S7E2: Continuing a Conversation with Ben Hepburn

This is Larry Lessig, and this is the second episode of this special stream inside of season seven of the podcast Another Way Conversation with my high school friend Ben Heburn, who lives in Williamsport, Pennsylvania. Actually, for locals, it's like loyalsoc. And this is a conversation that we're trying to build around the current administration and how we can understand it. And in this episode, you'll hear we talk about a range of questions, including, at the end, the issue of Gaza and the other aspirations this administration has made for expanding the reach of the United States. So this is a fun conversation. I'm going to apologize up front. I got to pay more attention to setting up this discussion in a way that guarantees the quality of the recordings. And so this is the last time we're going to do it in this way. You're going to hear the next one if you continue to listen, be a little bit better structured from that perspective. But I hope you enjoyed the conversation and we're committing to keeping it within the range of an hour. And let's see if we do it. Hey, welcome, Ben. We're in our second episode of our effort at a conversation about where we are in the country and our relationship with our new president. Last time we spoke, it was four days before the inauguration, and now we are weeks after the inauguration. This is February 9th today. How are you feeling?

I'm excited. I'm excited. Obviously, there's a lot of things that are going on, maybe too many things, but there's a lot of things. They're really going after some things. And I look at it, Larry, as a very positive thing. I'm not looking at it negative. I'm not looking at it like, oh, boy, you know, this, the administration before the one before whatever. I'm not looking at it as a negative thing. I'm looking as very positive that they're going and they're looking at some things and saying, why did you do this? I mean, hopefully they give them a chance to explain. And maybe there's a good reason, maybe there isn't. You know, I, I was impressed with, you know, like, Kristi Gnome that she went down and looked at North Carolina and she wasn't bashing the previous administration, but she was saying, I want to learn from the previous administration. And I thought that, you know, really is positive. I thought it was a very positive thing for her to say. And, and I'm looking at it like that, you know, I mean, you know, Larry, you can look at everything and you can. Is it half full or half empty? And I'm definitely looking at it from a positive standpoint as to, I think it's a good thing that some of the things that are going on right now, you know, there's a lot of things that are coming out that are positive, you know, like, for example, you know, President Trump and President Biden, they agree on the, this, this U.S. steel, they didn't want to take over, but now we, it seems to be the company's going to invest in US Steel as opposed to taking it over. And that's, you know, they both wanted that, which is a, it's a good thing. So, you know, that's a positive thing, you know, so. But what I see going on though, Larry, and I don't know if you see it or not, I see an awful lot of negative and I see a lot of people, I have people on my, my, my social media that are like really being nasty. And even anybody that's voted with Trump or likes Trump was just, oh my, it's terrible. And I don't even, you know, I don't get that. I don't understand how you can be so vocal and so vulgar and think that that's going to be a good outcome.

Yeah. So, I mean, I agree that it's kind of exciting, a lot of vigor and action. The big thing I think people from my side wonder about is it's a pretty bold remaking of what our constitutional system's supposed to be, right? When you walk in and you say USAID is a criminal organization, we're going to shut it down, or Department of Education is shut down, which is Elon Musk's declaration a couple days ago. You know, we have a system where laws are passed, they set up agencies. The agencies are given money, they're supposed to spend them. President doesn't have the power at least under the Constitution right now to come in and just change all that. So does it trouble you that we have got this massive grab, power grab by the President of the United States inconsistent with what the Constitution requires?

