[00:00:00] Speaker A: Foreign. [00:00:05] Speaker B: You're listening to casual talk radio where common sense is still the norm whether you're a new or long time listener. We appreciate you joining us today. Visit [email protected] and now here's your host. [00:00:20] Speaker A: Ler I do not consider myself to be a conservative. There are conservative thoughts, there are conservative preferences, there are conservative beliefs. But I don't consider myself to be a conservative. I'm the furthest thing from a liberal. So I don't really have a clean classification because the flaw of trying to create a clean classification is you're setting yourself up for failure when things don't go the way you think they should. And evident by the whole Epstein chaos. I thought it was good to share basic thoughts, although I'm hesitant to go too deep on it. The fiasco that's happening after the Charlie Kirk murder, everything that's happening within what I would argue is the well known conservative circle. And you might not follow this and kudos to you if you don't, but if you do, you know who I'm talking about. Candace Owens, Megan Kelly, Tucker Carlson, Ben Shapiro, to a lesser degree. The it's interesting to me and I it's hard for me to determine how much of it is show as in it's not real, it's, it's work and how much of it's legit. I think their sentiment is legit, but I'm talking about the way they portray their feelings. I was watching a Megyn Kelly bit after I'd watched the Candace Owens bit and Candace Owens essentially made some conspiracy theories and Candace Owens has been allegedly been attacked, called an anti Semite and all sorts of stuff. I've not followed that because it's difficult for me to listen to her show for an extended period of time. I think I'm, I'm envious that and I'm pretty sure she's younger than me. I'm envious at the amount of energy that she has. I'm envious of it because I don't have it. I don't have the energy to fixate on a topic or research a topic to that depth. It's not that I am disinterested but the level of energy, it's, there's levels I am way out of. She's out of my league. She is way above me and I accept that and I acknowledge it and I will say I respect her capability to do that. I can't remember a time in my life that I was so energized about a topic I was trying to think about it and I, I can't other than, you know, the pandemic, but other than that. And even then I wasn't as energized as, as Candacey at that point. So I'm not going to get into the whole anti Semite stuff because I've not done deep research. I don't take a side. It's not my battle. It is something that apparently has energized a lot of people, young and old with what's going on with Israel and genocide and Jews and it's, it's a, it's dominoes that perhaps there's some value. I question the why all of a sudden it hit a fever pitch. But that may simply be Hamas and other elements that have caused people to give it more focus. So I acknowledge that there may be world factors that have caused more awareness than was the case, let's say, 10 years ago. That is not the source of my conversation. My source of the conversation is obviously, you know, Ben Shapiro, Candace Owens. They, they did not see eye to eye. They used to work together then they then basically said something to a forum that was, I think, disrespectful to Candace and they separated and Candace went to her own show. Candace's show was higher ratings than Ben. And I think Ben, you know, I've watched Ben for a while. He's difficult to follow because of how he speaks. He is, I think he's so adamant about trying to be right that he doesn't understand about how his quick speak maybe a turn off to people. Chris Eubank talked about this. The idea of, you know, why are you talking so fast? You should not speak that fast. You should want people to understand you. You should want people to hear your message because otherwise the message is wasted. That's how I feel about Ben, is that he has a lot of good information, but because of how he speaks so rapidly, a lot of it may go in one ear and out the other. So there's times that I'll watch the channel, but I cannot follow it for an extended period. Tucker Carlson, I think is decent, good Tucker. The thing I'm most against, I don't want to say against, but that's the best word I can say against with Tucker is he has a stance, he has a belief, he's. He tries to be very neutral in what he's saying, but there are times when he will use charged verbiage and he's not wrong when he does. But I, I can sense a strategy behind his charge verbiage the charge verbiage Candace tends to do at times. Ben, not so much, but every now and then. Megan absolutely. But with Tucker, it's. It's like he presents as I'm neutral, I'm on the line, but he's using this charge verbiage and it's kind of subterfuge. Best word I can think of with this whole anti Semite and everything else is going on. Apparently these all four have been getting attacked by, you know, I don't know if it's Jews attacking them specifically or if there's other groups. They talked about big money players and all sorts of stuff that I don't follow. But it got me curious because it seems like there's. They're not on the same page like they once were. And I got the sense that there's a little bit of division happening in that ring. Even Donald Trump has caused some of this, that they're no longer in agreement with a lot of the things that they used to be under the past. And I'm going to attribute that for Megyn Kelly to. She's kind of accepted, and I'm not speaking for her, this is my observation. She's kind of accepted. This is a problem. This is a problem that's a larger problem. So