POPULARITY
Can you believe it's already here? 37 Gameweeks have all led to this as the final Gameweek of the season is just around the corner.
In this podcast I go through my final thoughts to help you lock your FPL Team Selections ahead of Gameweek 37. ━━━━━━━━━━━━━ ⚽️ Join my Sleeper Premier League Pick'Em mini-league
Show Notes This month, the Skin Flint team welcome RCVS & European Specialist Debbie Gow to the platform to explore Eosinophilic granuloma complex (EGC). (00:00) John Sue and Paul introduce the podcast. Chapter 1 – What on Earth Is Eosinophilic Granuloma Complex? (02:55) Sue welcomes Debbie Gow to the podcast and invites her to introduce herself. Debbie shares that she is a specialist in veterinary dermatology, working at a busy referral hospital outside Edinburgh. She describes her role in setting up the dermatology service, working with a resident and derm nurse, and her continued involvement in CPD and writing. (04:05) Sue introduces the topic: eosinophilic granuloma complex (EGC) in cats. She jokes that it's sometimes referred to as “eosinophilic granuloma confusion” due to its complexity and terminology. She asks Debbie to break it down explaining that EGC is an umbrella term for three lesion types: Linear granulomas: Seen on the backs of legs, chin, or in the mouth. May or may not be itchy. Plaques: Often pruritic, ulcerated, and secondarily infected. Found on the ventrum or medial thighs. Indolent ulcers: Located on the upper lip, may appear crater-like. (07:28) Sue asks about miliary dermatitis. Debbie considers it a separate reaction pattern, not part of EGC, though also common and allergy-associated. (08:15) John asks about age, breed, or sex predispositions. Debbie explains that while any cat can be affected, young adult cats (6 months to 5 years) are most likely to develop these lesions. Females may be slightly overrepresented, but evidence is limited. (09:27) John inquires about geographical prevalence. Debbie confirms EGC is seen globally wherever cats are present and exposed to allergy triggers. Chapter 2 – Lookalikes, Lip Lesions & Licking Cats: Sorting the EGC Puzzle (10:21) Sue asks whether EGC lesions are pathognomonic or if there are important differentials. Debbie stresses the importance of not assuming a diagnosis without investigation whilst they can have a classical appearance: Cytology is key to identifying eosinophils. Differentials include squamous cell carcinoma (particularly for lip ulcers), mycobacteria, fungal infections, and viral diseases. (12:37) Sue asks about a minimum diagnostic approach. Debbie advises: Cytology Wood's lamp and trichogram to rule out dermatophytosis Consideration of biopsies if in doubt (14:08) Sue asks how to perform cytology. Debbie describes: Tape prep for dry lesions Cotton bud for moist/crusted areas Direct impression with a slide (14:59) Sue asks how often infection is present. Debbie says: Infections are uncommon but more likely with plaques due to licking Cytology helps assess if antibiotics are needed Most cases are treated with anti-inflammatories rather than antibiotics (16:52) John asks about allergic patterns in cats. Debbie describes four main reaction patterns: Miliary dermatitis Head and neck pruritus Ventral overgrooming Eosinophilic lesions She notes cats may display multiple patterns and also non-skin signs like conjunctivitis, otitis, or sneezing. (19:02) John asks if specific allergies present with specific signs. Debbie says it's inconsistent. While flea allergy is often associated with miliary dermatitis and food allergy with head/neck pruritus, patterns vary and aren't reliable for diagnosis. Chapter 3 – Practical Approaches: From Kitchen Floor to Referral Door (21:23) John asks what owners might notice or try at home. Debbie recommends: Observing behaviour Keeping a diary Ensuring flea control Considering recent diet or environmental changes (23:30) Sue asks about food trial myths. Debbie emphasises: Over-the-counter “hypoallergenic” foods are not suitable for true food trials Prescription hydrolysed diets or novel proteins (e.g. ostrich, kangaroo, crocodile) are required Food trials should run for ~8 weeks She also recommends: Treat toppers to help encourage eating Short-term feeding is usually nutritionally safe Veterinary nutritionist input for longer-term plans (28:43) Sue asks how to start a food trial if a cat is self-traumatising. Debbie uses concurrent systemic treatment (usually steroids) to control inflammation during the trial, tapering meds over 4–6 weeks if possible. (30:05) John asks for the first steps as a guide for primary care vets. Debbie recommends her first steps would be to rule out ectoparasites with full household flea control, possibly whilst beginning topical/systemic treatment as needed for comfort (32:10) Sue asks what to do when left with suspected environmental allergy. Debbie describes: Referral approach: Intradermal testing and immunotherapy if cost allows (40–75% success rate) Primary care approach: Use steroids at the lowest effective dose Importance of prioritising flea control and food trial first as they are often curative (36:50) Sue and Debbie have a healthy debate on the relative benefits of allergy testing when immunotherapy is not being considered as an option. (41:08) John wraps up the episode, thanking Debbie for simplifying a complex topic and helping listeners better understand eosinophilic granuloma complex in cats. John asks Paul and Sue another probing - if not questionable - question.
Derek does the California Mille – California's take on the 1000-mile Italian road rally, the Mille Miglia. Behind the wheel of a 1956 Alfa Romeo Giulietta Sprint Veloce, Derek (and OTS & Co. cofounder, Tazio Ottis), experienced some of central California's best driving roads between Half Moon Bay and Calistoga alongside over 80 of the finest automobiles to exist by the mid-20th century. === This episode is sponsored by Vyper Industrial — America's #1 rated shop chair, tool carts, and creepers, proudly made here in the US. Visit vyperindustrial.com and use code CARMUDGEON for $50 off. === Initially dreamt up by local driving legend and passionate car enthusiast, Martin Swig, the California Mille hopes to recreate some of the legendary driving experiences of Italy's Mille Miglia. After Martin's passing, his wife and two sons (specialists at Broad Arrow and Bring-a-Trailer ) carried on the tradition until the event was purchased by Hagerty in late 2020. It's a swanky affair with spas, fancy lunches, drive-thru oyster bars, and open regular bars, with specialist mechanics and flatbed tow trucks at your beck and call. Naturally with 70-year-old (or older) cars, many breakdowns ensued. A Mercedes 300SL needed a tow, and a Ferrari 250 TdF required assistance from Patrick Ottis Company after several transmission components welded themselves together. A bolt came dislodged on the shift linkage of a Citroën ID promptly stranding it, but Derek's stash of spare bolts saved the day. Differentials were grenaded, and problematic torpedo fuses were replaced while still in motion. A woman in a Honda Accord even PIT-maneuvered a pre-war Bentley on the Golden Gate Bridge. The Carmudgeons discuss past rally experiences in a W201 190E in Europe, Jason's 5000-mile trek to Ohio in his Scirocco, the Orange Blossom Rally in a Mazda Cosmo, and the BABE Rally in a $400 Cadillac stretch limo. Derek touches on the Colorado Grand Rally and Copper State Rally, and the boys discuss possibly starting the Curmudgeon Mille e Uno Rally. Derek points out that Miles Collier, cofounder of the precursor to the SCCA, posited that there are 2 types of enthusiasts: contemplative and experiential. Rallies are definitely for the latter. Plus Jason wears an un-tailored button-down, we dive headfirst into porta potties, and we wonder if the 1988 Honda Accord is too reliable to rally. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Darren, Martyn and Craig look at the final four GWs of the FPL season and attempt to highlight some differential picks to help managers gain in rank.Hey Everyone, Darren here! StreamYard has helped us set ourselves apart from other podcasts this season and create something unique whilst not sacrificing our brand. Try it out on the link below for some free credit.Want to create live streams like this? Check out StreamYard: https://streamyard.com/pal/d/56629777...
This week the lads recap DGW32 and preview DGW33 in great detail. Taking a deep dive into Arsenal, Aston Villa, Crystal Palace and Man City. They also answer the key questions;Diaz vs JotaIs it time to jump on Wolves?Wait on Forest?Does Barnes keep his place over Gordon? Plus some key questions about chips usage;Free Hit DraftsBest Assistant Manager PicksTriple Captain Picks Alongside all the usual features of Differential Draft and this sections 3 week punts. With Alex ‘FPL Guru' Rex, Barry ‘Differential King' Stokes and Scott ‘The Voice Of The People' Williams. 00:00 – Intro, Manager of the Week10:00 – Arsenal18:59 – Man City28:46 – Palace & Villa34:59 – Liverpool41:46 – Wolves47:30 – Forest51:20 – Barnes Vs Gordon52:12 – Ass Man Chip55:20 – TC58:53 – Free Hit Templates1:04:57 – Big Sam Quiz1:07:56 – 3 Week Punts1:12:22 – Dif Draft Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
We're back after a break for a stock take following the GW39 action. We look ahead to the closing stretch of the season, talking about the races for automatic promotion, the play off places, and relegation. We talk about how the teams have been doing and who we think will prevail in each of those races. We finish by answering your questions on Away Days, Differentials, and Leeds assets.
With the FA Cup quarter-finals complete we now know how Blank Gameweek 34 might look with six sides currently blanking.