I don't think it, I don't think it bothers me as much as maybe it some does people. But again, Larry, I'm looking at it from a positive standpoint. And I know, at least from the what I know I'm not, certainly not going to argue, you know, constitutional law with a law professor. That would be ridiculous. But, you know, it seems like this, each branch, you know, controls the other branch. And, and I know that, you know, you can, you can say things and you can do things, but how much of it is actually doable without, you know, this branch or that branch or executive committee, whatever. I mean, all of that is tied together and talk is cheap. I know that they've shut things down. I think that's, again, I think it's a good thing. I also think that they are not going to shut it down and say, hey, we're shutting everything down, whether it's good or bad. I think there's always a possibility. You know, there's always a reason that you say we're going to shut it down, but, oh, we need this program, this is program that we got to keep. So we're going to keep that, but we're going to look at these other ones. And that's kind of what I do here at the Farm. You know, I, you know, I do things well, we're going to, we're going to shut that idea down, but we can't shut it completely down. So from a standpoint of common sense, so to speak, for me, I, I, I'm liking it. I'm liking the positive. Like you said, stirring the pot a little bit. You know, I'm, I'm not a scholars like you are, Larry, where I know all the rules and ins and outs, but it seems like we've, we've hit some nerves with some people and we've got things stirred up a little bit, or he's got things stirred up a little bit and, you know, sometimes maybe he stirs too much.

What I want to make sure I understand is there are two separate questions. One is, are the things that he's doing a good idea or not? So is it a good idea to shut down usaid, is it a good idea to shut down Department of Education? And the second question is, if it's not constitutional the way that he's doing it, does it trouble you that it's not constitutional? Now, again, we're not going to, we could, but we don't have to go into an argument about whether it is or not. I'm just asking if you assume that it's not what the law requires. Does that trouble you?

If I'm assuming that the law, you know, I don't want him to break the law. That's what you're asking? No, I think, I think what he's doing, obviously, like I said, I, I don't, I'm not, I can't get in that argument with you. I just don't know enough about it. But for him to stir what he's doing, I think it's okay Being in education, I don't like the voucher thing that he's doing. You know, I'm not, I'm not on board with the charter and all that. I want the public education system to be revamped and made better. I would really like to see that go. If you have a school that's not doing well, let's make that school do well. Let's get some good leadership in there. I think leadership is the key to everything, and I think that's part of what you and I probably agree on the most. We need better leadership, and that comes from a lot of things like limiting terms and different things like that. So the leadership factor is what really gets me. But I like the fact that the, I mean, I think it's a good time right now. School, school budgets are set, you know, everything's running, you know, fairly copacetic, so to speak, and go in there and maybe revamp it. And I, being in education, there's a lot of things that I know that to me was not necessary or was pointed in one direction versus another direction. What I mean by that is, you know, we cater to education, to high academics instead of hands on or the working class or, you know, the labor class. So I think a lot of that needs to be revamped and looked at because, you know, when you and I went to school, for example, we had shop classes. You know, I was in advanced hydraulic, advanced woodworking. And they've eliminated a lot of those. And what do you do with those kids? I mean, it's just the same thing with what you're talking about immigration. You know, we, we have these people and, you know, we're trying to eliminate them to get them out of the program where maybe we should be saying, okay, we can we use these people and can we make them a good life? And I, you know, so you're looking at it from a standpoint of, you know, what's best. So I'm on board with the education, I see the aid, and you know, you know, USAID is really, there's some questionable things there.

Why do you think that?

Well, I'm not sure that a Sesame street in a third in another country is something that we should be, you know, putting thousands or millions of dollars towards. There was a whole list of things that I saw there, you know, that I just didn't quite understand why we're doing, you know, giving aid for those particular areas. I mean, it's been plastered all over, you know, different, different things. And again, I just, I think that we Should. I think this is where a lot of the people in the United States are coming from when they're saying, make America great again. Let's take that money and invest it in America. And I. And I don't even care if it's, you know, the children's hospitals, you know, the veterans that are coming home that are having problems, you know, that have lost a leg or an arm or limbs or whatever. And you go, we got to take care of these folks. And I think that's where, you know, America's saying, you know, take care of us first. And it's just like, you know, you. And I do that every day. I can give money to charity, but I can't give all my. I got to pay my bills, too. You know, I don't want to be completely broke and go, well, I gave my last thousand bucks to the charity when I don't have money to pay my electric bill or whatever, you know, So, I mean, there's a balance. So that's where I think a lot of those things.