when I say this and that, you can fill in blanks with anything she's talked about. So people will always go back to her and Trump and her doing the moderating and, you know, blood coming everywhere and they'll always fixate on that. And Megan had said, and I paraphrase, but she said something to the effect of, you know, we had talked about it and we kind of squashed the beef. And she became a supporter because she realized, I think, and again, I paraphrase, but she realized that what we had under Biden was so much worse. It's like, okay, what Trump's talking about now is on the right track of where we should be. If you can look past all this other stuff, which is what I've been seeing. Ben Shapiro, he's criticized Trump one time. I've heard him straight criticized Trump. And then there's times when he's been a supporter, but he's never been. He's not straight line like some other people. Candace isn't straight line. There's times she's criticized Trump. I've heard it. Tucker just recently criticized Trump about the Epstein stuff. So there is a synchronicity between them with respect to Trump. But within this whole Jew and Israel thing situation and everything else, I Get the sense that there's some sort of division being imposed by external forces that's causing these four via their platforms to not be in clean sync like they once were. And I don't know what the trigger was. I don't know what the true cause was. I observe it because I'm listening at points to all four of them, and it doesn't come across as a unified message. I don't know if that's Trump's fault per se, but I know that Trump, some of his actions and inactions have contributed to that. Clearly, none of the four of them are going to listen to Michelle, which is fine. But my message would be my sense of it is that there's some sort of external factor that is causing a disruption in the unification that you once all had together. I don't suggest that you're not friendly or cordial or saying that there was a singular voice that was clear and apparent and it no longer is there. Why ever that's the case. And I would encourage you to really analyze these external forces to try to identify where it's coming from and not allow it to win because it's possible. And again, this is tin foil. It's entirely possible that if I'm right, these factors are doing so because they understand there was a blowout with Donald Trump winning this most recent, and now there's a push to try to get him out of office, starting with making him a lame duck. And you could unravel significant of the progress that was made because your voices were kind of important arguably to reaching certain people as well as Charlie Kirk's was. So if your voice is no longer as strong in the right direction and you're instead focused and fixated on other things that arguably are not worth the energy, it becomes a distraction. Chewbacca so I'm suggesting that perhaps what I'm sensing is by design to distract you and distract your message so that you're no longer resonating the right message to the people that listen to you, who may have been the very people that helped Trump get in office. And when we see like the government shutdown situation, that's a great example of something that is preventable. Finger point blame. As always, Trump's sound bites saying it's the buck stops with the president, and it does. But at the same time, a lot of what's being requested on both sides, the regular American is not interested per se, in, for example, most people don't really care about health care itself. They care about the cost of it. It's all economy. Most people don't care about npr. Most people don't care about these other elements. There are people that do, but they're the minority, not the majority. So the minority voice then being arguably left behind, creates a narrative. Before whatever's happening with the four of you, you were able to break through that fog and still reach those people and keep them focus, laser focused on the real problems. We don't want healthcare for illegal immigrants. We want a safe border. I've heard three of the four of you say these things at points, but it is lost in a fog of a bunch of irrelevant messaging. When I say irrelevant, I don't suggest it's irrelevant to you or to your listeners. I'm saying it's irrelevant in the broad spectrum. It would be like saying it would be like fixating on one ant in a room full of people at a party, you ask, well, why are you fixated on that ant? Because something's told you that the ant's more important than everybody else in that room. Something's told you that the everybody else's presence has less value than that ant's presence. The question is, why is that? I'm simply suggesting when I say irrelevant, I'm saying when you look at the bigger issues that we're all dealing with and what's going on in the government, your voices lent a certain measure of credibility in the direction that led to Donald Trump getting elected. The lack of your voices or the minimization of your voices, distracted by other factors that are not as large of issues domestically. It has a risk. It has a risk of the other side increasing and elevating their voice and swaying people over to that side. We've already seen inklings of this with the increase of shootings, because the increase of shootings, it used to be significant quantities of shootings were happening under Democrat leadership. Now is not the case like it was. Donald Trump has a lot of shootings under his record, not because of him, but it's still under his record. Nobody is stopping to really understand what's the root cause of this elevation and investigate it for what it is. Part of that is the fervent