Welcome, welcome, welcome back to the Left of
Old North. We're your hosts with the most. My
name is Adrian. And I'm CJ. And today, okay,
we're going to have to move through this episode
pretty quickly because I feel like we say this
every episode, but there is a lot of lot to cover.
And I mean, it's only been a week. We're going
to try and get this out the very next morning.
So, you know, hang on to your hats. We're going
to be moving through this pretty quick. CJ, how's
your week been? It's been good. It's been good.
Busy, but, you know, got the Easter and all that
good stuff. But, you know, that's done. And now
we're. Yeah. Happy Easter. Happy late Easter
to everybody who celebrated. And, you know, happy
250th anniversary of Lexington and Concord. Happy
420 to all of you who indulge. And, you know,
we'll just move right along from there. So big
thing happened this weekend. which I will cover
a little bit more later, but the 50 -51 protest
that happened on the 19th here in Raleigh and
also saw a lot of American flags out there. But
a lot of the American flags were upside down,
which I think is interesting because if you don't
know, an American flag that's flown upside down
means that the country is in a time of distress.
Now, both sides have kind of used this to mean...
Different things at different times. During Biden's
presidency, there were a lot of MAGA supporters
that loved to fly upside down flags and variations
of flags that were many different colors, some
all black, which is also a way to say take no
prisoners. So if you didn't know, but CJ, I wanted
to get your your kind of insight because you
brought this up to me while we were discussing
what we wanted to talk about. And I think it's
interesting the premise that you're putting forward
here. Yeah. So I can't even remember how I started
to think about this, where this came from. But
I started kind of thinking about the idea of
one thing that I think Democrats might want to
do or probably should do. on a national level,
state level, whatever, kind of reclaim this idea
of patriotism. Now, does this mean you want us
to start wearing the American flag? as like our
booty shorts or like not quite quite um i'm not
saying go full on you know toby keith courtesy
of the red wine blue over here because i mean
i do have a pair and i'm just looking for any
excuse to bust those suckers out that will be
for the top tier uh Part of our Patreon is a
full 12 -month calendar spread of Adrian Brakeley
in his red, white, and blue booty shorts. Nice.
All right, cool. I will bust out the camera here
pretty shortly. Fourth of July special coming
up, folks. Discount code 1776. Anyway, all that
to say, no, I think that for a very long time,
the... right, especially after 9 -11, kind of
took over the American flag, kind of took over
what it means and kind of defined what it means
to be patriotic, to love your country and all
that stuff. And while this may not be for every
single Republican out there, a lot of this idea
of what it means to be patriotic is being, you
know, almost nationalistic being you know against
anything that is different anything that's not
you know baseball and apple pie and it is excuse
me and it is not questioning the president although
it's not questioning the president as long as
that president is a republican but the thing
is The way I look at it, one of the most patriotic
things you can do is question the president,
is question the government and push back and
criticize. It doesn't mean you don't love your
country. It just means you want to see it get
better. That's kind of a little, that's kind
of an aside there. And I tend to agree in the
way that like, yeah, patriotism should not belong
to one party. The wires get a little crossed
there when we start. putting a nationalistic
vibe on it right because then it's like well
okay maybe maybe both parties don't need to be
super like nationalists we don't need to all
be wearing flag pins and make sure to fly the
flag off the back of our ford f -150s all across
our seven lane highways we don't we don't all
need to be doing that but i think that you raise
a good point of like there there are clearly
a bunch of democrats who would do that no matter
what um they might be embarrassed to because
they don't want to be associated necessarily
as somebody who leans conservative but i would
argue they kind of already do and maybe they
just need to embrace that and kind of just like
take it back in a way yeah like hey hey man people
on the left already think that moderate democrats
are more to the right than some republicans so
like just own it maybe and you know republicans
love to campaign democrats in this light of they
are anti -american they're anti -america right
and i think one way we can fight that is again
embrace the iconography embrace the flag embrace
you know you know the bald eagle and all that
stuff but we don't have to take it to that nationalistic
level nothing says we have to and we shouldn't
take it to that level it's a very fine line Yeah,
no, it is. It's a fine line between nationalistic
and jinganistic and patriotic. And I will say,
I think that the Republican Party, again, especially
post 9 -11. Oh, I mean, the Democrats, too, post
9 -11. Well, true, true. But they did. But I
will say Republicans have definitely done a incredible
job in the worst way of weaponizing patriotism.