Vi resonerar kring differentials tidigt på säsongen. Hur ska man tänka kring att välja lågt ägda spelare? Vi lyfter sedan 8 lågt ägda spelare som vi tycker ser spännande ut.
Players from Liverpool, Newcastle, Crystal Palace and Aston Villa are hitting great form but with a Blank for all four teams on the horizon in Gameweek 29, it's time to plan to transfer some of them out
There's a big difference to the pod this week as Kelly Somers and the team start to look ahead to Blank Gameweek 29 and discuss how to make the most out of the Assistant Manager chip
ray from @nocoastdiff stops by the studio to chat all things differentials.
After the fun of one Double Gameweek, we quickly have another as Liverpool again play twice in Double Gameweek 25
Send us a textDeren Ardinger (aka @honduh_challenged) joins me to talk limited slip differentials... obviously my car is having some excessive transmission wear, and Deren is my transmission voodoo guy... so we talk limited slip differentials, how they work, and how you can set them up. No I wont tell you how my OSG is set up... because I have NO IDEA... YETTo support the podcast... just share it... thats all a podcast needs to keep the motivation... I promise!
Try Fantasy Football Hub for free
Mo Salah cannot stop hauling for his owners as he delivered his 10th double-digit return of the season.
A short turnaround means the next Gameweek gets under way in just 2 days time with our first set of midweek fixtures of the season.
One of the FPL Pod team have hit the button on their Wildcard chip and no player is more important to that than the inclusion of Mohamed Salah
Erling Haaland is the hot topic once again after an underwhelming Gameweek, in which over 300,000 managers used the Triple Captain chip on the Man City forward
With some tasty fixtures coming up for Man City, Kelly Somers and the FPL Pod team discuss whether it's time to take a punt on Phil Foden
It's been a long week for Kelly Somers after she followed the advice of the FPL Pod team on the last episode to go without Cole Palmer and he went on to score four goals
Despite improved returns for FPL managers last Gameweek, with favourable fixture-runs shifting, the Wildcard is being used heavily again
With Man City taking on Arsenal in Gameweek 5, many managers are facing a conundrum of what to do with the popular picks from those clubs.
Episode 6 is an exciting discussion on how, when and what gearing to choose for your Jeep. We also dive into other related topics like axle shafts, ball joints, lockers, differential housings and more. This episode is slamm'n, so prepare yourself!
Forward options are proving frustrating outside of Haaland, so Kelly Somers and the FPL Pod team look ahead to who could fill your frontline
Chris Sutton and Statman Dave are joined by this week's guest host John Acres to discuss the latest in Fantasy Premier League ahead of gameweek 3.They talk chips – does anyone regret not using the triple captain in gameweek 2? Is it too early to wildcard? And who are the best differentials to target? Has Savinho passed the eye test, or should we be looking at Chelsea's hat-trick hero Noni Madueke?Plus Sutton Death takes on a Manchester United theme.
We're only one Gameweek into the new season and already discussion about using our Triple Captain Chip is hotting up
Please note: None of the information in any episode of this podcast constitutes financial advice.This is the 4th episode of a new five-part series on The Daily Coffee Pro by Map It Forward Podcast, hosted by Lee Safar. Our returning guest in this series is Judy Ganes from J Ganes Consulting. Judy is a world-renowned market advisor with over 40 years of experience in the commodities sector.In this series Judy gives us insight into "market structure" and "certified stocks" and why the situation we're facing at the moment isn't what the "typical" market is faced with.In this insightful episode of 'The Daily Coffee Pro' by Map It Forward, Lee and Judy discuss how differentials and backwardation influence the market, the impact of volatility, and the challenges producers face. With real-world examples and a deep dive into market mechanisms, this episode provides a comprehensive understanding of coffee economics. 00:00 Understanding Coffee Market Dynamics00:49 Introduction to Coffee Consulting Workshop01:27 Market Structure and Certified Stocks01:59 Backwardation and Differentials Explained03:00 The Role of Certified Coffee08:42 Hedging and the C Market20:50 Volatility and Its Impact27:15 Looking Ahead: The Future of Coffee27:57 Closing Remarks and Call to Action Look up the pricing on the ICE Exchange (C-Market) here: https://www.ice.com/products/15/Coffee-C-Futures/data?marketId=6802486Connect with Judy here:LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/judith-ganes-8881065/Website: https://jganesconsulting.com/••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
Please note: None of the information in any episode of this podcast constitutes financial advice.This is the 4th episode of a new five-part series on The Daily Coffee Pro by Map It Forward Podcast, hosted by Lee Safar. Our returning guest in this series is Judy Ganes from J Ganes Consulting. Judy is a world-renowned market advisor with over 40 years of experience in the commodities sector.In this series Judy gives us insight into "market structure" and "certified stocks" and why the situation we're facing at the moment isn't what the "typical" market is faced with.In this insightful episode of 'The Daily Coffee Pro' by Map It Forward, Lee and Judy discuss how differentials and backwardation influence the market, the impact of volatility, and the challenges producers face. With real-world examples and a deep dive into market mechanisms, this episode provides a comprehensive understanding of coffee economics. 00:00 Understanding Coffee Market Dynamics00:49 Introduction to Coffee Consulting Workshop01:27 Market Structure and Certified Stocks01:59 Backwardation and Differentials Explained03:00 The Role of Certified Coffee08:42 Hedging and the C Market20:50 Volatility and Its Impact27:15 Looking Ahead: The Future of Coffee27:57 Closing Remarks and Call to Action Look up the pricing on the ICE Exchange (C-Market) here: https://www.ice.com/products/15/Coffee-C-Futures/data?marketId=6802486Connect with Judy here:LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/judith-ganes-8881065/Website: https://jganesconsulting.com/••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••Support this podcast by supporting our Patreon:https://bit.ly/MIFPatreonThe Daily Coffee Pro by Map It Forward Podcast Host: Lee Safarhttps://www.mapitforward.coffeehttps://www.instagram.com/mapitforward.coffeehttps://www.instagram.com/leesafar••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
The start of the new season is almost upon us, so Kelly Somers and the FPL Pod team are making their final tweaks to their squads
0:00 - We're joined again by Super Agent Peter Schaffer! The fellas dig deeper into Sean Payton's first depth chart and why it shouldn't be taken at face value.13:53 - One of the most underrated components of a winning sports team is continuity. It's completely disappearing from the college landscape in the NIL era. 32:20 - Brett runs through a list of the point differentials for NFL teams when their starting QBs plays vs when the backup plays.
Welcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: Consent across power differentials, published by Ramana Kumar on July 9, 2024 on The AI Alignment Forum. I'd like to put forward another description of a basic issue that's been around for a while. I don't know if there's been significant progress on a solution, and would be happy to pointed to any such progress. I've opted to go for a relatively rough and quick post that doesn't dive too hard into the details, to avoid losing the thought at all. I may be up for exploring details further in comments or follow-ups. The Question: How do you respect the wishes (or preferences) of a subject over whom you have a lot of control? The core problem: any indicator/requirement/metric about respecting their wishes is one you can manipulate (even inadvertently). For example, think about trying to respect the preferences of the child you're babysitting when you simply know from experience what they will notice, how they will feel, what they will say they want, and what they will do, when you put them in one environment versus another (where the environment could be as small as what you present to them in your behaviour). Is there any way to provide them a way to meaningfully choose what happens? We could think about this in a one-shot case where there's a round of information gathering and coming to agreement on terms, and then an action is taken. But I think this is a simplification too far, since a lot of what goes into respecting the subject/beneficiary is giving them space for recourse, space to change their mind, space to realise things that were not apparent with the resources for anticipation they had available during the first phase. So let's focus more on the case where there's an ongoing situation where one entity has a lot of power over another but nevertheless wants to secure their consent for whatever actually happens, in a meaningful sense. Lots of cases where this happens in real life, mostly where the powerful entity has a lot of their own agenda and doesn't care a huge amount about the subject (they may care a lot, but maybe not as much as they do about their other goals): rape (the perhaps central example invoked by "consent") advertising representative democracy colonisation ("civilising" as doing what's good for them) Our intuitions may be mostly shaped by that kind of situation, where there's a strong need to defend against self-interest, corruption, or intention to gain and abuse power. But I think there's a hard core of a problem left even if we remove the malicious or somewhat ill-intentioned features from the powerful entity. So let's focus: what does it mean to fully commit to respecting someone's autonomy, as a matter of genuine love or a strong sense of morality or something along those lines, even when you have a huge amount of power over them. What forms power can take: brute force, resources that give you physical power support from others (that make you - your interests - a larger entity) intelligence: the ability to predict and strategise in more detail, over longer time horizons, and faster, than the subject you are trying to engage with speed - kinda the same as intelligence, but maybe worth pulling out as its own thing knowledge, experience - similar to intelligence. but maybe in this case emphasising access to private relevant information. Think also of information asymmetry in negotiation. Examples where this shows up in real life already (and where people seem to mostly suck at it, maybe due to not even trying, but there are some attempts to take it seriously: see work by Donaldson and Kymlicka): adaptive preferences children animals (pets, domesticated, and otherwise) disabled people, esp. with cognitive disabilities oppressed/minoritised people and peoples future generations and other non-existent peoples It may be that the only true soluti...