Yeah, we agree there should be a balance. What really troubles me in this debate, though, is it's just filled with so much bullshit. It's just filled with so much misunderstanding. The majority of Americans think America spends 25% of its budget on foreign aid. We spend less than 1% on foreign aid. And the list of things I saw, the same list that the president's spokeswoman put out, all but one of it was just total bullshit. Had nothing to do with. With USAID. I mean, for example, they said $70,000 for production of a DEI musical in Ireland. That's wrong. It was nothing to do with usaid. It was a separate program State Department was always supporting. They said $2.5 million for electric vehicles in Vietnam. Just not true. So there's the long list of things that they put out there that rile people up and lead them to believe this is a disaster for America when, I don't know, when we lost the belief that, you know, what you say has got to have some basis in reality. And, you know, the biggest beneficiary of shutting down USAID is China, number one. Because all of these people who are depending on America, they're not, you know, their needs aren't met. They're just going to turn to the next person that's going to help them, which is going to be China. And so, yeah, I mean, what. But, you know, the bigger point is, I think we should have a debate on it. Sure. Debate informed by the facts. But let's have a debate on it. But the thing that troubles me, and again, maybe this is just my obsessive constitutional law perspective, but troubles me is, wow, we have a person who thinks that he alone gets to decide when the Constitution says Congress gets to pass the laws and you got a majority in Congress, go get Congress to pass the law you want, you just grab the power and run with it. That's a pretty bad precedent because it's not always going to be Donald Trump president. I mean, he might not think that, but, you know, I think he's not always going to be president.

No, I don't think so either.

No.

You know, Larry, has, this has been an ongoing thing, though, hasn't it? I mean, I, correct me if I'm wrong. I mean, this, we've had presidents that do this and they make these decisions and, you know, like you said, why don't we get more input and, and work together. I, I can only agree with you in the fact that I think everything should be discussed. I would like to know the truth. You know, that's, you're exactly right. And you're saying what, what they put out and what they, they throw out there. None of it. Well, you know, it's like my mom said, you can only, you know, you can only believe half of what you see and nothing that you hear. Right. And, and those are the kinds of things that really get me going. I mean, I, I agree with you as far as, what do you do if, if they throw a bunch of stuff out at you and you go, oh, that's terrible, but then you find out that it's not true.

Right.

Then you go, that's, that's terrible. Is there somewhere in between. They always say in, somewhere in between is the truth. And, you know, I don't, I don't know. You know, I guess I, I can agree with what you're saying and why you're upset, but I also can look at like the side of the, let's call it the Democrats where they're, they're already talking impeachment. They're saying we're at war. Is that what you need to be saying in a, in a, in a positive, you know, nation or whatever, and trying to get things you, you know, right away you want to, we're what, two weeks in and somebody's already said impeachment? Right. You know, different things like that.

Yeah. I mean, that's posturing because obviously there's no conviction that's going to happen out of Congress. But again, if you think that he's violating the Constitution. For example, like, you know, we have the Federal Election Commission, which is supposed to be monitoring and upholding federal election law. And it's an, it's an, it's a completely nonpartisan in the sense that there's an equal number of Republicans and Democrats on the commission. And they're supposed to be appointed in a way that guarantees that it's not going to be partisan. It's not really functioned well, but it's there. It's the only enforcement for federal election law we've got. He just fired the chairman of the Federal Election Commission. There's no basis in law for him to fire the chairman of the President. Federal Election Commission. He believes, as president, he has a theory, it's called the unitary executive theory. He has a theory that he gets to do whatever he wants with people working in the executive branch. That's never been upheld by the Supreme Court. To the contrary case called Humphrey. Humphrey's executor said exactly the opposite. But he fired her just like he fired all the inspectors general, the people who make sure that fraud is not happening inside of the government. The ones. And the law expressly said, you can't fire them unless you give Congress 30 days notice. You said, I said, to hell with that. I'm just gonna fire them. So the thing that concerns people, that leads people to talk about you're not living up to the Constitution you swore an oath to, are these actions that are just plainly beyond his power. Now I think what he's doing is teeing up a challenge. He wants, he believes there ought to be this much more powerful president, President who can basically do whatever he wants. That's the way you get stuff done. It's like, make the president the CEO, make him into like Elon Musk in at Twitter and, you know, maybe, maybe we should talk about that. But I'm not sure I, I'm not sure I'm troubled by members of Congress who are trying to, you know, uphold the law and uphold the standard that he ought to be living up to.