push for the Epstein files, which I argue is a distraction. I'm not suggesting it's not important to know. I'm suggesting that these on the ground events that are happening are more important and more valuable. And I think you, you as well as the Trump administration risk losing the very people who put you in office if you don't focus your message on the boots, on the ground issues that are relevant in the now because they've not been solved and to them it's same old same old as before. If you have this Michigan situation, which is terrible, right? If you have a Minnesota situation, which is terrible, and Chicago situations, which there they're all terrible and there's no high level active push to do something about it. There should never be a world where shooters are empowered, bold to go and attack a church. There's a fundamental problem if somebody is so bold as to attack a church, not just shooting, I'm talking walking in it, strapped. Because you think about it, it's unthinkable. Schools attacking schools with children. Something's fundamentally wrong. Three of the four of you say the right things and how terrible and how disgusting and etc. Every word right what this is. But I don't know that your message is resonating as strongly because as with the Trump administration, a lot of it lacks a true call to action that has some, pardon the pun, ammunition behind it. I don't know what the solution is. I have a proposal, but nobody would like my proposal because it would actually solve the problem. Summary I think my personal thoughts, I think there are elements that are purposely trying to distract certain of you who are on the conservative side cause dissension and disruption within your ranks. Just like a Trojan horse in a way. But from the inside, I think even you might even have people who are in your own core circle who have caused this turmoil somehow, people that you might even trust that might be doing that, I don't know. But I find it strange that all of you had such a unified stream message that no longer is as unified. And it's again, not that you dislike each other, not that you hate each other, not that you're not friends. But I don't know that there's any sort of consistency like there used to be. It feels like you're deviating from a singular course. And whether that's Trump causing that or something else causing it, my advice to you is to figure out how to course correct and get it back on track before it's too late. Second topic. I'm off those four. Second topic. And I think this is equally as important. Perhaps. Did you know that my age range allegedly is returning to religion now? I would argue that we never left religion. The flaw of religion as a general term is the narrative that you can only have one, you can only belong to one, and you must do the one that your parents did, because that's what it is. What most in my Age range realized is that you hear teachings of whatever kind of. And they do not conform, they do not match, they do not apply, they do not resonate. There is something off. You can't put your finger on it really. It is not necessarily that certain of these people are not inherently religious because religion does not necessarily have to go by formal standard. Religion is simply something you have faith in, something you trust and are confident in, something you believe, something you support. All of these support religion. People are generally exposed to very limited religions, diverse religions. Tina Turner is a great example of this. Tina Turner later would go to Buddhism and that was her aha. Was to join Buddhism. That not everybody works well with rigid religions. The idea that you have to go to church on a routine basis, you have to do this, you have to do that. You think the Freemasons, essentially it is a religion of a form, but there's. And there is some rigor, but nowhere near that you might see in other churches. The money aspect isn't the same across. So I think people have taken a step back and realized, all right, I need to figure out what I want out of religion. What do I expect to get out of it? If you go in to religion expecting what you're taught in it, you will be disappointed. Because getting something out of it has to come from inside. You have to already have the faith because nobody can give it to you, right? So no matter what the religion is, it doesn't matter which it is. You have to already have some inherent faith. And that comes by way of a support system to a limited degree, a support system that can support your growth in the faith, whichever faith. And that goes to trust. And trust comes from confidence, confidence comes from courage. The reason I link it that way and the reason that this was eye openening for some people, this realization that religion should be part of it. When we move away from it totally so we say no religion at all, everything then becomes a focus on the irrelevant. And when I say irrelevant, I don't suggest that these are not important things that they focus on. I'm suggesting that they are not necessarily relevant to you and your growth. They are relevant to what you were told you must do. You must go to work, you must go to school, you must pick up your kids is a routine. And the routine is born from what everybody else has told you must happen. And you are then serving essentially a different master because you are not serving whichever deity that you want to believe in. You never lose that belief in whichever deity that is. You're simply choosing to Follow a different belief system and that becomes your life. When it becomes your life, where's your fulfillment coming out? The fulfillment's coming from the satisfaction that you