party, and the
Maga Party talks about immigrants and I don't know, they struggle,
people eating animals and pets. I mean, they talk about
things that quite frankly are You have to ask yourself,
why are they talking about these things?
Speaker 2 (12:06):
Why aren't they talking.
Speaker 1 (12:07):
About policy in an intellectual way?
Speaker 2 (12:11):
Why? That's what I asked myself.
Speaker 1 (12:14):
Why why aren't they speaking about actual policy things in
an intellectual way, in a compelling way, in a way
that can be explained, rather than speaking of things in
an inflammatory way where you cast broad dispersions upon groups
of people.
Speaker 2 (12:32):
You know, historically, that's what Democrats did.
Speaker 1 (12:34):
Democrats played identity politics where they cast dispersions upon large
groups of people, and they were wrong when they did
that almost always, and Republicans used to call them out
on it. And now that's what the Republican Party is. Again,
not trying to offend you. These are just the realities.
Like you just only have to like if you're able
(12:55):
to recall any political history over the past twenty years,
thirty years, don't know how old you are, but.
Speaker 2 (13:00):
It should be quite evident. And none of this accomplished anything.
Speaker 1 (13:05):
It just causes bitterness, hatred and division inviting And I'll
share a little secret with you. Both parties are happy
about that. The Republican Party, which again isn't the Republican Party,
it's MAGA and the Democrat Party. They both love it.
(13:27):
As long as we're at each other's throats, they can
do anything they want. They can literally do anything they
want as long as we are at each other's throats.
You're not my enemy and I'm not your enemy. We
are both Americans supposedly living in the land of the Free,
where we should be pursuing life, liberty, and happiness. We
(13:54):
shouldn't be trying to deprive other people of rights, deprive
other people of liberty, or deprive other people of happiness.
Speaker 2 (14:00):
We should be pursuing our own life, our own liberty,
and our own happiness.
Speaker 1 (14:06):
And in as much as the government is able to
facilitate that in any kind of a meaningful way, it
mostly means they should just stay out of most everything.
Speaker 2 (14:16):
That's not what both sides want now.
Speaker 1 (14:20):
I guess probably the biggest change I've seen over the
past years is how the Republican Party shifted from a
party that largely talked about wanting the government out of
everything to now they just think the government could just
fix everything. I mean, they've got their guy. He's the
smartest guy, he's the best guy, he's the most amazing guy.
And he can just fix things.
Speaker 2 (14:39):
He can just fix boy, just let him in there.
He can just fix everything.
Speaker 1 (14:43):
He can fix the economy, he can fix the cost
of groceries, he can fix the price of ol he can.
Speaker 2 (14:49):
Fix a crime. He can. There's literally nothing he can't fix.
Speaker 1 (14:53):
And I'm sorry, but that's just not how things work.
And we fall into belief that that's how things work.
This is what has led us into more than ever.
We are becoming a society of personalities and person one person,
the Democrats less so because they haven't had that one
person since Obama. Now they experienced it with Obama, he
(15:16):
was the person, not just Democrats.
Speaker 2 (15:20):
Tons of Republicans voted for Obama.
Speaker 1 (15:21):
By the way, Trump took that, but it's expanded even more,
like he not only has gained the implicit trust of
everybody who is in favor of him, they just get
his trust implicitly. He actually toys around with this idea
of being a dictator, of being a sole leader. He
floats that idea all the time, which scared the hell
(15:44):
out of everybody. And again, I'm sorry if you don't
see that, if you're blind to that, it's just because
you like him so much. We as Americans should never
allow any elected official to even joke, to even take
lightly and joke about the possibility of becoming a dictator,
(16:06):
about ripping up the constitution and going past two terms
as president, any of these things, we shouldn't accept it.
Speaker 2 (16:11):
It's unacceptable. I don't care if it's a Democrat doing it.
I don't care if it's a Republican do it.
Speaker 1 (16:15):
Don't care if it's the Green Party or the Libertarian
Party or something kind of other independent, I don't care.
Speaker 2 (16:21):
We as American.
Speaker 1 (16:22):
Should never allow that to happen, not even in jest.
Speaker 2 (16:30):
Anyway.