So why aren't they saying that, Larry? Why aren't the, the Congress saying that, hey, you can't do that. This is something that by constitutional law, you can't do it. Let's, let's sit down and say, look, President Trump, for example, here, why don't you, why, why, why are you doing this? Why are we not, why don't we have an open line of communication? Why are you not saying, look, this is not the way we do things, right? And why are you not discussing that? And, and instead of whatever they're doing, I've seen some, you know, rallies. I've seen Maxine Waters trying to get in the education. I've seen all that. You know, why aren't you setting down with reporters or whoever you need to sit down with and get that information out to the American public and saying, look, this is what we're doing in a very calm, you know, cool collective way. Because I don't see that coming from really the Democratic Party much. I see it, like I said, Kristi Noem, you know, down there and go, we're not going to bash Biden's fema. We're going to try to make it better. And that's what I see coming out. Again, I know there's, I know there's Republicans that are bashing. Don't get me wrong, I understand that. But I'm trying to sort through the better parts of it and look at it and say, well, this is something that I'd like to hear.

Right? Yeah, I mean, yeah, I guess, you know, it depends what channel, you know, what your feed is. I guess my feed is filled with people trying to say that. But we do live in a time when, you know, we don't. You don't reward calm, easy conversation. That's not what gets you hits. Doesn't. Because it's not viral. Right. What gets you viral hits is like saying outrageous things. So, you know, Elon Musk declaring this is a criminal organization or the, you know, he wants his, he wants his minions to have access to the computer systems for whole of the government so he can monitor the payments because Social Security is just riven with fraud. You know, I mean, he says these things with no basis in fact. He doesn't know what the hell he's talking about. But that's the way you get attention. Right. And, you know, how do you fight that? So what do you think of Musk? What do you think about his, like, role here? Well,