Cup of Justice co-hosts Mandy Matney, Liz Farrell and Eric Bland — take a look at the lawsuit filed by Buster Murdaugh against documentary filmmakers and major networks, accusing them of defamation in their Stephen Smith reporting. Eric gives a quick primer about what defamation is and what Buster is going to have to prove in the courtroom. Mandy and Liz talk about their observations of how the media handled the mentions of the Murdaugh name in the Smith investigation and what things looked like behind the scenes when film crews descended on the Lowcountry. They also explore the biggest question of all: Will this case end up bringing much-needed answers in the Stephen Smith investigation? Also on the show, what the Supreme Court's decision to uphold a firearm ban for those accused of domestic violence will do for women and why it's so hard to get women's stories of abuse to be taken seriously. Premium members get an extended discussion about how law enforcement handles domestic violence calls and what needs to change. Let's get into it... Episode Resources: CNN Special Report Featuring Mandy, Liz, Eric, Sandy and Others ABC's 20/20 S44E11Fall of the House of Murdaugh CNN: Supreme Court upholds law barring domestic abusers from owning guns Premium Members also get access to searchable case files, written articles with documents, case photos, episode videos and exclusive live experiences with our hosts on lunasharkmedia.com all in one place. CLICK HERE to learn more: https://bit.ly/3BdUtOE. And for those just wanting ad-free listening without all the other great content, we now offer ad-free listening on Apple Podcast through a subscription to Luna Shark Plus on the Apple Podcasts App. And we also offer access to exclusive video content through our new YouTube Premiere subscription. Check out our new Luna Shark Merch With a Mission shop at lunasharkmerch.com/ SUNscribe to our free email list to get alerts on bonus episodes, calls to action, new shows and updates. CLICK HERE to learn more: https://bit.ly/3KBM *** Alert: If you ever notice audio errors in the pod, email info@lunasharkmedia.com and we'll send fun merch to the first listener that finds something that needs to be adjusted! *** Find us on social media: Twitter.com/mandymatney - Twitter.com/elizfarrell - Twitter.com/theericbland https://www.facebook.com/cupofjustice/ | https://www.instagram.com/cojpod/ YouTube *The views expressed on the Cup of Justice bonus episodes do not constitute legal advice. Listeners desiring legal advice for any particular legal matter are urged to consult an attorney of their choosing who can provide legal advice based upon a full understanding of the facts and circumstances of their claim. The views expressed on the Cup of Justice episodes also do not express the views or opinions of Bland Richter, LLP, or its attorneys. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
On today's show: Differentials 101; best teen cars with Kelly Blue Books' Brian Moody; the ins and outs of powdercoating. Informative automotive buffoonery with Bud and Tim and guest co-host Brian Ocock, sponsored by Year One, the muscle car experts, Concept One Pulley Systems and Lanier Technical College.
Another fascinating Premier League season comes to a close! So join Kelly Somers and the FPL Pod team as they look back on all the highs and lows from a thrilling campaign
We bring you some midnight madness (thanks Juls) ahead of the final Double Gameweek of the season.
On this week's Fantasy 606, tensions are frayed between the trio as the season heads towards its climax. There's a new leader in the mini-league – how will that affect the joint team?They discuss the latest injury news – what's the best way to optimise a bench boost in gameweek 37? Which players should you be targeting? Who should you steer clear of?Plus Leon Osman joins the pod for a game of Sutton Death.
It's crunch time in FPL as we near the end of the season and every decision counts
It's been a big Double Gameweek 34, unless your name is Mohamed Salah
SummaryIn this conversation, the hosts discuss the upcoming Premier League matches and the impact of double gameweeks on fantasy football teams. They analyze the potential picks from each team and share their opinions on players to consider. The conversation covers topics such as injuries, form, and differential options. The hosts also engage in banter and reflect on their own fantasy football performances. The conversation revolves around the upcoming double game weeks in Fantasy Premier League (FPL) and the strategies of the participants. They discuss the players they have and the potential transfers they might make. They also analyze the fixtures and predict the outcomes of the upcoming matches. The conversation ends with a review of the FPL leagues and the current standings.TakeawaysDouble gameweeks can provide opportunities for fantasy football managers to gain an advantage.Injuries and form should be considered when selecting players for double gameweeks.Crystal Palace and Fulham may offer potential differentials for fantasy football teams.Liverpool players are still worth considering despite recent setbacks.Banter and reflection on fantasy football performances add entertainment value to the conversation. The participants are strategizing for the upcoming double game weeks in FPL.They discuss potential transfers and analyze the fixtures to make informed decisions.They predict the outcomes of the upcoming matches and discuss the performance of certain players.The conversation concludes with a review of the FPL leagues and the current standings.
The big Double Gameweek is finally upon us so Kelly Somers and the FPL Pod team dissect how best to attack it
Gameweek 31 isn't quite done but GW32 is near so Kelly Somers and the FPL Pod team are here to guide you through
There's no time to rest as we prepare for a midweek Gameweek that promises some tasty encounters for the popular picks
Kelly Somers and the FPL Pod team discuss Wildcard squads and how to plan accordingly for the upcoming Blanks and Doubles ♻️
It's time to deal with a Double followed by a Blank Gameweek
SummaryIn this episode, the hosts discuss the upcoming fixtures in Game Week 27 of the Premier League. They analyze the potential impact of key players from various teams and share their insights on who to pick for fantasy football teams. The conversation covers topics such as player injuries, team form, and the performance of specific players in recent matches. The conversation covers discussions about upcoming matches, considerations for team selection, debating between players, predictions for specific matches, differentials, and a review of the league standings. Andy and Dom also share the changes they made to their teams.TakeawaysLiverpool's Salah is a popular choice for fantasy football teams despite concerns about his fitness.The hosts express mixed opinions about the performance and potential of players from teams like Brentford, Everton, and Newcastle.The importance of considering a player's form, team performance, and upcoming fixtures when making fantasy football transfers is emphasized.The hosts discuss the challenges of managing players who are prone to injuries or inconsistent performances. Consider the upcoming matches and the potential outcomes when making team selections.Differentials can be valuable in making up points in mini-leagues.Pay attention to blank and double game weeks when planning transfers and using chips.Regularly review the league standings to track progress and identify areas for improvement.
What promised to be a mega Double Gameweek turned out to be an underwhelming one for some managers ❌
It's Double Gameweek time and an Erling Haaland Triple Captain is the talk of the town
Kelly Somers and the FPL Pod team are here to give you the lowdown on all the Double Gameweek announcements
Welcome to "The Adams Archive," where we delve into the intricate weave of societal influences and global challenges. In our thought-provoking episode "Foundations and Frontiers," we explore the interplay between the development of political beliefs, the ethical quandaries of cloning, and the complexities of environmental activism. Episode Summary: This episode offers a deep dive into the foundational elements that shape our political ideologies and how these perspectives intersect with contemporary issues like the ethics of cloning and the paradoxes in environmental advocacy. We take you on a journey through these interconnected realms, providing a nuanced understanding of these critical topics. Segment on Political Socialization: We begin by unraveling the layers of political socialization. Discover how familial interactions, educational systems, and media landscapes contribute to the molding of our political identities from a young age. Segment on Cloning Ethics: Venturing into the realm of biotechnology, we examine the ethical implications and societal impacts of cloning. This segment explores the moral dilemmas, regulatory challenges, and public perceptions surrounding this controversial scientific frontier. Segment on Environmental Paradoxes: In our discussion on environmental issues, we confront the ironies and complexities of modern environmental movements. We analyze the actions and rhetoric of global forums and key figures, assessing how their approaches align or conflict with various political ideologies. Call to Action: Dive deeper into these vital discussions by subscribing to "The Adams Archive" on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube, and other platforms. Join our social media community for ongoing conversations and updates. All the Links: Access all our content easily at https://linktr.ee/theaustinjadams, your gateway to our episodes, social media, and additional resources. ----more---- Full Transcription: Adams Archive. Hello, you beautiful people and welcome to the Adams Archive. My name is Austin Adams and thank you so much for listening today. On today's episode, we're going to go through some pretty wild current event topics, including the fact that the World Economic Forum in their meeting in Davos has decided that it is now bad for the environment for you to drink. Coffee. Could you imagine that? Flying hundreds of miles across the ocean in your private jet, only to talk about how it is now bad for the environment for you to drink coffee. So we'll touch on that. After that, we'll get into a conversation surrounding how scientists in China have now successfully cloned a monkey for the first time that has survived in good health. We'll talk about what that means, including the fact that there was 112 failed attempts, which is only, you know, pretty terrifying to think about. What the other monkeys went through to actually get there. Now, a lot of people are talking about how this is actually going to have something to do with human cloning, obviously, because that's the end result of all of this. And there's some arguments that that's already happening. So we will talk about that. Then we will dive into a conversation about the current situations between Rhonda Santus dropping out of the presidential election, Nikki Haley getting peppered and just chirped. Constantly at all of the events that she's at, including the fact that, uh, there was a recent article that talked about how she had an affidavit come out from a recent accuser of her being an adulterer, uh, to her then active duty husband. Uh, we will also touch on another man who starts discussing with her about how she's not going to be Trump and that she should be spending all of her hundreds of millions of dollars simply. Giving it to homeless veterans, which I guess I agree with. Uh, so we'll talk about Nikki Haley. We'll even talk about the fact that Nikki Haley said that she wasn't allowed in a beauty pageant because she was Indian because they didn't know where to place her, which is pretty comical. All right. So that will be our current events. Then we will dive into the deep dive conversation this week, which is going to be the dark psychology behind voting. Now, that will