did what you were told. But are you really satisfied? Are you really fulfilled? The answer is no. Which is why regardless of how much you work, regardless of how hard you work, regardless of how many hours you work, you're not really happy. You don't feel happy. You see and receive certain enrichment from doing it, like education. Certainly you do grow mentally, but you're not fulfilled. There's always something missing. Which is partially why companionship becomes a thing. Because genetically we are predisposed not to be alone. We, we accept that it's the nature who we are. We cannot procreate as a single being, like some species can. My point is that most of these that are part of this realization, their wake up just happened later than people like myself. The idea that work, just going to your work, it's like the Matrix. You're just going to work, right? And you're doing what you're told. You go into school and you're doing what you're told, there's no fulfillment. Something's missing. Them turning to religion of whichever they choose creates now a different fulfillment. It creates a different purpose, it creates a different thought process that you have a support circle, other people, like minded people that you congregate with, whether in person or not. The point is that you have that collaboration. You now have some sort of support to fall back on. You also are deep diving. You're challenging yourself to go deeper than you've ever done before spiritually. And some people, there's a fear when they first start doing it and then they go a little bit deeper and then they realize, what am I afraid of? Well, the fear is because you've avoided for so long. I'm tying that together because my opinion is that a lot of people have fallen off the wagon, to use the term, because they've allowed the fear to control the routine. A fear of losing a home, a fear of losing my kids, a fear of losing my dog. Fear of fear. It's fear. Fear, fear, fear. Fear is the governance. And that fear becomes the master. You then are a servant to that fear without realizing that fear is really now the master because it's taken over, because you've allowed it to take over. You didn't realize that it was taking over. When you're set out into the quote, real world, the fear isn't there at first. It starts and then it festers and then it grows. And then at some point you either control it or you let it take over. I told a story about some girls that I went to school with. We're talking doctorates and PhDs and people making six figures high, mid high, six figures millionaires. These, these were people that we, I already knew were going to be the best of the best. They were rotc, they were top of the class. They did everything they were expected to do. I talked to one of them and she took, I knew her 2004, 2005. She didn't get married until like2021 because for her, she focused hot and heavy on the career and she went a long way with career education and that was her core focus. And she's a sweet person, just a sweet person. But it was difficult for her to make that commitment with somebody because she was so focused on career and everything else. So 20 years. So she wasn't, it wasn't until she was in her 40s that you really got to settle down and enjoy that kind of a pair. Now the flip of that is it gave her a chance to understand herself better. As I talked about with the Michelle Obama, the idea that when you're in your 20s, you don't really know yourself, so you don't know that it's the right fit. So her waiting did give her somewhat of that aha. Of who she was and what she wanted and how she wanted things to go and she was able to hit a peak of success. But in chatting with her, you know, she was really excited and as was I to be able to talk after so long. So I hadn't seen her in so long. And she straight said, you know that. And I paraphrase, but she said that, you know, she was wild, she didn't really understand, she wasn't grounded, she didn't understand what it was she really wanted until very recently. And then everything seemed to click and you know, she got back into, you know, her beliefs and, and then it all came together. My point is, and I believe those listen to the show match my age. If you've gotten back into religion, good. If you've not, it's fine. If that works for you. Some people, it just, they've not and they won't and it's fine for them to do that. But if you have consider what was the aha. What was the point? You realize this. I need to at least look into it for myself. And everything I just talked about fear being that master. And when did you realize fear is that master? And when did you Realize that you needed to get away from that master. I'll say. In my own experience, I had never. When I went into the workplace, I was never afraid of anything, but I knew I had to. I had to keep going and keep going, keep going and keep going because of being wary, okay, do I have a place to live? Do I have food? And that fear wasn't the driver, though. It was just in my brain, like a robotic reaction. I have to do this. I got to figure something out. I got to hustle. And I had to hustle at times. As I said, there was a couple of points. I was almost homeless, and then I had to adjust and figure out how do I avoid that happening again. But when I was. But anger at a point, anger was my master. It controlled a lot of what was happening and arguably cost me a couple jobs because I had to control it. I had to learn how to keep it under control. I never struck anyone. I've never threatened anyone. But if people said things or did something, then, yes, I'm going to speak my mind calmly, but I'm going to speak my mind. And they don't like that because some people don't like to hear the truth. But that's how I was. I'm still that, but I'm a lot more controlled in how I express the same thing I've said before. I'm a lot more controlled about it. To where they don't sense that I just insulted them. It doesn't come across as an insult. But somebody that's on that level realizes, man, you just schooled. I dealt with that when I was at that same company with the garage, just talked about 2004. I told the boss, this is what needs to happen. Either you do this, you do this. And I was not rude about it. But it got to a fever pitch. I had to chew them out. I had a sales guy in the company I went to after this. This is 2010, 2011. 