Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Good morning, happy
Friday.
We made it through the week.
Half a day for me, woot, woot,alright.
I have three stories, one ofthem's fairly tragic.
The other two are verylighthearted.
The reason I brought the tragicone up?
I just find it well, it'shorrible for one thing, but I
(00:20):
don't know I need to know moreabout this kind of stuff that's
happening.
Well, what did I do?
I thought I shared it on X.
I guess I didn't know I need toknow more about this kind of
stuff that's happening.
Well, what did I do?
I thought I shared it on X.
I guess I didn't.
Oh, here we go.
You ready?
All right, here we go.
(00:47):
Family sues Tesla afterCybertruck owner dies in a 5,000
degree inferno, causing bonesto disintegrate.
This poor guy burned alive todeath in his that doesn't make
sense uh, in his cyber truck,and I don't know.
This is just strange, don't?
I mean?
Do cyber trucks have automaticlocks where I mean, surely you
are able to get out?
I don't know.
Let's read the story.
I only read the headline when Ifirst shared it, so let's see
what happened.
A Tesla owner was burned alivein his Cybertruck after the
(01:09):
stainless steel beast erupted ina 5,000-degree inferno, so
intense that it caused his bonesto disintegrate, according to a
wrongful death lawsuit filed inTexas.
This is horrible.
Michael Sheehan, 47, bought thefuturistic pickup in April of
2024.
Just three months later, onAugust 3rd, the truck veered off
(01:30):
the road, slammed into aculvert and burst into flames
near Beach City around threemiles.
So what do you mean?
It veered off.
The truck doesn't just veer offby itself.
So what the hell happened?
I guess we're not going to findout.
The raging fire trapped Sheehaninside the vehicle, as I hope
he was unconscious.
The raging fire trapped Sheehaninside the vehicle as the
(01:55):
batteries powering the $100,000SUV went into catastrophic
failure.
Court filings say the blaze wasso hot went into catastrophic
failure.
Court filings say the blaze wasso hot Sheehan's skeletal
system literally fractured fromthe heat.
Yeah, I know, you told us thatalready.
I want to know why.
What happened?
(02:16):
Why was he locked?
Just three months later, onAugust 3rd, the truck veered off
the road, slammed into aculvert and burst into flames.
The raging fire trapped Sheehanand said Well, how did it trap
him inside?
Somebody needs, I need, moreinformation.
He was eight inches shorter inlength than he was.
(02:38):
Oh God, he was eight inchesshorter in length than he was
before he burned.
Attorney Scott West said that'sthermal fracture.
She hands, widow shannon and hisparents filed the lawsuit in
june accusing tesla of selling avehicle of defectively designed
okay, this was a single vehicletrash the trash crash.
(03:04):
The petition states the crashforces were survivable except by
the for the ergonomicshortcomings and deficient crash
.
Worthiness West, a formerindustrial designer engineer
turned trial lawyer, blasted thecompany's priorities.
He alleged that Tesla putaesthetics ahead of basic safety
(03:30):
, making it nearly impossiblefor Sheehan to escape once the
truck lost power.
Instead, sheehan found himselflocked in a firetruck.
So what does that mean?
How did that happen?
The lawsuit says theCybertruck's electric.
Here we go.
Maybe this explains it.
The lawsuit says theCybertruck's electrically
(03:51):
operated doors can't be openedonce power is cut.
Well, that doesn't make sense.
Exterior handles fail and themanual release latches inside
are unreasonably difficult tolocate in an emergency.
That doesn't make sense.
Who would design a truck likethat, really?
(04:14):
So you can't open the door frominside.
Even Even when you cut thetruck off, there's no power to
it.
You can't open it from theinside.
That's what this is saying.
Tesla the filing continues gaveowners insufficient warning or
training on how to exitpost-crash.
(04:34):
Well, I don't think they'rerequired to do that, wow.
But when Tesla delivered theCybertruck to him, the
instructions they gave him werewoefully inadequate to handle a
situation like this.
I mean, I've sold cars.
I didn't have to tell peoplehow to get out of the car if it
crashed.
Um, of course, I didn't sellCybertrucks either.
(04:58):
So this is crazy.
All right, I guess you can gofinish that reading it.
I still don't have any answersfor you on that.
I don't know.
I don't know anything aboutCybertrucks and how they work.
Okay, so moving on.
Here are three things in aninterview you most likely won't
(05:19):
get hired for.
All right, this is from the NewYork Post.
Three things, one of them.
I read the first one.
I'm like well, duh, that'sobvious.
Who would say that in aninterview?
Saying I want to start my ownbusiness someday to a recruiter
sounds like oh my gosh, y'allSorry, I don't know what is
wrong with me.
I want to start my own businesssomeday.
(05:41):
To a recruiter sounds likeyou're planning your exit before
you even walk through the door.