include a conversation surrounding, uh, political socialization, which is basically the idea of how you got to vote the way that you vote. Now, we all tend to think that we think for ourselves, but a lot of people don't understand the fact that there's a lot of circumstances that actually go into why you vote the way that you do. So, we'll talk about all that. And there's some pretty surprising things in that that I found when doing my research. Anything from the music you listen to, to the social media apps that you use consistently, all the way down to the income class and the city that you grew up in. There's, there's so many little different things in here. And then we'll talk about some different dark arts techniques that politicians use in order to try to gain your So all of that and more stick around the longer you stick around, the deeper we get. So go ahead and subscribe, leave a five star review, whether you're on Apple podcasts, Spotify, YouTube, you can join us on YouTube, by the way. Uh, if you go onto YouTube, type in the Adams archive, you can see all the articles, all the videos that we're discussing here, and I will see you there, but let's. Jump into it. The Adams archive. All right, let's jump into it. The very first topic that we're going to be discussing today is going to be that the world economic forum. If you don't know the world economic forum is a meeting of a bunch of. Elites or multibillionaires that think that they can control the general population. They meet once a year in Davos in Switzerland and their fearless leader is the infamous Claus Schwab. And so they got together this year and decided that the hot topic that they were going to discuss is the fact that it is now bad for our environment for you to drink. Coffee, like I said earlier, they fly hundreds of thousands, thousands of miles to get there in their private jets, just to tell you that you shouldn't be drinking coffee all the while they're the ones who are, I don't know, profiting from your extra, uh, ability to actually do things in the morning as a result. So we have a video here, um, this comes from, uh, let's see, the title of this article is coffee is bad for the environment claims world economic. Members, and it says the consumption of coffee is causing CO2 to populate the earth to pollute the environment and unelected bureaucrats Attending the World Economic Forum claimed speaking last Wednesday at the globalist Confab in Davos, Switzerland Swiss banker Hubert Keller said coffee drinkers should be mindful They're contributing tons of co2 pollution into the atmosphere Hmm. Basically, the coffee that we all drink emits between 15 and 20 tons of CO2 per ton of coffee, Cowher said. So, we should all know that. This is, every time we drink coffee, we are basically putting CO2 into the environment. Could you imagine? And one of the reasons is because most of the coffee plantations and most of the coffee is produced through monoculture, and monoculture is also affected by climate change. Now at this meeting, they are the very biggest topic this year. So you can actually go to the world economic forums website and you can look at, they do a analysis of what are the biggest threats to the world each and every year, and lo and behold, this year's was. Climate change. Hmm. Now, that's obviously the next big money grab after the end of COVID 19. Now, that's to be determined, I guess, when you have the variant X that's coming up and all that stuff. Um, but climate change is obviously the biggest money grab. And so when we look at conversations surrounding them trying to, I don't know, condemn you for drinking coffee. Just is unbelievable to me. Um, so this is, uh, this is the video. It comes from that Swiss banker and his name is who cares? Here we go. For the session and you raised the coffee example. I'd love just to give you the chance to Basically, the coffee that we all drink, um, emits between 15 and 20 ton of CO2 per ton of coffee. So, we should all know that. This is every time we drink coffee, we are basically putting CO2 into the atmosphere. Um, the other, and one of the reasons is because most of the coffee plantation, or most of the coffee is produced through monoculture. And, um, and, and monoculture is also affected by climate change. Um, the quality of these nature assets is, uh, deteriorating quite rapidly. Now that's a conversation for another day is like, what is monoculture, uh, monoculture agriculture is, it is absolutely, uh, a completely ineffective way to, to do things and it actually poisons your food there. There's a whole bunch of our stuff that you can read up on monoculture, um, agriculture, but. Just the idea that all of these pompous assholes go meet up in some mountain somewhere to tell you that you shouldn't drink coffee is absolutely comical. Alright, that brings us to our next article, which says that, uh, this comes from, uh, the Telegraph. And this was something that came across, I had actually like a, a, a notice on my phone about this. And I, I've talked about some of these things before, whether it be the, uh, chimeras that were coming out of China. Whether it was the sheep that was cloned, whether it was like the baby pods that they were talking about, uh, you know, basically taking, uh, the sperm of the father and the egg of the mother and putting it in this like pod that they were going to grow a human out of. Um, and then more recently even creating children from stem cells, which is the most probably dystopian of all of this, but this is just along those lines. And so. In China, they cloned a monkey for the first time that survived in good health after 112 failed attempts. Now it says that Chinese scientists used the same method that made Dolly the sheep in 1996, uh, but it has lived longer than any other cloned primate. Now they, they, I think that they gave this thing a name, this one, not Dolly. I think it's called Retro. Yeah, that's the monkey's name. The cloned monkey's name is Retro. A monkey has been successfully cloned by Chinese scientists and in the world's first has so far lived for two years. Researchers have cloned primates before using the same method that created Dowie the sheep in 1996, but none have. Ever lived for long, either dying before birth or shortly afterwards. Now that was a conversation that I brought up last time, when we're talking about the human baby pods and you know, the, the human cloning is like, how many times are you going to go through this, whether it's the stem cell research, whatever it is. How many research subjects, the chimeras fill in the blank. How many research subjects do you have to go through until you successfully create a clone? Right. And they say 112. I'm sure they would rather not have, have people. You know, beating down their door to shut them down. So I'm, I'm sure that number is multiples higher than what they're reporting there. Just like I'm sure it would be if they started to clone humans, if they started these little weird baby pods, if they made these stem cell babies, chimeras, whatever it is, there's going to be a massive amount of casualties and gross scientific experimentation that goes into it. So to me. Anything and everything that revolves creating life that doesn't have to do with, you know, any scientist that's sitting there with a, you know, two beakers pouring them together or whatever the hell type of stuff they're doing here, um, is just sick. It's, it's, it's sickening to me because the, the, the torture that they put these, you know, even the two days of the trying to clone, uh, these monkeys or the, the chimeras or whatever it is, is just the, the amount of agony and the, the torture that they must go through, uh, as a result of getting this one cloned monkey. And, and, and for what reason, like what, what is the goal of this? Why, why, what is the problem that we have to start cloning things? What is wrong with reproduction current state? Well, I'll tell you what's wrong with that. You want to get deeper and deeper into that is, is you'll understand the idea that they don't want you and then this was something that I talked about with the baby pods. What's the most concerning to that to me is that that's no longer your property, you, you, you know, you remove the mother and the father from, from the reproductive process. Then you remove the, the hormones that are released when that baby is born. And as a result, you, you remove the protective shelter, the, the, the hormones, the, the, uh, um, You know, the motherly instincts that come as a result of birthing a child, that come as a result of having a child that is half your DNA and half the DNA of your spouse. Now you, I don't know, go to a government center and pay five grand or whatever, and now they get to create a baby on your behalf. Only by the way, it's not your baby. It's their property. They created it. You did not create it. And, and so that is one of the most Dystopian ideas let alone the idea that they can start to interject whatever types of CRISPR technology that they want to to make the the child the the Monkey, whatever it is more agreeable more likely to be and this will actually even lead us into our next conversation To be more agreeable to be less aggressive to have different in more More Uh, personality traits that are going to lead them to vote a certain way, that are going to lead them to act a certain way, that are going to lead them to be less or more docile and less likely to revolt, whatever it is, when you, when you take reproduction, and you give that to the government, right, you have China now cloning monkeys, for what end? I don't think they just want to clone monkeys. That's obviously not the goal. The goal is to clone humans. But why? Why? So let's, let's finish this article. It says, however, a modified technique designed to create a stronger placenta has seen a rhesus monkey be cloned, be born and live healthily for more than two years, making it the longest lived primate clone yet. The animal was labeled retro. Only one birth was successful from a total of 113 attempts. So, they tortured a hundred and twelve monkeys to create one. The process, called somatic cell nuclear transfer, involves extracting the genetic information from a standard cell and implanting it into an egg from another monkey that has had its own genetic material removed. Now they have this cute little diagram of how they cloned this monkey, um, but who cares? To me, that's the whole conversation, right? I think that, you know, even brings up an interesting conversation about surrogacy and, uh, you know, IVF and like, there's, there's definitely more to be talked about there, but I do think to me, this is highly concerning because you see exactly where this is going. We know what the end goal is, but why is that the end goal? Because we can, and I think that's probably the fair answer to all of these scientists, right? It's like the people who are commissioning these scientists to do these types of experiments. They have the goal in mind, right? They, they have an idea of what, what they want to do this for. And it's going to be profitable, right? It's going to be a reason that they can make money off of it. Right? And that, that was the baby pods, right? Like imagine Epstein Island having a whole lower layer, uh, underneath his island of baby pods. Like just, just all of the horrific things. And if you haven't heard of like the. Um, offshore, like, child trafficking stuff is just horrific, and, and they don't have social security numbers, they don't have moms, they don't have dads, nobody's looking after them, and, and, and, just, there's no reason to open up this box, there's nothing good behind it, absolutely nothing, what, what possibly could come from this that would be good, and then you get into the, the, um, Philosophical conversations. Does, does this monkey have, or human down the road, does it have a soul? Is it, is it, uh, you know, is it from a religious perspective? Is it, is it a child of God? Is it, is it something that is going to, uh, have