I haven't followed him as much as I probably should. I do, I think he's a leader like most of these guys. The job, the, you know, the Apple and all that. These guys are master for masterful leaders. Right. But the question goes back, did he really do that much with the, you know, the generating of electricity in the car, electric car, or is he smart enough to hire people that are doing right, just like the Jobs guy? And all these people, you know, are they doing the work maybe they did at the beginning to start the company? Or is Is Elon the one that's, you know, calculating how to, you know, when these rockets come and we're not just dropping them in the ocean anymore, we're getting them settled back down. That's amazing. Is he doing it? Is he smart enough to hire the smartest people to do it? And again, you know, that's where the leadership comes in. You know, I know many things is that, you know, leaders, leaders want to lead and they want to be in the limelight. But I, I. The most successful leaders are the leaders that are in the back and they're just, you know, you do this, you do this and organizing everything. And I agree with you in the fact that a lot of the stuff that, you know, he's out there saying, a little bit controversy, obviously, and, and to say those things. And it's just like me saying something about wrestling, right, that one coach does something bad. So it's a corrupt or, you know, it's not in general, you know, when you look at it and you say a large percent of everything is, is good, you know, and I think that's where I'm. I'm coming more from those positions. I mean, the guy's obviously pretty damn smart, right? And. I listen to AOC tell him he's one of the most, most unintelligent millionaires out there. Billionaire billionaires out there. I think. What, What. Why would you say that? You know, then, then I question. If you're saying that, I really question a lot about you as opposed to Elon Musk saying something maybe that's off color. And I, I say, well, you, you were an intelligent man, so you're not saying anything, you know, about, for example, aoc you're not talking about her. You're, you know, just try to spin it in a positive direction. And I think it is, I think that is a positive. Like you said, you, you get more, you do get more reaction when you make the, you know, the ridiculous claims, so to speak. And I get that. And they're, they're all master at it. I mean, I don't care who you, who it is. The little things they throw out there that, you know, make you really think about it and how today's society, we have to be so clear in what we say and, you know, so people interpret it. You know, I have a. The next student, we were at a function, and his son was riding the bike. There's a lot of people there. And he called him over and he said, listen, I don't want you riding your bike. There's Too many people here, right? Ten minutes later, I see him riding, riding a bike again. And his dad whenever, said, I thought I told you not to ride your bike. And he goes, dad, this isn't my bike. You know, so, so when you, you know, it's like, I have to be very clear today that I don't want you riding any bike, right? And I think that's one of the things that I find today very interesting, is that you have to be so clear on what you're saying or someone will pick it apart and go in a tangent and really, well, that's not true, or that's not this. And, you know, even, even, you know, some of the things that Trump says, you know, when you start, including diversity and all that, I, I, I don't have a prejudice bone in my body, I don't think, but I just want the best person there. I don't care if you're black, green, whatever. That way I want the number. If I have a, if I have a pilot that I get on a plane with, you know, I flew out to, I guess it was Oklahoma, and the pilot was there greeting us, and I said to him, I said, how you, how you doing today, sir? And he said, fair to Midland. I turned around and started walking out, and he goes, no, no, no, I'm just kidding. I'm doing good, you know, because I want the best guy in that, in that pilot chair. You know, I don't, I don't care how big or small or anything. I want the best. And I think, like, like if, if Trump says something sometimes and leaves it open to interpretation, it's always interpreted negatively. You know, I watched him, Larry, I don't know if you watched him sign that, that declaration for excluding males out of women's sports. Right? And he had a bunch of girls there. He, he was very well spoken, had the girl that got hit in the face with the volleyball that was severely injured and Riley Gaines and all those, you know, girls, and they were for it. And, you know, he, he just, I thought, did a really good job and, you know, it makes sense to me. And, and for that, I, I applaud him. But the other side is, oh, you're, you're discriminating against, you know, trans women and so on and so forth. And, you know, I just, I think a good leader does things that is the right thing and not always trying to appease everybody. Right. And I think our last administration kind of did that a little bit. They were trying to appease everybody and just instead of Saying no. You know, and it's like you and I both were raised by men that said, no, we're not doing that. You know, it was just. You didn't question it, you just did it. Because dad had the experience, you know, and the wisdom, and, you know, you did it. And when you're, when you have leaders like that, you know, it's good. And today, I think, you know, dads or leaders are. Well, let's look into it. Let me see what I can do about it, you know, and, and so on. And I, I can give you a great example. Teaching. You know, I taught for 36 years. My doctor's appointments were during the summer. They were before school or after school. And it got to the point where when I was, you know, at the end of my career, there was these emails that would come, can someone cover my class? I have a doctor's appointment. Can someone cover. Can someone do this? Can someone do that? You know, and it was okay with the principals, you know, as long as the teacher got coverage. Well, no, it's, it's, it's not okay with me. You're here to do a job. You need to schedule your appointments other times. And, you know, this is your job. We're not, we're not allowing that, but the leadership has allowed it, you know, and instead of saying no, you know, you're, you're, you do your physical during the summer. You know, now, Larry, I realize there's emergencies. You know, you get sick and you, and you can't get in. That. That's not what I'm talking about. But see, right away, someone to jump on the bandwagon goes, oh, so if you get sick during the day, you can't go to the doc? No, that's not what he said. You know, these are appointments that were made six months ahead of time. You know, I got a dentist appointment. If, if someone put down, I, hey, I got a broken tooth and I need to go to the dentist, get it fixed. That's. That's understandable. Right? And. And so on. But that's what we're at right now. Where I think it, you know, some of the things I've seen, you know, President Trump done, I'm really happy about. I do like the fact that there's a lot of people talking about things. I don't like the fact that the negative that has gone on and the name calling and, you know, the, Even some of the rallies and blocking highways, you know, those are the kinds of things that really upset me. That's not the right way to go about doing it.