Speaker 1 (16:31):
I want to be a part of the solution, but boy,
it'll take a lot of people signing up to do
the same thing. Maybe you'll be one of them. I
don't know either way. I appreciate you listening today's episode
The Pot
Today, I'd like to speak briefly about the decline of
the American Empire and do it in a nonpartisan, non
antagonistic kind of way. The United States as a global
power is experiencing a period of decline. This is not
in debate. This is something that has been occurring gradually
(00:22):
over time. Our nation's economic dominance is diminishing as other
established and emergency emerging economies around the world continue to
grow and expand. On an individual level, most Americans are
struggling to adapt to these changes. The United States government
(00:43):
has not responded effectively to these changes either, largely because
there's very little political will to do so. In many ways,
those people that are empowered benefit from the trajectory as
it is happening. Historically, empires in decline follow a very
familiar path. Wealth becomes concentrated among us select few, while
(01:04):
the majority of the population faces increasing economic hardships. This
invariably leads to fighting and bitterness and infighting between those
at the bottom because quite simply, they're powerless to fight
those at the top. While this trajectory could potentially be
slowed reversing it would require a level of collective awareness
(01:26):
and action that it seems at present very unlikely. One
of the most significant challenges we face is that Americans
would need to reject policies, regardless of which political party
enacts them, that disproportionately benefit the wealthiest at the expense
of the broader population, policies that disproportionately benefit the powerful
(01:46):
at the expense of the broader population.
Speaker 2 (01:49):
This is not a partisan issue.
Speaker 1 (01:51):
Both major political ideologies and parties contributed to the problem
in different ways. So the following two examples are just
some brief summaries. It's certainly far more in depth and
broad than this, but I think these are some things
that both sides can easily identify and to some degree
understand and even agree on. On the right side of
(02:14):
the spectrum, the trend manifests through tax structures that often
place a lighter burden proportionally on the wealthiest while shifting
more responsibility to the worker and middle class. At the
same time, social assistance programs for our weakest and most
vulnerable are framed as being wasteful, while subsidies and financial
(02:34):
advantages for the wealthiest among us are portrayed as being
noble necessary. On the left side of the aisle, policies
designed to provide social support sometimes create long term dependencies,
and it makes self sufficiency seem less appealing or attainable. Additionally,
(02:55):
regulations that are placed on larger businesses intended to promote
fairness and safety, among other things, often place disproportionate burdens
on the smaller businesses, while larger corporations they're much better
equipped to absorb the cost the infrastructure changes needed to comply,
(03:17):
and this caused us the smaller upstarts to fail and
further consolidates the market dominance of those who are the largest.
At the core of this issue is a well documented
historical truth. A society divided against itself cannot stand. This
is wisdom that is as old as time, dates back
(03:39):
to biblical times and beyond. For much of its history,
America's political discourse revolved around policy. Americans would debate things
like the merits of taxation, regulation, education, infrastructure for relations,
and we'd often always have disagreement. They were frequent, but
(04:02):
compromise was the mechanism through which governance functioned. One side
had to get a little bit of what it wanted
to the other side to get a little bit of
what it wanted, and we would have a compromise. Compromise
prevents extreme swings in either direction, either far ideologically to
the right or far ideologically to the left. It's changed
(04:26):
though in the past two decades, especially in the last
ten years, political discourse has shifted dramatically. The nation is
no longer debating policy. Instead, the United States is engaged
in ideological warfare. Each side used the other side not
merely as an opponent with different views or different opinions,
but as an existential threat to the nation. The result
(04:51):
of this is an uncompromising all or nothing approach to governance,
where governance is driven by the belief that only one
side can be right and the other side is not
only misguided, but they're actually malicious and evil. If this
trajectory continues, the outcome as predictable sustained decline. What else
(05:11):
could happen? This is a sobering reality, particularly those who
have been through all the times that we've experienced as
a nation. We view it through that lens, especially the
older generation. Future generations, they likely experience a nation where
economic power and influence is concentrated among a select few.
(05:32):
The majority contend with increasing limitations. That's the reality that
we all up until recent times only observed from a
far distant lands, high concentration of power, wealth among a
very select few, and everyone else basically fighting for scraps.
Speaker 2 (05:54):
Now, could we change this?
Speaker 1 (05:55):
I mean, in theory, yes, but it will require fundamental
shift in public consciousness, one where we, as individuals across
the political spectrums, acknowledge past missteps, reconsider our long held beliefs,
and embrace meaningful change.
Speaker 2 (06:07):
But not just change, but compromise.
Speaker 1 (06:14):
History sadly suggests that such transformations are rare.
Speaker 2 (06:18):
Human nature tends towards.
Speaker 1 (06:20):
Entrenchment rather than reflection, and more often than not, human
nature wins out.
Speaker 2 (06:25):
Now, I don't know if I can change. I don't know,
but I've decided to try.