Sometimes literally. yeah let's let's paint american
flags on the side of our bombs there it's patriot
it's it's it's not a weapon of mass destruction
it's a weapon of mass patriotism we're bringing
democracy to the desert and like i i think that
you you have a good i think you have a good premise
i think it's interesting that like why not let
the left also use the symbol of american iconography
and this sort of patriotic bent. Why can't we
do that? And I think that part of the problem
is that so much of what is jingoistic, what is
conservative, is already kind of wrapped up in
the flag. It's really hard to separate that,
especially when you have a large subsection of
the left wing of our, I guess, our society. Not
just the party, but in our society that views
the American flag as something that... is just
inherently colonial it is inherently abusive
to like native people it's that's kind of hard
for us to reclaim in a way yeah um not shooting
it down not shooting the idea down at all but
that is that is the struggle that is ultimately
the thing that is going to be a defining feature
in the conversation that i don't think a lot
of people will be able to get over unfortunately
yeah yeah i get it and i think Again, one of
the things I said earlier was, you know, I think
one of the most patriotic things you can do is
criticize your country. But one of the most patriotic
things you can do is also be honest about your
country. Be honest about its history. And be
honest about its mistakes. It's, you know, I
would say it's original sin, but really original
sins, plural. Mass genocide of Native Americans,
slavery, etc. Yeah. But... We can also try and
remember that, you know, we have still, we have
done great things, but we have also done horrible
things. Right. And we need to acknowledge those
horrible things and learn from it. We learn from
it, we correct those mistakes, and we as a country,
we as a society can grow from it. I think that
that's probably the right way to look at it.
I mean, but that's also clearly from our perspective.
Oh yeah, no, we're two white dudes. We definitely
don't necessarily have our finger on the pulse
there. Well, I mean, I already said I kind of
already gave the game away. I do have some things
that have an American flag emblazoned on them
that I wear on an... infrequent basis but that
i still wear so like it's not beyond what i already
consider to be you know something that i would
already do but you mentioned also some recent
democratic campaigns that prominently featured
the flag we kind of covered this a little bit
very very briefly but like democrats post 9 -11
went hard on using the flag as part of their
imagery and the thing is that bush was just better
at it I think a lot of Republican conservatives
were. So that's something that's going to be
hard to overcome because Obama didn't get away
from it completely, but he did sort of move the
iconography from something that was more nationalistic
oriented to something that was more identity
oriented. It was more, the campaign was not necessarily,
and this isn't to knock him at all, but the campaign
was more about his identity and the hope that
he represented. and the change that he could
represent as somebody who could become president
versus somebody running with a national identity.
Like, for instance, I have a Biden poster back
here, or a Biden sign back here. They very explicitly
used the imagery of the flag and the E in his
name. And he's definitely not the first one to
do it. Not at all. But definitely the most prominent.
recently, I would say. Do you have any examples
that you can think of? Putting you on the spot
here, but... Oh, God. Because he's looking back
on his wall trying to figure out... It's not
beyond the realm of possibility for Democrats
to use this kind of imagery, but I just don't
think that in the post -911 era, in the post
-Obama era even, and especially after Trump,
we are kind of past the point. on the left where
we want to use that kind of iconography because
it sort of labels you as someone who is in that
way well i will say if we do kind of go that
route if we do try to reclaim it so say we should
embrace efforts by progressive groups to kind
of make it a little bit more inclusive and justice
-oriented. You can go back to that idea of the
original sin and inequity and inequality in the
country. So yeah, no, we can definitely work
on following the lead of those democratic campaigns
or those progressive groups, I should say, to...
kind of reclaim, redefine patriotism as something
that is inclusive and is justice oriented. And
I think that, well, obviously it does not solve
every single problem out there. It does not necessarily
address adequately, you know, those issues of
the original sins, as I put it earlier. Yeah.
It's still a step that we can take. I don't know
if we have the PR money for that, to be honest.
But speaking of, speaking of PR money. And something
that the DNC is kind of dealing with right now.
Kind of want to pivot real hard into something
that happened this week that was kind of a big
story. If you haven't heard about it already,
25 -year -old David Hogg, who just recently won
a position as a vice chair in the Democratic
Party, he put forward a plan, or rather, just
not really a plan, just an initiative to fund
primary challenges against incumbent Democrats
that... He and people in his organization called
Leaders We Deserve feel are not doing enough
to resist the Trump administration and, by extension,
Republicans in general. And that has kind of
resulted in some tensions, to put it mildly.
So just some quick facts on this. So they want
to fund a $20 million campaign through... the
leaders we deserve. I don't know if it's a PAC
or if it's just a group. I think it might be
a PAC. I think they have a PAC associated with
it. Regardless, they want to spend $20 million
through that organization to support young progressive
candidates to challenge these older incumbents.
And just today, when we're recording, this is
the 20th, criticism from party leaders like Hakeem
Jeffries, who emphasize unity and caution, he
basically said, I don't care what David wants
to do. I'm going to stick by our incumbents.
And David Hogg has kind of put forward this defense
as like, it's essential for revitalizing the
Democratic Party. Because right now we have certain
leaders that are... Not really beholden to the
wider demographic of young voters and Democrats
in general, but I see the argument on both sides
a little bit that technically they are representing
their constituency. If they're not going to get
voted out, that's kind of what primaries are
for. On the flip side of that, I do think it's
very healthy for democracy in general, but especially
for political parties to have regular contested
primaries. Now, I know that there are some who
would disagree with me, especially because primaries
cost a lot of money. There's a lot of time investment
involved. So not taking that out of the equation.
It's just it's it's something that's cropped
up over the last week. And it's been part of
a large like it's one small part of a larger
conversation that's kind of been boiling and
boiling and boiling. And I think this might be
the tipping point. Yeah. And I mean, like you
said, this is having these challenges are. part
of a healthy democracy. And it's what will help
keep the Democratic Party itself also healthy.