similar traits even? Is it going to be sociable? Like, there, there's so much that will go into this. And, and just Why? Why do you want to do this? Right? But scientists want to do it because A, they're getting paid lots of money to do it, but also B, because they just want to see if they can do it, right? Scientists have a certain type of personality where they, they just want to see if they can make something happen, right? You have a hypothesis, you put it to the test, and all of a sudden you're creating an army of Lifeless, soulless, monkey human hybrids. To me, there's just, there's nothing good behind that wall. And this is just another step towards that. Another step towards whatever it is the reason, right? There's so many different ways that you could go with that, that is completely dystopian. And I can't think of a single good scenario that would come from Human cloning. I just can't. I, I, there's, there's zero, zero scenarios where that's a good thing for humanity. Especially in a world where they're telling us that we're overpopulating, when we're obviously not. The population's on a decline. If, if we're overpopulating on our own and reproducing way too much, according to them, why are you trying to clone humans? What's, what's the point of that anyways. So let's segue into our next conversation. This one is more recent and about politics and what that drives us from the last conversation into, and what I mentioned earlier is they can change with CRISPR technology, how. You might vote by changing certain personality traits. They make you a little bit less aggressive. They make you a little bit more agreeable. They make you a little bit more creative. And a little bit less, I don't know, uh, productive, whatever it is. There's so many little traits within your genes that are encoded inside of your body. And one thing that I was wondering is what is nature and what is nurture, right? Why do we vote the way that we vote? And do we Um, and I say we just like Americans do, are we born likely to vote one way or the other? The answer is yes. Um, and we'll look at that in just a minute as to why, but before we do that, let's get a little bit of election updates because Ron DeSantis has officially dropped out of the presidential race and decided to endorse. Donald Trump, and this comes from W. M. U. R. nine A. B. C. And it says, uh, it is clear to me that majority of Republican primary voters want to give Donald Trump another chance. You think I, uh, yeah, I'm pretty sure he just obliterated every single person, uh, within the primary, um, in the caucus in Iowa. And so, you know, he saw the vague drop out almost almost immediately. We saw it. Ron DeSantis drop out almost immediately. And I think the Ron DeSantis hype train was like pretty good at the beginning. I would, it would be really interesting to look at the political marketing failure that was Ron DeSantis campaign, because he had so much political steam. He had, he had so many people behind him that were so pro Ron DeSantis that loved his ideas coming out of COVID. He was like the COVID king. You know, all the while, while Donald Trump being, you know, was getting flack, was, was being talked down upon for the way that he, you know, gave a medal to, to Fauci, the way that he, you know, boasted about lockdowns and certain things like that is, is, and so simultaneously, Ron DeSantis should have come out of this, like with a ton of steam, with a ton of, uh, you know, traction going into the election, and, and now what we see is that it, as soon as Ron DeSantis opened his mouth on a debate uh, stage, he just got obliterated. Even when we saw Gavin Newsom against Ron DeSantis and I'm not against Ron DeSantis. I think that again, his policies, that his track record during COVID was absolutely phenomenal. He was one of the only people speaking out one of the only people trying not to close down businesses. There's a lot of reasons that a lot of people should have been very pro DeSantis. I think he shook the hornet's nest with Donald Trump. Right? And I think, you know, the desanctimonious, uh, tagline stuck a little bit. Um, but, to me, it's like, he should have, had he came out on the debate stage the way that Vivek did, had he come out with the track record that he did and a great marketing campaign, there's no reason that he shouldn't be the only one left. But out of all four people that were on the stage and on the ballot for the caucus, the only one that's left now besides the obvious of Donald Trump is Nikki Haley, which makes absolutely no sense to me at all. She is. 100 percent the Republican Hillary Clinton. She, everything that comes out of her mouth is just a talking point from a war lobby. And I haven't heard a single thing from her. I think she had like one good. Exchange on the debate stage. But all I see from Nikki Haley is a a reoccurring talking point that is everything and anything that the lobbyists want. And you saw the one the one area that Donald Trump I think they said that he lost by one vote and I think that it was even changed that the fact that Um, he he actually ended up winning that area I'm not sure but there was out of a 90 or 100 99 of them were for Donald Trump and one of them was for Nikki Haley and by one vote So what you saw is the democrats in the areas that they were in where they could they actually went and voted in the GOP caucus and voted for Nikki Haley, so if The Democrats want Nikki Haley, then why would the Republicans, right? And if the war lobby wants Nikki Haley, then why would the Republicans? And if every big money machine from, you know, I I'm, I'm just surprised she doesn't have a Pfizer tattoo on her arm, uh, that she's showing off to everybody, but you already see her pandering to the left. So to me, it's, it's a little sad that the only two that we have left, because I do think that both Ron DeSantis and as much shit that I've talked about Vivek and, and all of the questions that I have about his history, whether it be about the Soros Foundation funding his, uh, his, his time at Yale, whether it be about his two years that he was on the world economic forums, young global leaders list only to, uh, tell them that, Hey, I didn't want that. Take that down. The only one that was inconvenient from him and he wasn't using it to, uh, get, it. seed round funding for his pharmaceutical startups. Um, so as much as, as much as I've talked bad about Vivek, Vivek or DeSantis are just absolutely a million times better up potential candidates than Nikki Haley. So what that tells me, especially if you understand that her husband. Is, isn't some tech mogul, right? He doesn't have billions of dollars. I'm not sure what her previous employment was, but I just doubt she has hundreds and hundreds of millions of dollars to spend on one. I think it's New Hampshire, whatever. We're going to see a video where some guy goes and calls her out and says, Hey, you're going to spend a hundred million dollars campaigning against Donald Trump. And we already know you're going to lose. Why are you doing that? Why wouldn't you just go spend that money to help homeless veterans? Well, the answer is that the political lobby is the one that's propping her up. That's where she's getting all of her money. The only reason that Nikki Haley is even relevant, the only reason she's standing on any of the stages she's standing on, is because she's literally has the, the war machine's hand and the pharmaceutical industry's hand up her ass telling her exactly what to say in every one of these exchanges. And so it's, it's, It'll be interesting to see how long she sticks around. How long will they prop her up? Because I, there's absolutely zero chance. Like I bet you, if you go look at the, uh, betting books and you look at the odds of Nikki Haley winning the 2024 election is just. Zero, you know, and if, and if there was any sort of reason, and I think this is something that Vivek said at one time or another that I talked about when he dropped out is the fact that, oh, well, they would never let Donald Trump actually, you know, get on the ballot. Something's going to happen. And, and. I'm not saying something's not going to happen, this always could be that fact, and especially when you understand that Donald Trump is like one of the most, uh, contentious and hated people in the world to the most powerful people in the world, it's an absolute possibility that something not, not good happens, you know, he's been indicted for like the 115th time, um, but the idea that Nikki Haley would be the one left in the running, and maybe that's their hope, I don't know, why would you spend a billion dollars to If there's a 1 percent chance, I don't know, maybe if you have hundreds of trillions of dollars like Raytheon, and uh, you know, Pfizer does, so, I don't know, it's very interesting. So there was a few conversations that came up about Nikki Haley. One of the ones that came up as a result was Nikki Haley made a comment. about her history growing up in the deep south, being brown. Now, I don't know about you, and maybe my eyes are deceiving me, but to me, Nikki Haley does not look brown. She looks like a white Suburban mother. That's what she looks like. Now, she did grow up in a Indian family. I saw a picture of her family the other day, and her dad was in some traditional type Indian garb. And, um, you know, but she, you know, if white privilege was a real thing, Nikki Haley would have it. Not saying that it's a real thing. But. Here, here it is. Here comes Nikki Haley saying that she was, she was teased every day for being brown while in the deep south and that she has black friends. Here we go. We were the only Indian family in our small southern town. I was teased every day for being brown. So anyone that wants to question it can go back and look at what I've said on how hard it was to grow up in the deep south. As a brown girl, anybody can look at my record and see when Walter Scott was shot down by a dirty cop, how I made sure that the Walter Scott family didn't suffer because we put the first body camera bill in the country in place. Anybody can look at the fact that when we had nine amazing souls die in Mother Emanuel Church, I did something that no Republican or Democrat ever wanted to touch, which was call for the Confederate flag to come down because it would take two thirds of the House and Senate and was an impossible feat. I don't know what you're implying with that, but what I will tell you is, saying that I had black friends is a source of pride. Saying that I had white friends is a source of pride. If you want to know what it was like growing up, I was disqualified from a beauty pageant because I wasn't white or black. Because they didn't know where to put me. So look, I know. So let me get this straight. Nikki Haley was disqualified from a beauty pageant because they didn't know whether she was white or she was black. Now, I don't know If my math's off, just like my eyes are off, apparently, because I don't see a brown woman in the deep south, I see a white privilege card holding, uh, you know, suburban mom, but Nikki Haley was born in like 1972, I think. And Nikki Haley would have been in a beauty pageant, let's say 16 years later, almost in 1990. Right, let's say she was 15, would have been 90, 72, 87, right? Like, was there segregated beauty pageants in 1987? Cuz I think I'm missing something here and and even if there was You think they're gonna have a white and a black category and then you're gonna be like, hey guys I would like to participate and then they would say, uh White black are you white? Are you? Uh, you're disqualified, like, do you think how that that's really how that conversation went? Or do you think that Nikki Haley is a liar? Because I think Nikki Haley is just a liar. And we see that further shown by her actions, which we will see here in just a second, against her husband, which allegedly. And I say allegedly because it's just a signed affidavit, just a signed affidavit, which, you know, means that if the person was