Speaker 1 (06:31):
My efforts to expose the lies and bullshit and nonsense
and all these things detrimental to America mostly fallen flat
ears because of these entrenched divisions that I spoke about earlier.
But is there a better way, one that can cut through,
one that might work.
Speaker 2 (06:47):
I don't know. I'm willing to try, though.
Speaker 1 (06:53):
This essay and this episode of the podcast are examples
of that. I'll begin with the following And let me
be honest, and let me be a sincere and let
me be genuine. If any of my attempts to expose
lies and the egregious actions taken by the current administration,
any administration, anyone in political office, the current political party
(07:18):
and power, or anybody else has caused you personal offense,
I offer my sincerest apologies. Now, I don't apologize for
exposing lies and malicious acts by anyone in government, no
matter which side of the aisle they're on, but I
should never do that at the expense of my fellow
Americans and humans, regardless of what they believe, and I'm
(07:39):
guilty of doing that.
Speaker 2 (07:42):
Mainly out of frustration.
Speaker 1 (07:46):
So I'm challenging myself to only speak on these issues
in a way that doesn't demean or discount anyone which
admitted It would be very hard because there's some people
that believe some very outlandish things, and it's very difficult
for me to understand how they can believe them, and
it makes it difficult for me to talk about it
without sometimes moving into a demeaning tone of voice swearing.
Speaker 2 (08:10):
Perhaps it's very hard for me, but this one thing
is true.
Speaker 1 (08:17):
People on both sides of politics are very entrenched in
some very wrong beliefs, or they're on the left of
the right, and they're not just wrong beliefs, they're verifiably
wrong beliefs.
Speaker 2 (08:29):
Which should never happen.
Speaker 1 (08:30):
Something that's verifiably wrong should never be believed. And this
has been the most frustrating thing, especially about the last
ten years in America. But the path to correcting wrong
beliefs is obviously a different path than the one I've chosen,
because I would say since twenty twenty, when I really
(08:51):
started voicing.
Speaker 2 (08:53):
My opinions and.
Speaker 1 (08:56):
Thoughts on subjects very loudly, I've affected very few people.
I've affected a couple of people, and I've had some
good conversations with people as a result of some things
I've posted. But for the most part, what generally happens
is that people on the other side only tend to
dig in even deeper in.
Speaker 2 (09:15):
It's not been very productive.
Speaker 1 (09:21):
So accept my apology, and I would ask you if
you would do some soul searching, If I could do
soul searching, anybody can, and ask yourself, just like, maybe
these things that they're saying are true are actually false.
Maybe I shouldn't just blindly believe one side or the other.
(09:42):
Maybe I shouldn't blindly believe that doing things this way
is the best way. Maybe I shouldn't believe that this
thing that they're doing, that they're saying they're doing for
a specific reason, is actually the reason they're doing it.
Maybe I shouldn't believe that this particular organization, or this
particular group of people, or this particular.
Speaker 2 (10:03):
A segment of the population.
Speaker 1 (10:05):
Is evil or harmful, or violent or wrong just because
somebody in a political party that I subscribed to says
that they were. Perhaps they're wrong, Perhaps I know crazy thought,
but perhaps.
Speaker 2 (10:19):
They're telling me these things to manipulate me.
Speaker 1 (10:24):
And these are questions we can ask ourselves, no matter
which side of the world, no matter which side of
the political spectrum world. I like to think of myself
as a centrist, although I don't think that's true. I
thought there were many, many, many issues. I tend decide
more on the conservative side of things. Now that's not
the MAGA side, because MAGA isn't conservative. There's nothing about
MAGA that's conservative. There never has been, that there will be.
(10:44):
It's a populist movement. It's not a conservative movement. It's
hijacked the Republican Party. I'm sorry if saying that offends you,
I don't mean it in an offensive way.
Speaker 2 (10:52):
But these are just the realities.
Speaker 1 (10:56):
I was a lifelong Republican, a lifelong Republican, and up
until the election that Joe Biden ran against Donald Trump,
when Donald Trump was trying to be re elected, up
until that election, up until that election, I had.
Speaker 2 (11:14):
Never once in my life voted for a Democrat ever.
Speaker 1 (11:20):
So I would say that I skew more towards the
conservative side of things, mainly only ideas that Republicans put
out about physical responsibility and smaller government and freedom and
some things that they say, although they don't do any
of those things, like nothing they do really follows up
(11:41):
on those things. But those are the things that they
talk about, or they historically talked about.
Speaker 2 (11:45):
Nowadays they don't.