1011. Sales guy. I sorry. He made a screwed up decision. I told him, you need to choose. Go do this or do this. Same thing I did with the other leader that worked. The sales guy didn't work. He came into my face yelling and screaming, wagging his figure in my face. And I gave my notice. And then all of a sudden, they're scrambling to try to keep me. It's too late. You allowed that person to step out of bounds when I didn't do anything disrespectful. He screwed up. I just told him he screwed up. It's his Fault he didn't own that. That's him. I will not be here because clearly he doesn't want me here because he's not going to be yelling and wagging his finger in my face. Once I realized how easy it was to control that anger and recognize it was the master at a point and I learned to control that, my experience got better and easier. Right to where I'm no longer serving two masters. I'll need to now I can say the same things I said before, but I control the situation. I'm no longer, no longer worried at all because I've made moves smarter than what I did do. I wish I could have been had the wherewithal to have done that in my 30s, but I didn't. It's fine. But at no point, at no point was I going to stay in that groove of letting anger be the master and the driver of what I was doing. It was not going to be acceptable. So if you've gotten that realization, for you, religion was the answer to get away from the other master, which is probably fear in your case. If you really think about it, good. If you haven't, it's fine. All I would say is a call to action. Think about why you do what you do. If you've not gone back to religion, if you've not settled on any. And when I say religion doesn't have to be a rigid religion, it doesn't have to be Christianity, but it's whatever religion that makes sense. If you've not, then my call to action is think about what you do on a routine basis. Think about why you do it. Think about how you feel when you do it and when you don't do it. And you're likely going to find that for the vast majority of the things that you have to do, fear is to master. You might be okay with that. If you're not okay with it, consider how you can change that. How do you get away from fear being your master? You control it. You control it by identifying why you feel you have to do these things. Things like I'm afraid of losing my home, no problem. But you can control that situation as well. If you work right now, you might be an at will employment company. Certainly they have the power to take away your livelihood. You don't have to stay there. You don't have to stay with the amount of money you're making. If you consider yourself critical, as in the company would absolutely go south if you were to leave. That means you have the power. If you're not Considered critical. Consider how you get away from it to get somewhere where you would be more important. What you're then doing is you're taking power away from the fear by putting yourself in a situation where you're not just a number, where you're not necessarily expendable, where while they could cut you, they would be afraid to. You're redirecting the master to a different slave. The aha. For me, I understood that in order for me to go where I needed to go and do what I needed to do, I had to crunch and pull strings and do all sorts of stuff to open doors. Then it was, once the doors open, you're not going to want me to walk back out of it. So I'll do whatever I need to do to make sure you don't want to drop me. And if you do drop me, you're going to be at a tough spot. That's difficult. I don't suggest it's easy. I'm saying it's a way to decouple yourself from the other master and take back control. Then once you can master doing that, once you can get away from that master, now you have to choose. You could have your own control, you can be your own master and be cool with that. You can consider religion and there's a master. It's up to you. The power, that's what everybody in this that was talked about was craving control and power. Instead of feeling powerless all the time, with a support system that's there to help you with a place, a safe space that you can go and talk these things and feel a togetherness that you might be lacking because you might have friends. But it's not the same, is it? Right. All I'm saying is it's not necessarily the religion. It's not about the rigor of religion. It is. There's something missing. All you have to do is identify why it's missing and create a plan for filling that gap and make sure that whatever it is, it's not in control of you, that you maintain control, but you're making the right decisions for yourself, for your. Your family or your future. It's not easy, but I do think it helps everybody, not just you. That's the key. It helps people around you. If you can do that and if you're smart enough not to allow whatever religion to take over you as a person because you should still maintain a sense of self along your journey back towards religion.