But, I mean, I think David Hogg also went on
at some point in the past week to say something
along the lines of, you know, we're not just
going to challenge people who are old or people
who are whatever. We're going to challenge people
who are essentially feckless, the ones who aren't
showing a spine or anything like that, which
is much needed. I mean, the Democratic Party
has an approval rating of, what, 27? percent
that sounds about right and i wouldn't be surprised
if it's lower now yeah same obviously that's
a huge problem you know yeah you have you know
we have had members of the democratic party literally
die in office uh what was her in california uh
diane feinstein yeah yeah she uh literally died
while she was still in office and she was She
was in her 90s. How old was she when she died?
90? Yeah. She had been there, I think, since
at least the 80s, if I remember right. Something
like that. I mean, regardless, it was longer
than most of us, or most of our age group had
been alive. Yeah, exactly. And my thing, or one
of my things is, you know, you get into office,
you know, you, you know, this is your first term,
you are still connected in a way to your district.
You're still... Connected to the zeitgeist that
you kind of managed to tap into. You're there
for another term. You know, you've been in D
.C. for a while. You've kind of started learning
how to play the game. And maybe you haven't been
to your district as much. But you still go on
the breaks and whatnot that Congress have specifically
for that purpose. Then you get reelected and
it's the third term. And oh my God, where am
I even from? I don't remember now. Yeah. Oh,
this is an issue in my district, apparently?
Well, I can stay 20 minutes and call my office,
so I have no idea. You start to kind of lose
that connection. Again, that pulse on the zeitgeist
of your district. You become out of touch. Yeah,
exactly. You become out of touch. You just kind
of get used to it. You kind of take it for granted,
and you don't put in the effort. You get so used
to what you're doing that you just... You get
complacent. Once you start to get complacent,
you start to not care, not actively care. You
don't really or you no longer consider. Let me
back up. Well, you no longer consider that to
be an important part of your job to get to know
your constituency on a regular basis. You're
just kind of there to do the wheeling and dealing
in Washington, D .C. And I think a lot of these
Washington insiders start to feel that the things
that are going on in D .C. are a lot more important
than what's going on in their district. Not because
they don't care. I think at some level they do.
I don't want to come out and just be like, they
don't care about anything that happened to their
district. I don't want to put that blanket statement
on everybody. Because that's not fair. We're
people. We're flawed. But I'm not going to give
them... I'm not going to sugarcoat... that like
yes there are people in congress right now that
are completely oblivious to the kinds of things
that are affecting everyday americans and they
continue to call for they continue to call for
pushes in congress and from the president i mean
democratic senators and congressmen as well will
try to they're trying to like influence trump
as if they're going to get anywhere with him
especially publicly and and it just it just speaks
to like This goes back to a few weeks ago now
with Chuck Schumer. Just feeling that this old
way of getting things done in Washington is still
the way to do it. We are past that, man. Catch
up. Catch up. The train is leaving. You are on
the last car. You better jump on or we're moving
beyond you because we have to. We have to keep
the train moving. If you're not on, that's not
our fault. And like people were calling for Alexandria
Ocasio -Cortez to run against him. I would say
that at this point, not a bad pitch. No, it's
not. I mean, it's again, it's because Schumer
is out of touch. Pelosi is out of touch. Most
of the Democratic leadership is out of touch.
And, you know, what's the quote? It's the definition
of insanity is doing the same thing and expecting
a different result. We have done the same thing
as a party for so damn long. And look where we
are at. The Republicans have control of all three
major branches of government. And even though
there's a system of checks and balances, those
fucking systems are breaking down right now.
Right. You know? And even when they don't, even
when. There's a sliver of hope and there's a
unanimous decision by the Supreme Court in what
just happened earlier this week. If you've been
paying attention, they basically told the Trump
administration, no, you cannot send this dude
to El Salvador without due process. Even when
this court that has a six to three conservative
majority decides that the Trump administration
is wrong, they're still not doing it. The Trump
administration is just ignoring him. Just ignoring
the court. And it's like, well, okay, so checks
and balances. Hey, Congress, maybe do your job.
Nope, because they've got a very slim majority
in both the House and the Senate. So nothing's
going to happen. So throw the checks and balances
thing out the window. We have got to stop leaning
on that, Chuck. And by a somewhat lesser extension,
Hakeem Jeffries, do... whatever it takes at this
point that's what we as american citizens that's
what we as democrats that was that's what we
as liberals and anybody to the left of us is
saying please dear god pull whatever levers you
have and i think it's interesting a lot of this
pushback that you were seeing against david hogg's
idea you know not all of it comes from the leaders
but a lot I would rather say a sizable majority
of it does. It's coming from Schumer and Pelosi
and Jeffries and whatnot. And I think it's most
definitely in part at least because they're afraid
of losing their own power. Republicans love power.
Democrats also love power. Yes. You know? Yes.