lying, they would potentially go to jail, but just a signed affidavit stating that she cheated on her husband while he was, I believe, while he was active duty. If not mistaken, potentially even like deployed. I don't know if that's correct, but I know he was active duty at the time. Um, so we'll go ahead and read that article. And that to me, like if, if you are cheating on your spouse, right? Like your spouse is you're like, if you have everybody in your whole world, and there's one person that you are going to give. All of your trust to one person that you are going to be the most loyal to one person that you're going to Absolutely not do anything to hurt. It is your spouse, right? Like when you get into a Marriage you're doing it because well for a lot of reasons But you're doing it because you want to be with that person for the rest of your life Now if I'm your best friend and we've been best friends for 10 years 15 years and you cheat on your wife I know that if you're not loyal to her, you're not gonna be loyal to me If I'm your business partner and I find out that you cheated on your wife, I know that the first opportunity that you get to make a little bit of money that screws me and my business over, you're going to do it. So I'm not going to be your business partner and I'm not going to be your best friend. I know that if you find yourself in this situation and you are also running for office, how can I trust you as a candidate? Right? So to me, that like, that goes back to the idea that if If somebody, Nikki Haley is absolutely bought and paid for, she's going to do the thing that is aligned with what is in her, her, not even her family's, not even her, her, her immediate family, but her best interest, Nikki Haley's best interest. So let's go ahead and read this. This comes from the Postmillennial, and it says Nikki Haley allegedly cheated on her husband with lobbyist and communications consultant prior to South Carolina governorship. Yikes. Uh, court documents have revealed that Nikki Haley did in fact cheat on her husband before becoming governor, and that one of her lovers was a married South Carolina lobbyist. She was Having an affair with a lobbyist. So not only are you taking their money, but you're also, you know, Haley repeatedly denied that she'd been unfaithful to her husband, Michael. When allegations first broke in 2010, they've been married for 28 years. And have two children together. According to the Daily Mail, the aforementioned lobbyist, Larry Marchant, Jr. And Haley's communications consultant, Will Foulkes admitted in signed affidavits that they both, they had both on separate occasions had affairs with the then future government. So not one. But two people, both signed affidavits. In his affidavit, Marchant said that he and Haley had sexual intercourse during a conference in Salt Lake City in June of 20, or 2008. I came forward publicly on this matter only after being contacted by the press and after hearing Rep Haley claim that she had been 100 percent faithful to her husband in response to the folks allegations, when I knew her statements were absolutely false. Yikes. Um, so that to me says a lot, right? And that's not to say that somebody can't change and somebody can't, you know, go through a, a, a transformation and become loyal again. And, you know, I get it. Like, but that sounds pretty shady. stuff to me, right? And like I said, if you are going into that situation and you have your one person in life that is like, that's my guy, that's, that is my girl. That is, that is going to be the, the mother of my children, the father of my children, uh, whatever that is, if you can't find it within yourself. To conduct yourself in a manner that would align yourself with that trust that would align yourself It's just how are you gonna run for office and and let alone just even talk about the optics of this That how easy is this for them to bring this up? Now that's not to say that every single person that's been on one of these debate stages Doesn't have a ton of skeletons in their closet, which they do But this is one of them Right? And especially with like a lobbyist. It wasn't even like her personal trainer or something. I don't know. All right. Um, now I did have one last thing that I wanted to touch on and this is about Donald Trump. Donald Trump sent out a statement on truth and it said a president of the United States must have full immunity. Without which it would be impossible for him or her to properly function. Now I found this to be an interesting statement. The reason that I think this is an interesting statement is I kind of wanted to talk this through with you guys and see if I agree. And I don't think that I do. I don't think a president should have full immunity. I think that what, what is the, like, I believe that there are certain things that a president has to do. I think that the presidential role is inherently a criminal job. You have to. Murder people you have to you know engage with shady foreign entities You have to run the CIA and the FBI which just in and of itself is going to come with illegal illicit activities as they've shown a track record for for you know, however long since the you know, 47 when the FBI was or the CIA was created But to me, it's like how could I absolutely disagree with this? I don't think a president should have immunity I think that yes, the job would be hard If you didn't have immunity, that's the job. You have to do it within the guidelines of legality, because if there's no, if a president can get into office and immediately become unhinged and have absolute full immunity for every action that they've ever taken, then, then, then what's, what. What are we doing here? Like, you just get to murder people, you get with no repercussions, you have no barriers and guidelines to the way that you have to dictate your actions, you don't have to follow the Geneva Convention, like, what would make you think that the president should have full immunity? So, I'll continue his statement, give you the full context, but it says, Without much, it would be impossible for him or her to properly function. Any mistake, even if well intended, would be met with almost certain indictment by the opposing party at term's end. I, I think in today's political landscape, that is true. That's what we're seeing here is that Donald Trump has absolutely been a political witch hunt. Uh, you know, how, how many indictments does he have now? Like 30 or something. Um, how many states has he been indicted under? How many, how much of it is stuck? And really it's more about, to me, the precedence that this is going to set moving forward because then whoever gets out of office next time, same thing. Right. And so I understand the point. I understand the premise, but I just don't see how inaction that's an effective way to run a country. Is there any country that operates that way? Maybe Russia. Maybe Putin has like absolute immunity in North Korea and China. But like, is that really what we're shooting for? Is North Korea, China, and China. Right. You know, Russia's type of, uh, you know, totalitarian regimes. I don't think so. Um, even if well intended, would be met with almost certain indictment by the opposing party. Even events that cross the line, quote unquote, must fall under total immunity, or it would be years of trauma trying to determine good from bad. There must be certainty. Example, you can't stop police from doing the job of strong and effective crime, Trump said, prevention because you want to guard against the occasional rogue cop or bad apple. You can't stop police from doing the job of strong and effective crime prevention. Uh, sometimes you just have to live with the great, but slightly imperfect. All presidents must have complete and total presidential immunity or the authority and decisiveness of a president of the United States will be stripped and gone forever. Hopefully this will be an easy decision. God bless the Supreme Court. And this says, if anything, presidents and politicians should be held to a higher legal standard, not a lower legal standard. And I think that his, his example of police, uh, just kind of defeats his entire argument there. I just don't see how that holds true because if you give police absolute immunity. Then they're just gonna, like, I think that cops, people who sign up to be police are inherently good people. I do. I wholeheartedly believe that. I believe they generally have good intentions. But I also believe if you take a big enough sample size of people that there's going to be, as he quotes in here, bad apples. And that doesn't allow you to Just randomly walk down the street and, you know, not follow the, the force escalation protocols that are called for being in the police force. You still have guidelines and those guidelines that police have are far more stringent. And, and they get indicted or they, they get perceived or prosecuted probably at a far higher rate than, than any political person ever as a result. They literally have body cameras in the middle of their body that, that follows the every move. Right? Like, so, to me, the argument falls apart, and I think it's a little self serving. Um, again, I don't think Trump is going to be found guilty of anything, and I don't believe that he should be. But I also just don't think that the precedent of setting the example that the president just can absolutely do no wrong is a good one. I just think it's a false premise, and that it will cause something horrific to happen, just like if you gave police absolute immunity. Um, the people who hold the positions of power, You know, with great power comes great responsibility, right? Spider Man. It's like you, you have to inherently have a microscope on you. And the law has to be in place because without it, you could just turn it into a complete totalitarian regime. You could do whatever you wanted when you get, you could, and especially when you're determining, you know, the, you're the, the head of the entire largest, strongest military in all of history. So to me. I just don't agree. Um, so now that we've properly set the stage of what is going on in our current political landscape, this is going to bring us to our deep dive of the week and the deep dive of the week is going to be on the dark psychology of voting and political socialization. So political socialization is the idea that essentially all of the things that happen in your life, all of the people that you've come in contact with, all of the key moments of your childhood, a lot of it has an impact. on your voting and who you vote for and what political party you end up being a part of. Um, so we even have a video that I'll show you by Jordan Peterson, um, but let me walk you through this. So again, this is the go ahead and pull this up here for you says, um, so we're going to walk through this and there's a complex intersection of psychology and politics, and we're going to aim to unravel the intricate web of factors that influence our political decisions and voter behavior. Our focus is the profound and often understated role of political socialization in shaping party affiliation and political identity. Now. Let's begin by understanding what is political socialization, right? Sounds pretty, uh, you know, political science y, like, college, uh, terms that you were supposed to memorize, and it probably was. Um, but it's an important thing to understand. Because you have to see the other, at some point, the divisiveness has to clear. And you have to see that just across the aisle way could have been you. Could have been your, your dad, could have been your mom, could have been your, you know, otherwise things devolve into, uh, you know, what we saw in the revol or the, you know, things devolve into chaos and violence, right? So, so, I think this is an important conversation. I think it's just an interesting one anyways because there's so many small, minute points, whether it be the music you listen to, all of those things that, that influence your voting behavior. Um, so, this