Speaker 1 (11:47):
Nowadays the Republican Party is the Maga Party, and the
Maga Party talks about immigrants and I don't know, they struggle,
people eating animals and pets. I mean, they talk about
things that quite frankly are You have to ask yourself,
why are they talking about these things?
Speaker 2 (12:06):
Why aren't they talking.
Speaker 1 (12:07):
About policy in an intellectual way?
Speaker 2 (12:11):
Why? That's what I asked myself.
Speaker 1 (12:14):
Why why aren't they speaking about actual policy things in
an intellectual way, in a compelling way, in a way
that can be explained, rather than speaking of things in
an inflammatory way where you cast broad dispersions upon groups
of people.
Speaker 2 (12:32):
You know, historically, that's what Democrats did.
Speaker 1 (12:34):
Democrats played identity politics where they cast dispersions upon large
groups of people, and they were wrong when they did
that almost always, and Republicans used to call them out
on it. And now that's what the Republican Party is. Again,
not trying to offend you. These are just the realities.
Like you just only have to like if you're able
(12:55):
to recall any political history over the past twenty years,
thirty years, don't know how old you are, but.
Speaker 2 (13:00):
It should be quite evident. And none of this accomplished anything.
Speaker 1 (13:05):
It just causes bitterness, hatred and division inviting And I'll
share a little secret with you. Both parties are happy
about that. The Republican Party, which again isn't the Republican Party,
it's MAGA and the Democrat Party. They both love it.
(13:27):
As long as we're at each other's throats, they can
do anything they want. They can literally do anything they
want as long as we are at each other's throats.
You're not my enemy and I'm not your enemy. We
are both Americans supposedly living in the land of the Free,
where we should be pursuing life, liberty, and happiness. We
(13:54):
shouldn't be trying to deprive other people of rights, deprive
other people of liberty, or deprive other people of happiness.
Speaker 2 (14:00):
We should be pursuing our own life, our own liberty,
and our own happiness.
Speaker 1 (14:06):
And in as much as the government is able to
facilitate that in any kind of a meaningful way, it
mostly means they should just stay out of most everything.
Speaker 2 (14:16):
That's not what both sides want now.
Speaker 1 (14:20):
I guess probably the biggest change I've seen over the
past years is how the Republican Party shifted from a
party that largely talked about wanting the government out of
everything to now they just think the government could just
fix everything. I mean, they've got their guy. He's the
smartest guy, he's the best guy, he's the most amazing guy.
And he can just fix things.
Speaker 2 (14:39):
He can just fix boy, just let him in there.
He can just fix everything.
Speaker 1 (14:43):
He can fix the economy, he can fix the cost
of groceries, he can fix the price of ol he can.
Speaker 2 (14:49):
Fix a crime. He can. There's literally nothing he can't fix.
Speaker 1 (14:53):
And I'm sorry, but that's just not how things work.
And we fall into belief that that's how things work.
This is what has led us into more than ever.
We are becoming a society of personalities and person one person,
the Democrats less so because they haven't had that one
person since Obama. Now they experienced it with Obama, he
(15:16):
was the person, not just Democrats.
Speaker 2 (15:20):
Tons of Republicans voted for Obama.
Speaker 1 (15:21):
By the way, Trump took that, but it's expanded even more,
like he not only has gained the implicit trust of
everybody who is in favor of him, they just get
his trust implicitly. He actually toys around with this idea
of being a dictator, of being a sole leader. He
floats that idea all the time, which scared the hell
(15:44):
out of everybody. And again, I'm sorry if you don't
see that, if you're blind to that, it's just because
you like him so much. We as Americans should never
allow any elected official to even joke, to even take
lightly and joke about the possibility of becoming a dictator,
(16:06):
about ripping up the constitution and going past two terms
as president, any of these things, we shouldn't accept it.
Speaker 2 (16:11):
It's unacceptable. I don't care if it's a Democrat doing it.
I don't care if it's a Republican do it.
Speaker 1 (16:15):
Don't care if it's the Green Party or the Libertarian
Party or something kind of other independent, I don't care.
Speaker 2 (16:21):
We as American.
Speaker 1 (16:22):
Should never allow that to happen, not even in jest.
Speaker 2 (16:30):
Anyway.
Speaker 1 (16:31):
I want to be a part of the solution, but boy,
it'll take a lot of people signing up to do
the same thing. Maybe you'll be one of them. I
don't know either way. I appreciate you listening today's episode
The Pot
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Special Summer Offer: Exclusively on Apple Podcasts, try our Dateline Premium subscription completely free for one month! With Dateline Premium, you get every episode ad-free plus exclusive bonus content.
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!