And whenever you have been there for so damn
long, you don't want to give it up. And you don't
want to lose re -election. Exactly. And my thing
is... Because you can be in power and... still
lose an election or not be in office like you
can go be a lobbyist you can you can go work
on the board or be on the board with of a multi
-billion dollar company there are ways but it's
a multifaceted it is and i'm going back to your
little train thing like i think my analogy i
like is you know we are still or have been acting
forever like you know republicans are playing
the same game we are but they're not you know
it's not even that they're playing by a different
set of rules, they've created a whole new fucking
game. We're still over here like, oh, I played
baseball and hit it and run the bases and whatnot.
They're figuring other shit out. They're doing
something that we don't even know what it is.
That's funny. I was also thinking of baseball.
I'm sure that anybody's listening to this. I
would bet that there's a high percentage of you.
We didn't even mention the game, but then he
said baseball and I was like, wow, okay. Is it
because it just has... A ridiculous set of rules.
Well, there you go. We're bringing it back. Do
you think it's just because it has an absurd
amount of rules and not all of them are used
all the time and barely anybody knows what's
going on at any given time and for some reason
it's just all boring as shit but we keep doing
it? I mean, partly. Baseball people out there
are going to hate me for that one. I mean...
that's the thing like schumer and pelosi they
just they don't know what's going on anymore
no they really don't they just care about their
insider trading pelosi well allegedly possibly
very loosely allegedly look representative mike
levin out of california california uh 49th district
he's he's made his whole uh congressional career
off of trying to get congressional stock trading
banned completely and let me tell you they he
is getting his work cut out for him this week
because and during this presidency like when
you have when you have high level economists
straight up saying like i would be shocked if
there isn't anybody in the upper echelons of
our federal government that is not making a pretty
penny off of the fact that these stocks suddenly
jumped and then dove overnight yeah i just i
mean i i like david hobb's idea i think that
we should be challenging the people who are feckless
who don't have a spine who aren't willing to
do what like say senator uh van holland did yeah
like go down to el salvador people We should
be challenging people who won't use their platform
and use their voice that people have voted to
give them. We should challenge them. We should
call them out. And we should make them afraid.
We should make them realize that, oh shit, I
can lose this position. I don't change what I'm
doing and actually do my fucking job. Which is
to listen to the people who voted you in. Even
if you want to sit here and claim that we are
all paid by Soros. Still waiting on that check,
George. Yeah, same. He can Venmo me, if anything.
Yeah. We're going to have to get in touch with
his son, I guess, now. Apparently he does more
of the business side of things now. But that
kind of brings me into it. I'm going to take
a bit of an opposite position here from David
Hogg. I appreciate the urgency and I appreciate
the action and the willingness to just be like,
no, this is what we're going to do. Suck it up
if you don't like it, because we're going to
do it. The one thing that we need to really make
sure that we're watching for is that we're not
unintentionally replacing people who do represent
their district really well, because then we run
the risk of a more moderate Republican. running
in the general election and then winning over
moderates not that's not the fear monger about
like the overton window and oh that's why you
should never run progressives but like this is
why it it's a district by district race house
races are not national races. Sometimes they
can be, especially when it's a really high profile
one. But for the most part, it's a statewide
at most race. Senate races are where it gets
really like more at the national level. And that's
where you get a lot of big money coming in from
outside states and things like that. Here in
North Carolina, we have four Democrats and 10
Republicans in our House delegation. to congress
it used to be seven and seven a lot more even
right now some people would argue you know those
maps were also gerrymandered more in favor of
the democrats especially when you look at that
one that stretches all the way from like winston
-salem down to charlotte um if you take a look
at a map from the 2010s you know what i'm talking
about but so fair understood But that doesn't
mean it's necessarily fair, right? We've got
anywhere between 10 % at the most down to like
a .01 % difference in voting here in the state
when it comes to the split of votes between people.
It's a very purple -ish state. We should not
have a... four ten and that's tentative like
don davis won that race by a hair yeah that's
nc that's nc's first district for all of y 'all
that are listening and um just so you know that
that first district includes 22 counties in the
northeast of north carolina so just imagine that
campaign um for a second the point being that
sometimes you cannot run somebody in that district
that is way less socially conservative than somebody
like Don Davis. Part of the reason he won in
that district is because he's able to relate
to the people that live out there and he represents
them a little bit better, even if he doesn't.
hold the same types of values. 80 % of the time,
85 % of the time, probably even 90 % of the time,
he's going to vote with Democrats. But on bills
where it's a little more socially conservative,
a little bit more on the gun rights advocacy
type thing, he might vote the other way. And
the question we really have to ask ourselves
is do we want to win elections or do we want
to have accurate representation? I would argue
we just need more fair mouths. And I mean, yeah,
no, I think that is a... fair critique i do i
think there is room for kind of both of these
ideas a little bit i think we do need to be careful
of those places where you know if someone gets
out in a more moderate or than a moderate republican
just can't just kind of slide in and we lose
we lose that But we should still, at the same
time, go after people who literally do nothing
for the party, who are not helping to advance
it, who are not helping to stand up and, again,
use that platform, use their position to speak
up against the bullshit going on with the Trump
administration. I think there's room for both
of these things. It's just going to take a little
bit of fine -tuning, to say the least. Yeah,
and it's also going to take using the current
situation that we're in. with the Trump administration,
with the way that the tariffs situation has gone
with the human rights abuses that, you know,
somehow they're like just speed running that
right now. And when you consider that that's
something that you can use as part of an electoral.