process, which is political socialization. is which individuals form their political attitudes and beliefs. And it's not a fleeting phase, but a cornerstone in our political makeup. It begins early in life, influenced by various factors. Our families, our education, our peer groups, the media, and significant life events. These elements do more than just mold our views. They embed deep seated political ideologies and preferences. Consider the family. Often the first and most influential agent in the process. The political discussions at the dinner table. The voting behavior of our parents. The political climate that we grew up in. These experiences lay the foundation for our political leadings. And as we grow, we get educated, and we have peer interactions. Those all come into play, introducing us to diverse perspectives and fostering critical thinking about political ideologies. Now you see with some children, right, some children just are going to do what their parents Raise them to do right. You're, you're in those, those political discussions. You have similar personality traits. You probably are similar in the idea of like aggressivity and passivity and creativity and all of these personality traits that align with your voting behavior. So let's go ahead and jump into this. I'm going to pull up this video from Jordan Peterson and we can watch it together because I think it properly frames the entire conversation around this and I find it to be pretty interesting. So let me go ahead and pull this up for you and we will watch it Political belief is determined in large part by temperament and personality, and that's very strongly biologically influenced. And so conservatives tend to be lower in openness, which is a trait associated with creativity, and higher in conscientiousness, which is a trait associated with industriousness and orderliness. They tend to make good managers and administrators and lawyers. They tend to make good conservative business types. That's, that's their forte, that's their niche, and that's a valid Place to be and a valid thing to be and you know Conservatives aren't so good at being entrepreneurial, and they're not so good at being artistic and creative. That's not their niche That's more the niche of the liberal end of the spectrum and as far as I'm concerned for the political system to function properly You need proper representation for all the temperamental types, and they need to be engaged in dialogue So but the thing is is that when the conservatives are saying well, you know especially when they're perhaps Thinking about leading the damn party, let's say, that they're worried about speaking their mind in a conservative manner. That's just not a good thing. That means that something's gone wrong with our political system, and seriously wrong. You know, and the other thing that, another thing that I've noticed it, thing, you know, when, when this all, Some of you may know, and some of you may not know, that I made a couple of videos back September 27th. I woke up one night, because I couldn't sleep, and I thought, I usually go and write if I can't sleep, because I've got something to figure out. But I've been playing with YouTube videos. I've been putting my lectures online since 2013. And by last April, they had about a million views. And so, I thought, wow, that's, that's really something, man. You know, like, you write a book, and you sell a million copies, you're one happy character. And I thought, I'd A million views is a very large number of views. It really tuned me in to the fact that YouTube was something completely other than what I thought it was. But anyways, that night I thought, Oh, I'll get up, I'll make a video instead of writing it down. So, okay, what else? Here's some things you might think about if you're a conservative. These I'll get up, I'll make a video instead of These things have become What would you say? People are afraid to say them. Here's the first one. The fundamental assumptions of Western civilization are valid. How about that? You know, it's not You think it's an accident? Oh, here's how you find out, okay? Which countries do people want to move away from? Hey, not ours. Which countries do people want to move to? Ours. Guess what? They work better. And it's not because we went around the world stealing everything we could get our hands on. It's because we got certain fundamental assumptions right. Thank God for that after thousands and thousands of years of trying and because of that we've managed to establish a set of Civilizations that are shining lights in the world, you know now so we said two interesting things which he talked about is tray openness Right, which leads to creativity. And, uh, you know, and so when you think of all the main personality types, and Jordan Peterson has a really tremendous, um, personality test that you can actually go take online, I think it's like 6, it'll ask you like 300 questions, and it'll give you a score on your agreeableness on your openness on your, uh, all of these different, you know, traits, it's like the The, I forget the number of them, but there's, there's essential traits that build your personality profile. And so if you understand that what splits the party divide is essentially to me at a certain stage of the conversation is personality traits. Right. If you're more creative and you're more quote unquote open, you tend to align on the left side. He even mentioned entrepreneurial being more liberal traits. And you see that when it comes to like Silicon Valley and startups and, you know. The reason for that, and he talks about the people who are conservative being better managers, they're more structured, they're less creative. But the best and most creative ideas that do well in a startup environment are wild ideas that everybody will tell you are generally terrible. Alright, take Airbnb, for example. Hey, let everybody crash at your house for a night and, you know, you charge them money and then you come back and your house will still be there. It's like, eh. That's kind of a weird idea. I don't, I don't think I'm going to, I don't think I'm going to do that. Or Uber, right? I, I think you should press a button on your phone and then some random guy will show up and you should jump in his car and it'll take you somewhere. It's like, I don't think that's a good idea either, but they worked and they were crazy ideas. They were creative ideas and they were at the right time. And it just so happens that much of the startup space trends. liberal and, and, uh, Democrat as a result. And much of the higher levels, the C suite of organizations and the, uh, high level managers and the people who actually run the operations of the business tend to be more conservative. And the reason for that is because they're much more structured in their thinking. They, they tend to abide by, you know, uh, rule sets that tend to make things move along. If you're, if you're hyper creative, you can get. And you get too far out there and now you can't create a successful business. So the, the, the ideal world is you have a large amount of creativity and you can borrow some structural foundations to, to properly execute and build a idea into something that's great. Like all of the great foundational leaders. And you think of Steve jobs, highly creative. You think of, uh, Jeff Bezos, highly creative. I don't know if Jeff Bezos would be a liberal per se, but, um, but they were able to borrow from both sides. They weren't hyper one side. They weren't hyper the other. And so what we're basically looking at when we're voting into a certain level, cause there's critical thinking and people who change their minds, but to a certain level, I would be really interested in maybe this is something that we can find out is what percentage of people change. their voting registration from Democrat to Republican. And this is, let's, let's go ahead and find it out. I bet you there's been an answer. So let's go to chat GPT. And I will ask it for us. Because I yeah, to me, it's like we're almost looking at a spectrum of personality, when you look at the spectrum of political affiliation. And, you know, there will be creative people who Vote conservative, and there will be highly, uh, structured and, uh, Structured people with, with low trait openness and high trait, uh, or low trait agreeableness. You know, I tend to, I was in the 1th percentile of disagree, of agreeableness. Meaning if there's a hundred people in the room, I'm the most disagreeable person in the room. Who would have thought? Um, I, I would, I, but, uh, surprisingly Not surprisingly, if you know me, but I'm generally a very creative person. I have a lot of ideas. I'm very entrepreneurial So my openness and creativity was was fairly high So I'm kind of a unique hybrid human But I think that that it's interesting to think that through and determine, you know How much of it is personality and genetics, right? So, let's see what percentage of people change from liberal to democrat and vice versa in their lifetime. And what age does this generally Right? And there's the, there's the old quote is I'll show you a, a, a young Republican and I'll show you a man without a heart and I'll show you an old Democrat and I'll show you a man without a brain. That's the old school. Uh, that's the, because a lot of people trend more liberal when they're young and a lot of people trend more conservative as they get older. Some would say wiser, uh, but let's see what it says here. It says determining the exact percentage of people who changed their political affiliations. Um, It's challenging. Several factors contribute to this complexity. Don't care. Don't care. Don't care. Um, let's see, give a percentage cause it doesn't want to. But that's why you see the hyper, uh, successful small startups into Facebooks and Twitters and all this stuff trend, very liberal because in going to these ecosystems very liberal because well one, um, that the person starting that company is generally very creative. And two, the people Operating that company are generally in the tech space and and you're going to see people who are Um more introverted who have certain personality traits that are more creative that are going to find themselves in those coding type environments Um, so again another interesting one Uh, so I don't think it's going to give us a number here, but it says the terms live. Okay. Don't care Let's see overall give a percentage Geez. All right. So let's, let's finish out a little bit of this video here and then we'll continue our discussion. You can be pretty damn filthy and still be a shining light in this world, right? Because if you look around the world at the state of governance in most places, it's like the most Pathological corrupt and vicious thugs rule and to stand out as an illuminated light against that background isn't so difficult But nonetheless, you know, we're as good as it's got and unless we can come up with something better We should be very careful about messing around with that So why don't we start with the assumption that we're doing something, right? One of the things we're doing right, for example, is that we actually value the individual, right? The individual has intrinsic value in Western societies. Do you know how long it took people to formulate that as an idea? And how unlikely that idea is that poor you, you know, useless, powerless you, with all your damn faults, you're actually worth something. You're worth something to the point that the law has to respect you. Assumption number two, peaceful social being is preferable to isolation and to war. In consequence, it justly and rightly demands some sacrifice of individual impulse and idiosyncrasy. Because it's not and being more than normal and being and being unique and creative and contributing in that way is extraordinarily important But the fundamental point is is that social being requires the sacrifice of a certain amount of individual idiosyncrasy And that's a fundamentally conservative claim It's like you