I mean, yeah, who does that?
At most companies, executivesagree new hires start making
financial sense after aboutthree years.
Wow, if you signal that yourplan is to leave and launch your
own thing, most companies won'twant to take that bet.
Well, no duh, who would do that?
(06:02):
What dumb ass would do that?
What else, let's see.
Yes, there's something thatjust about every employee wants
to do, but what?
Okay?
Another thing that is keepingyou from getting this job is
that you value work-life balance.
Thank you, I can't stay.
Who came up with that?
Work-life balance shit.
Thank you, I can't stay.
Who came up with that?
(06:22):
Work-life balance shit.
Companies want to know thatyou're motivated, that you want
to win and that your goals alignwith theirs.
Productivity and passion matter.
Another thing that should bekept under wraps in an interview
although it's a commonexperience with many corporate
workers never say you were letgo as part of your company's
recent layoffs.
Wow, why not?
(06:43):
This advice from Welch mightcome as a shock, but it's for a
good reason.
Seasoned executives know thatin many layoffs, companies pluck
out the top performers andreassign them elsewhere in the
organization, and they arewondering why they didn't happen
, why this didn't happen to you,okay.
Well, that makes sense, allright.
(07:04):
Moving on to our last thing?
All right, there's a new movieout called the Roses and it's a,
I guess, a remake of War, theWar of the Roses, remember with,
I think with Michael MichaelDouglas, is that his name, his
name?
And um, oh my gosh, I see her,I see her face.
Catherine, no, kathleen Turner,and it's funny because I
(07:33):
re-watched that movie, just likelast year when I decided to go
on this uh, adventure ofre-watching old movies.
That was one of them that Ire-watched and it was really
good.
But here we go.
I've seen previews for this andI thought, oh, I'd like to see
that because it has OliviaColman in it and I love her.
Come her back, she's okay.
All right, let's see what,apparently, the critiquers, or
(07:55):
whatever they're called,reviewers are trashing it.
So let's see what they sayAntiquers or whatever they're
called reviewers are trashing it.
So let's see what they say.
Bickering couples can bedelicious to watch Emma Thompson
, and I love her too.
And Kenneth Branagh's Beatriceand, oh my God, Benedict, what?
(08:15):
And lit a sexy match in MuchAdo About Nothing.
And Elizabeth Taylor andRichard Burton boozily ripped
each other to pieces in who'sAfraid of Virginia Woolf.
And then there's BenedictCumberbatch and Olivia Colman's
Till Death Do Us Part duo in theRoses, many, many rungs down
from their present predecessors.
This domestic blitz is weak andwitless.
(08:37):
Oh no, that means if they don'tlike it, that means I probably
will.
I have learned that a long timeago.
When these people who maketheir livings off of watching
movies and give us reviews of itwhen they don't like it, it
means I will.
So the crabby characters are anunappetizing and cringy pair
that would push a person to findany excuse to sprint out of an
(09:00):
awkward dinner party.
Well, that's what the movie isabout, dumbass.
Did you watch the original one?
This is probably some20-something-year-old soy latte
person writing this Probably isnot even aware that the first
one is out.
Let's see.
Maybe he does, let's see.
(09:22):
Actually, actually, the basicpremise of director jay roach's
film based on the novel the warof the roses is sadistic.
Good fun.
I didn't know there was a bookfirst.
I have to get the book partners.
Contempt turns deadly.
And why not another 1989 screenversion?
Yes, so he does know about it,but did you watch it and did you
read the book?
(09:43):
Who knows this inferior one?
More nancy myers golden statereal estate porn than scorching
black comedy.
Well, I like nancy myers.
I know she's a liberal, but Ilike her.
She makes good stuff, isn'tsmart, tense or fiery enough to
render bad behavior into punchyentertainment.
The movie is spicy as cornchowder.
Our terrible two are theo, andrenowned architect, and ivy, a
(10:09):
cook who abandoned aprofessional kitchen in london
for the fruit loops ofmotherhood.
When theo's ambitious newcalifornia building
embarrassingly collapses duringa power storm, so does his
career.
On the same fateful night, ivysparsely attended a hobby
restaurant gratingly calledWe've Got Crabs oh my gosh gets
(10:32):
a rave review from a prominentfood critic and business
explodes.
Roles suddenly reverse, so toodoes their resentment.
All right, so I'm still gonnawatch it.
I don't care, I'm gonna watchit because I like those two.
All right.
Question of the day.
I'm sorry, this episode kind ofsucked.
All right question of the day.
(10:54):
Okay, well, speaking of movies,what big movie out there was
hyped up and everybody loved,everybody was talking about it,
and then you saw it and youthought it sucked.
What is that movie?
That's the question of the day.
All right, I gotta go.
Thanks for listening.
Love y'all.
(11:15):
Bye, have a great weekend.