campaign as part of the rhetoric then i mean
definitely we should be hinging on that every
single time we should be just hitting him over
the head with it and a lot of people are saying
oh isn't it great that some republicans and some
conservatives are starting to regret their vote
or not even just republicans or conservatives
but moderates and like unaffiliated voters they're
starting to regret their vote a little bit because
they didn't like fully understand or they didn't
think he was actually going to do some of the
stuff that you know he said that he was going
to do. But I urge people to really be cautious
about that because the thing with that is that
if they were willing to vote for Trump, that
doesn't mean they're not willing in the future
to vote for somebody who is a Republican, but
it's just slightly less bad than Trump. This
is, this is going to take a lot more of a push
to make sure that people understand that this
is not just Trump. This is. the platform of the
conservative right wing of america right now
that they are okay with this all of them it's
not just trump it's the administration it's all
the people in congress that are enabling him
it's the courts it is the people that work in
the party structure especially here in the ncgop
they are co -signing pretty much everything he
wants to do and we don't have as much leverage
as the u .s congress does here in our state legislature
to be able to fight that we don't so that's the
fight we have ahead um and you know our races
get contentious here uh not the least of which
is the one that has been going on for six months
now oh dear lord that's right we're bringing
up the riggs v griffin case again folks ding
ding ding ding ding round five let's go oh god
no Again, before we really get into this, I want
to emphasize to everyone listening to this how
absolutely fucking absurd this is that we are
still talking about this in April for a race
that was in November of last year. This is insanity.
And it is just a showing of the GOP's willingness
to throw votes away, steal elections, and strip
you of your voice. And it is absolutely, again,
it's just insanity. And, you know, one of the
voices that they are trying to strip are certain
military people. You know, the people who...
Sign up in Adrian. You can probably speak to
this, obviously, a little bit better than I can.
But, you know, they're trying to strip away the
votes of people who have signed up to serve their
country and this state. Yeah, there's over 1
,600 ballots. Over 1 ,600 ballots of the 65 ,000,
68 ,000 that Jefferson Griffith's team was challenging
belonged to military members, which means that
they... went through the effort of making sure
all of their ducks were in a row, making sure
that they did their civic duty from overseas,
wherever they were serving, and that those got
to where they needed to go on time. And the North
Carolina Supreme Court, which again, is a conservative
majority right now, is just kind of deciding
to toss those. Now, correct me if I'm wrong,
they haven't done it yet, but it is on the table.
Correct. Last I heard. They haven't... actually
thrown anything out yet but the fact that it's
on the table in the first the the fact that it's
on the table in the first place is it's abhorrent
like service members don't have a choice to be
able to come over from you know wherever they're
stationed to just vote locally in north carolina
in any state so to just say oh we should just
throw these out because it's like too much effort
it's it's too much trouble the fact that they're
even considering that is It really is a gateway
to having just kind of what we were talking about
before, that if they set a precedent for this,
you're opening the floodgates for them to throw
out military ballots in any race that they want
to contest simply because it's too much trouble
or it's that they can't get it done within a
certain timeframe. And that's part of the problem,
right, is that military ballots have to be done
very, very by the book, very efficiently. In
the mail, by a certain point in time, I was an
FVAP representative while I was in the service.
I helped people get registered and actually vote
in November of 2018. I know the drill. It's not
easy. I think one of the things that pissed me
off is, and this is no secret, our country treats
its veterans like absolute shit. We don't fund
the VA like it should be. provide the post -service
care that we should. And this is just one more
fucking thing. You know, oh, you served your
country, you, you know, risked your life, or
you have, you put your body on the line, you
got injured, whatever. Maybe you have been, maybe
you've lost a limb, maybe something has happened
to you. Well, you know, I think if your service,
fuck you, we're going to strip away your right
to vote, essentially. And like, The fact that
we have the ability to vote is in and of itself
a huge privilege because they didn't always have
that, right? This wasn't always like, I believe
the first time that veterans were able to vote,
and I may need to go back and edit this. If I'm
wrong, you will hear my voice right now saying
past Adrian was wrong. But I believe the first
time that veterans, or excuse me, that military
service members were able to vote was when Lincoln
was elected during his second term. Now, or for
his second term. Okay, so I wasn't wrong, but
the concept of absentee voting was in its infancy
in 1862. It was the first time that they argued
for it. There were a couple of states that allowed
it to become law, specifically so that soldiers
fighting for the Union could vote while they
were in service, but it wasn't fully expanded
until the 1900s. So there you go. Now we're facing
the possibility that That won't be counted at
all just because it's a contested election. And
I urge anybody who's listening right now to make
sure that when you are about to vote, check your
registration, check it twice, and make sure that
you are in the correct precinct, that you are
voting for the correct ballot, that nothing,
that you don't, please don't move in between.
election election day and like april now because
we we that's the bar now that that is our sliding
scale anytime between here and now um that that
all to say and i'm sorry i i guess what i'm getting
at too is that with these military ballots and
the ability to throw them out we are saying f
you to our veterans um All the while, we have
probably one of the most inept secretaries of
defense that I have ever seen, at least in my
time in the service. But just today, it was revealed
that he may have yet again sent classified information
over Signal. And while that in and of itself
does not mean that he is an inept secretary of
defense, it's just everything surrounding that.