should be you should do what everyone else does unless you have a really good reason It's a good rule. It's like, you do what people have done throughout time. You grow up, you find a partner, you establish a stable relationship, you get a job, you make yourself useful, you have some children, you do something productive and interesting with your spare time, and you try to act like a respectable human being. That's what you do. That's a conservative ethos. If you have something spectacular about you that needs to be revealed to the world, then break some rules, man. Go right ahead. I'm dead serious about that. But most of the time, you don't. And even if you happen to be a special person, and you might be, 90 percent of you still isn't special. So most of the time, you're still going to be following the rules. And the rules aren't there to oppress. They're there to keep us at They're there to keep us away from each other's throats. Because human beings are very warlike. And we're very We're very competitive and we're very aggressive. And if we are fortunate enough to have woven together a social fabric that basically renders us peaceful and cooperative, we should try disrupting that at our great peril. Next. No, I think that's an interesting one. What he just talked about is, is essentially like there's a, there's a familiar template for life of, of what is a, a, a fulfilling life template. And we're seeing people stray further and further and further from that. And he said that's a conservative leading ethos, right? The fact that you should, uh, have a family. You should get a good job. You should have a productive hobby. All of those things, you know, you should be a productive member of society unless you're like super, super gifted in one area and you just have to dedicate every moment to it. You should probably have children, right? And the reason that we do that is because, you know, one part of that to me is having children makes you see everybody else from a new lens. It even makes you see you from a new lens. Um, And this is in a lot of different ways, but the way that I have changed as a result of being a father is, is unbelievable, right? You, you see, uh, uh, even somebody who's your own age, even somebody who's older than you, and you see within that person, the thing that you realize as a parent is everybody in this world is just A child acting as if they're an adult at any given stage of their life, like, at least that's what it feels like, like, everybody's just trying, man, like, it's, it's, it's, it's a tough go at life, and every single person is, is, at least attempting to do what they can with what they've been given. That's not every case and there's some people who, who should probably try harder, but it doesn't mean that you shouldn't have empathy for them because it could be your child sitting on the side of the road asking for money. It could be you doing the same thing. If you were given a different life with a different set of skills and a different set of intellect and, and a different level of drive and, and all of these things. So. You start to, you start to see the world and other people and society in a different perspective. And that can bring you to a more interesting religious conversation, but we'll leave that for another day. But another thing that I found interesting is, this is a thought that I had regarding my children, and I don't remember a ton of my childhood. I wish I had a better memory. I wish I remembered, you know, the friends I had and how we played on the playground and um, sleepovers and, and uh, you know, time with my family and all of the fun trips that we went on and all of the things like that. And I do remember some highlights and I have it in there somewhere. But it's not as, it's not as vivid as I would like it to be. And so, when you have a child, You have to realize too, and I think about this, it's like, it's very easy to write off your children's experience because it's like, oh, they won't even remember this, right? Like, oh, maybe, maybe I shouldn't have acted that way, but they'll probably forget it, because I forgot what my parent did to me in that situation too, right? But that's a dangerous path to go down. But if you do, if you look at it from the right perspective, it's your children are the opportunity to live your childhood again only through the lens of someone who can actually appreciate it. And so, if you treat your child as if they are the opportunity for you to give your own inner self, your own inner child the opportunities in life and experiences that you, Wish you would have had or you wish you remembered. You get that opportunity. You get to experience that thing again. And as a result, the world can open up to you. The, the creative, the, the, the way that you view everything can change. And it's a secondary opportunity to, to, to have that. If you can put yourself in the shoes of your children, and I'm sure the same thing goes for grandchildren and great grandchildren and so on. It's really not that much so on after that, but you get the idea. So to me, it's like when you have children, you get to relive what should be and can be the most illuminating fun, exciting time of your life. There's magic and there's, there's mystery to everything. And there's so many questions that you want answered. Like, uh, with my daughter, I'll sit there and she was asking me today, like, how was the world created? I was like, shit, that's a good question. Well, there's a couple belief systems and one of them is the religious and Christian belief system, which is that God created the earth and all the people in the universe and the stars and the sun in, in seven days. And then there's a scientific perspective, which is the Big Bang Theory. And I tried my best to explain that pathetically, uh, but I, I explained those to her. And then she, she asked a better question when she said, is there other? Is there other things like our thing, like is there anything outside of what our, not our world, but our place, like everything, is there another everything? And I said, well, I think what you're talking about is Like the multiverse theory or even like kind of like string theory, right? Like things can be happening simultaneously in a different reality. And so we got to ask Chad GPT to explain these things and like just the, the interest and, and mystery to her that is the, the surrounding world. And, you know, I still feel that way that I don't know what the hell is going on. And for all I know, there's a firmament above us. And we, or for all I know, we really did go to the moon, like who knows anything, uh, which is, you know. Another interesting realization as you get older is a lot of history is just fabricated by the authors of large conglomerate organizations that wanted to rewrite history and in their way, I digress. That's a side note, but to me, having children so important living life in a way that you are. That your ancestors lived, and there's a reason you have children. Your biology changes, your perspective changes, the way that you view the world, the way you view society, the way you view people, it all changes. Everything, your perspective is so important, and the only way that you get that is by having a child, and having something outside of yourself that is a extension of you, that gets to go off into the world and face their own hero's journey as a result. And so Yeah, you better have a damn good reason, um, in, in all of that to, to get back to the, to the original point, which is that, you know, even Trending within the conversation that we talked about earlier of like the depopulation of the world and our trending downward spiral of population It's like there's one half of society that is absolutely outbreeding the other half of society there's one half of the political spectrum that is absolutely Having babies, not having abortions, not using plan B and living a happy, healthy, fulfilling life with children and grandchildren. And there will be somebody by their side with food and flowers and comfort and jokes when they are dying. And there's another half of the political spectrum that has fallen into the trap that you are. everything that matters in this universe, right? Go back to like postmodernism, right? Your perspective in your reality is the only reality. And they fall in for this trap that says like, well, I'm a girl boss. I don't need to be a mom. Those stay at home moms are just whatever, right? Like fill in the blank. And this culture has been tricked into believing that the mom should be, you know, that the ultimate. goal isn't to be a, a mother or a father in life like that. That is everything. And they've been deceived into thinking that that's not the most fulfilling thing that you could accomplish in your life is, is pro creating and, and. Creating something outside of yourself and giving that, that version of you, that extension of yourself, the opportunities and experiences that you weren't given, or maybe you don't remember or whatever, right? It's like such an important thing, but we are absolutely outbreeding the crazy. And eventually, the pendulum will swing right back in our direction. I think in 20 years, we're going to see either a huge wave of non liberal. Uh, ideologies poke their head from the next generation because a very large percentage of people, much larger than any other time period of history, are deciding not to have children. And doing so through many means, including, you know, birth control and, and Plan B, but also abortions. And, and doing so after the fact, and, and having, causing much, you know, there's, there's its own psychological effects that even come from that, so. Anyways, so important, very interesting to see him talk about that, you know, the conservative leaning ethos of creating a family unit and, and the value of that in today's world and And how that kind of even pertains to political ideology. So here we go. Just a minute. Equity, equity. That's worse, right? Equity means Equality of outcome. It means that every single organization has 50 percent women and 50 percent men. Doesn't matter whether the men and women differ in their intrinsic preferences, which, by the way they do, the scientific literature on that is completely clear. It was established by the early 90s. It was established in the Scandinavian countries, where they've done most to flatten out the socio economic Differentials, say, between men and women. Didn't get rid of the differences between men and women. In fact, they became exaggerated. The biggest personality differences in the world between men and women are in Scandinavia. Just as the biggest differences in interest between men and women are in Scandinavia. Because when you get rid of the socio cultural differences between men and women, the biological differences don't disappear. They maximize. So, you hear the egalitarian, clarion call everywhere. Everything should be equal. Everything should be equally distributed. We should strive for equity. It's like, wrong! Especially if you're a conservative. Wrong! What we want are just hierarchies of competence. Not everyone's a neurosurgeon. You know, if your father has a brain tumor, you probably want a hierarchy of competence for neurosurgeons. So you can pick the one that's the best, so that he might not die. That's what a hierarchy of competence is for. For the postmodernists, there's no hierarchy that isn't based on power. Well, because they think the world runs on power. We need the best plumbers. We need the best contractors. We need the best Alright, so, yeah, and so that touches on another conversation, which, you know, there wasn't as much political socialization aspects within that that I was expecting, but, um, there are some interesting points there, which even talks about gender, right, there, there is a specific divide when it comes to voting percentages that are tied to gender, um, so just pulling up some of my Notes here, and we'll walk through some of those together. So here are some of the statistics