It's all wrapped up into one big bundle of we
don't care about veterans unless they're voting
for us. And even then, just hope and pray we
don't cut the VA. Which, I mean, I've heard it
before. its day before that, it's a possible
target. I mean, I'm sure Doge would love to get
its hands on that. Absolutely love to get its
hands on that. But speaking of Doge, this is
just kind of an aside that I just realized. I
don't think I've heard anything about Elon Musk
in the past few days, especially since Wisconsin.
I think that says a lot. He kind of had a meltdown
on Fox News the other day. They were asking him
how it's going, and he just went silent for like
five full seconds. And while I don't like to
delight in somebody's suffering, this is one
of those times where it's like, you deserve this.
You deserve this feeling. It is schadenfreude.
Like, it is so... just gut -wrenching every time
you see what he wants to do and then you connect
the dots and you're like wait a minute you're
not even doing that he's he's a con man he's
made a living convincing people specifically
rich people that he can actually pull off what
he says he can pull off when he doesn't it doesn't
matter we've all moved on by that point doge
has consistently been found to not actually be
cutting near what they said they were going to
be able to cut what was it like they're they're
he said three trillion three trillion in the
first year and they're they're barely they're
barely hitting 50 billion right now i may be
wrong about that but it's like it's not even
close and the problem might not happen and the
thing is like a good portion of that is cutting
jobs and i've named me the last time that a successful
republican presidency was built off the basis
of cutting jobs where for the last 30 years they've
been saying jobs jobs jobs we we have to hold
their feet to the fire on this and i'm not just
talking about the republican party but i'm i'm
talking about people who should be part of a
union but for some reason vote against that interest
it's like dude your job is your job is not as
safe as you think it is especially with the rise
of ai with automation with the fact that it could
just be cut at a moment's notice, with overseas
people taking your job, with jobs coming back,
and you not having the training or, frankly,
the energy to be able to keep up that job. Like,
let's say Trump is successful, and he's actually
able to bring back manufacturing jobs and all
these other things. You think these guys who
are in their 50s and 60s are going to be able
to be on that factory floor working that job?
Probably not. Well, I can live off my pension.
What pension? What 401k? The one that just took
it. The bath the other day? Yeah, the one that
just... Yeah, exactly. The toaster bath. I don't
know how to move on from that one. So there was
a protest this weekend. I'm just going to hard
pivot. On the 19th of April, there was a 50 -51.
protest in Raleigh. I went to it. It was a lot
of marching, which I haven't marched in a good
long time for a protest, so that was a good refresher
for me. And it also coincided with the 250th
anniversary of the Battle of Lexington and Concord,
which was, I guess, I don't know if they planned
it that way. Some people said that they did.
I think it might have been a happy coincidence.
Who knows? I think part of it was because they
were concerned that on Easter Sunday or the day
after Easter Sunday, Trump was going to try to
execute martial law. Like that was the thing
that was floating around there for a while, that
he might be trying to go like uber fascist. So
maybe this stopped it in a way. Who knows? All
I can tell you is that there were thousands of
people out there. I was a little bit worried
that there weren't going to be as many people
out there as on the 5th. Nope. There were just
as many, if not more, people out there as the
first time. And once again, we had millions of
people all across the states protesting one thing.
Even though the signs would tell you different.
The signs were all over the place. But everybody
was there because... We are back to anti -administration
party, baby. We're going all the way back to
the late 1700s, the early 1800s. You're either
administration, pro -administration, or anti
-administration. What's old is new. What's old
is new. We are rewinding the clock 250 years,
it seems. But it is to promote this unity that
like, hey, they were even saying at the protest.
we've got leftists out here. We've got socialists
out here. We've got communists out here. We've
got moderate Democrats out here. We've got, he
said, we've got anarchists out here. And I heard
like two people way over go. So, I mean, they
do, they do have anarchists out here, I guess.
Yeah, I guess so. But it is that shared, that
shared struggle that, Hey, we might not agree
on everything, even though we're, a lot of us
are on the left. We, still share the struggle
against this authoritarianism against this this
administration and what they're trying to do
i mean and i think it is interesting how we are
at kind of the 250th anniversary like a major
event and whatnot i i have found myself i don't
know if this has been on i don't think this has
been on purpose just kind of subconsciously kind
of Going back here in recent days and looking
at, you know, old stories from the founding of
the country and looking at, you know, things
that people have, that people were talking about
and referencing and whatnot. I think it's interesting
going back to, you know, a bunch of like these
old like quotes and old, you know, the beginnings
of our country, the things that were said and
references that we still see today. There's one
that's been standing out to me here recently,
and it's mainly, I think, because I saw a picture
of this. It's a church in Boston. It's the Old
North Church. And there's a quote from Paul Revere
just being displayed, I guess, from some sort
of projector or whatever. It says, And again,
what's old is new. We are in a dangerous time.
We really are. Yeah. We are in, you know, this
is very much kind of, I don't know if a powder
keg is the right word for it, but a right phrase.
Maybe, maybe it is. I think that's a perfect
description of what we're currently sitting in.
Yeah. We are very much on the precipice of something,
you know, and there is a good chance that if
we don't use our voice, we don't continue to
speak out. If we don't continue to call things
out that we will, we will just, fully go forth
into a tyranny. If we don't hold people accountable,
well then, we did not keep our democracy. Sorry,
Ben. When the president is able to hold people
in an El Salvadoran prison with impunity after
the Supreme Court, the highest court of law in
the land, says that you must bring somebody back,
and then Congress is unwilling to do anything
to stop the president, even when it is illegal.
We are at a crisis. This is not sugarcoating
it. This is what the Founding Fathers were talking
about when they wrote in the Federalist Papers
why it was so important to have a separation
of power. Why it was so important to establish
three separate but co -equal branches of government.
And we have on our hands right now a guy who
was voted into office on a populist platform.
that is currently doing everything in his power
to, A, enrich himself, B, enrich his friends,
and C, completely avoid any consequences, both
legal and societal. Like, we do not have many
options left. If the courts fail, if the police
won't help us, if Congress won't help us, where
do we go from here? And I'm not pulling that
thread anymore. Many people online have already
said how they feel. what the next step is, I
don't even have to say it. If you're listening,
you already know what I'm talking about. I will
say, one thing that is very much worrying me
is, you know, I think we may have mentioned this
in a previous episode, or maybe this was just
a conversation you and I were having, but one
thing that the Republican Party is doing, or
at least, not the Republican Party, but people
in Trump's orbit, people who obviously speak
for the administration, if not in an official
capacity, then at least in a social, cultural,
capacity they're saying stuff they're trying
to lay the groundwork for like a third term which
is again unconstitutional but one thing that
i saw the other day that is actually kind of
fucking chilling is um trump has a counter -terrorism
czar a guy by the name of sebastian gorka who
is about as far right as you can get and it's
absolutely batshit insane right but he kind of
take this back to uh what we were saying a little
bit earlier about uh kilmar prego garcia obviously
what's going on with garcia is fucked up and
it is un -american and unconstitutional everyone
in this country and this isn't me saying this
as a democrat and what i believe should happen
this is literally saying what the fucking constitution
says literally everyone who is in this country
citizen or not in the process of becoming a citizen
whatever everyone who is in these borders has
the right to due process, right? That's just
a fact. That's how it is. Right. Sebastian Gorka,
again, Trump's counterterrorism czar, said the
other day that people who support Gilmar Abrego
Garcia and who say that he deserves due process,
that really anyone who is being illegally, unjustly,
unconstitutionally sent to this fucking concentration
camp, because that's what CCAP fucking is, anyone
who is speaking out against these people, being
sent there, could be charged or should be charged
with aiding and abetting and should be considered
terrorists themselves. So literally, if you are
someone who has a problem with someone like Trump
wiping his ass with the Constitution and messing
with the idea of due process, then you, my friend,
in the eyes of Sebastian Gorka, or a fucking
terrorist. Right. That is terrifying. Because
again, this may not be Trump himself saying it,
but this is a guy who obviously is a mouthpiece
of some kind for the administration. And this
is what I've talked about before. Like, going
after Trump does nothing anymore. Trump at this
point should just be thought of as a figurehead,
rhetorically. Because going after him does nothing.
It actually strengthens his popularity. You take
off... The cogs. Because if the cogs don't work,
the clock doesn't run, right? It's stop attacking
him, start attacking the people who are making
these insane claims and asking for them to be,
A, removed, B, completely ostracized from society.
We do not have room for this kind of rhetoric
where people are able to say, if you believe
a certain thing, just believe. Not even like,
if you act upon something. Just if you believe
whatever the administration doesn't want you
to believe, you are a terrorist. I mean, this
is not to not to fall into the trap of the right,
but this is kind of getting into 1984 territory
where if the party doesn't want you to to speak
on something, you you can be disappeared. You
can be black bagged and sent to El Salvador now.
Like what? Because Trump is on camera. talking
about how we're going after homegrowns next.
And if homegrowns means anybody who was born
in this country, and if terrorist means anybody
who disagrees with the administration, that means
you, that means you, the person listening to
this right now, you are potentially in the crosshairs.
That's not an exaggeration. That's not, that's
not like pulling a thread that isn't there. That's
what they said from their own mouths. And if
you don't think that this is something that's
not possible, I mean, not to rehash things that
I see on blue sky, but read the poem. You know,
the one I'm talking about first, they came for
the, you know, the thing in the word, in the
words of our former president, Joe Biden, you
know, the, you know, the thing we are at that
point where if you're not speaking up for these
people, you are next, maybe not next time. But
down the line, you are. Anybody who's not part
of the in -group will be part of the ex -group.
This is how fascism works. It is a process. It
starts slow and it moves really, really fast
at the end and burns itself out. But there's
a lot of death and destruction in its wake. And
we cannot let it happen at all. We cannot let
this experiment play out because it will be devastation.
And it will be it probably would be the end of
our country as we know it, because it certainly
was for Germany. I think no matter what happens,
we managed to get through this and still have
a country, even if we still have a. democracy
democratic country there will be scars from this
for decades and centuries to come we will be
dealing with these effects on a national level
on a local level and on a global level yeah if
not just from the misinformation you know but
from the policies that they're setting forward
now absolutely that to say we have we do need
to end this on a somewhat lighter note i feel
like we've been very dour the last few episodes
right at the end I don't always want to end it
that way. Let me ask you this. It's just a fun
little thing. How about that? Sure, let's have
some fun. Unless you have something specific.
No. Let me ask you this. Who is your favorite
fictional president? It could be TV, movies,
books, whatever. Fictional president. Yes. You
know what? The guy, the president from Independence
Day. Yes. Cause you know what, what more can
you ask of a president when dealing with aliens?
He's got to get in the jet and blow them up.
Yeah. I was going to say, he's got to get in
that jet, man. He's got to, um, I don't know.
I love, I love kitschy movies too. I really enjoyed
air force one as like a Rambo style, you know,
like this is so, so unrealistic, you know, and
it's, it's, it's really funny when I start enjoying
the parts with like his cabinet. more than the
action scenes where i'm just like oh crap they're
they're trying to like coup him right now basically
they're they're trying to like take power away
from him uh they don't even know if he's if he's
dead or they don't know what happened to him
up on the plane this is actually interesting
and then it cuts right back to the action i'm
just like oh i guess we'll have to resolve that
like 15 minutes from now oh god i was interested
in that why'd you go away i'm not gonna lie i
recently re -watched uh the phantom menace And
they were talking about all the trade stuff.
I'm like, ooh, actually, this is kind of interesting
to listen to. Oh my god, George Lucas was a genius.
Turns out I did want to watch politics in my
Star Wars. I guess so for me, at least. And this
is about to be the most... typical bullshit no
just just say it don't you answer you can't is
bartlett from the west wing i knew you were gonna
say i knew you were gonna say bartlett what did
bartlett do what did he do for the country look
is that necessarily what he did for the country
nah uh so i mean i think for me and i mean i
watched the whole show through god i don't even
know how many times and i remember like watching
it the first couple times we're like oh yeah
i kind of like this guy you know cool you know
you know blah blah but watching it now i'm just
like oh good god if we could only have like a
fraction of that yeah like unfortunately it's
fiction very much so and um what one thing that
i i try to watch the west wing and i don't think
i can get over it's like pre 9 -11 post bill
clinton 90s optimism i don't think i can do it
like it's i need a little bit of cynicism in
my political shows and that that is fair that's
completely fair i will say is very much like
aaron sorkin like just really went in on the
saccharine kind of element of things like it
is like you said very optimistic too optimistic
at times but some Honestly, sometimes, especially
with everything going on, that's just what you
fucking need. No, I'm definitely not knocking
anybody who enjoys it. It's just, for me, I'm
kind of like, I just feel like this would never
happen. That's why your favorite official president
is actually Frank Underwood from House of Cards.
You know, I like Frank Underwood in the way that
I like Andrew Jackson. where he's such he's such
a piece of shit that it's kind of fun to watch
but then you're like oh actually no that's he's
he's like a really bad guy but like i can't look
away it's like a car crash but okay actual real
answer because i i i stalled for myself for a
moment to think about it but my real answer is
um i can't remember his name right now but the
president from designated survivor who's played
by keifer southern tom kirkman kirkman yeah it
was like because he's not a democrat he's not
a republican he's very in its own way it's a
little bit optimistic um spoilers for this the
tv show but he wins re -election against all
odds and like That's about as optimistic as that
show gets. But it's a fun show. You know, he's
basically just a smart -ish guy that slowly learns
how to become sort of ruthless as a president,
but also not too ruthless. Like, he's really
the balance of power. I like that. I like the
way that they displayed that. Like, he's not
perfect. And I think that bringing it down to
earth, but not letting it settle too hard. is
the right amount of realism that I like in a
TV show. But that's a good question. I like that
question to end it off. Yeah, just something
to kind of lighten the mood a little bit there.
Yeah, something for all of you to watch in between.
these episodes of Left of Old North. In the meantime,
if you want to check out our old episodes, we
are on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, looking at a
couple other places to try to get on to, like
Tidal was one that was floated to me, but I don't
know how to get our stuff on there. So, and you
can also check us out on, we're on YouTube and
follow us on Blue Sky, Twitter, Facebook, all
the good places and not so good places. And if
you want to throw us a bone, we have a Patreon.
You can also buy us a coffee and we post these
These episodes, we're trying to do it every week
on Monday. And if you want to listen in, just
make sure to either subscribe or check back in
with us then. But until next time, we'll see
you on the left of Old North.