Yeah, I mean, it's interesting. I mean, you know, when you describe, like, your dad or like the person who's in charge of your family, whether your dad or your mom, who tells you what you need to do and link that to Trump, it's kind of an interesting connection because, again, you know, I wouldn't think we have a kind of government where one guy alone gets to decide what things are supposed to be. And as much as you might like a particular policy, one thing about that policy is it's obviously angering and putting great fear in a large number of people. It's not just that sports policy, but the wide range of changes that basically have been forced into the government by this change of administration is basically saying to a bunch of people, you're no longer can take for granted that we're going to be treating people in this way. And we saw in the last election there's a great political return from ginning up this fury, anger, I don't know. But whether you like it or not, do you like it that one guy alone gets to do it?

No, I don't think, you know, one person should, should be able to do it. You know, I'm not sure I like that particular part of it, but I also know someone has to. So, no, I don't like, I don't like to have all the responsibilities on my shoulders, but I know that somebody has to right here in the house. And sometimes I say, I say no when somebody wants something done. And I'm like, no, we're not doing that. And sometimes I have to explain it. I get it, you know, but sometimes I, I don't. And unfortunately, I don't like that burden either. And I, and I know, Larry, what I, I get what you're saying. Don't get me wrong. You know, I, I think that a lot of people in this country, you know, we had the. He got, you know, the first election he got to. He figured out how to win with the Electoral College. Right. Didn't get the. He didn't get the popular vote. Well, this, this time he did. And I think there's a lot of people out there that are saying, I'm fed up with government, it's too big, and if this is the way we got to change it, then I'm okay with that. Right.

That's what scares me.

Yeah. And I get it. And there's a lot of people like that. And I think, you know, I was just thinking about this, you know, the other day. To myself, four years is a very short time. I'm not sure that four years for a term of a presidency is quite enough. But I'm also looking at, you know, Putin and, and all these other guys that, you know, yacht new and all that, you know, they've been there for how long? You know, and you're like, holy smokes, these guys are, you know, that would be a dictator to me. That would be someone that's there. You know, you're kind of elected for life, so to speak. You know, and who are we going to get in next? And it's also the policies. You know, I had the privilege of teaching for 36 years, but as I think back, I've had a new superintendent, like, every five years, right. And almost like clockwork, they would get in front of you, which at the beginning, no, no, super. You didn't even know the superintendent. You know, he ran the show, right? And then it got to the point where superintendent, you know, really getting out there and, and voicing. But ultimately, the first year, they would say, I'm just going to sit back and evaluate everything. I'm not going to do anything, you know, and that's when you're gone. And then, you know, you get into the second year and he said, well, we're going to make a few changes, not too many, because it's going pretty well or whatever. And then you get into third year and he's like, ah, things are going all right. You know, fourth year, it's getting a little late to change anything now. And next year I'm out of here. Right. So I admire the mentality that Trump is coming in and saying, we need to make some changes. And it's, it is hard to do and it's slow to do. And I get it. And I, I certainly understand. I want some checks and balances, too, Larry. I don't want a dictator. But at the same time, man, I admire the fact when he come in, he was hit the road and he was running.

He was running. And again, I agree. I mean, it's a great precedent to set that, that you come in, you got a bunch of things you're going to do. I just don't like the precedent that you're going to do them, whether it's consistent with the law or not. I mean, you know, for example, there's, there's a bureau, the Consumer Financial Protection bureau cost about $800 million a year. It saved $21 billion for consumers from, like, fraud, fraud of, you know, banks or whatever. It basically shut it down. Like the new head of it has said, we're not going to do any prosecution, we're not going to do any supervision. We're not going to do anything. Now, that's an agency created by law. You know, Congress debated it. They passed a law, the president signed it. My view is if you want to get rid of it, get rid of it through law. Don't get rid of it by basically running around the law and just exercising your power, knowing you're going to get away with it. Because Congress is pathetic. It can't do anything. And the courts take years and years and years. And by the time they decided it, you know, you talk about four years being too, too short. I mean, it's just never. Okay, so this is a good point. Let's, let's move on to another thing I'm just keen to know.

Yeah, let me ask you a question on that, Larry. Yeah. You talked about the law. I get it. So the, the people that came across the border, they broke the law. That's a simple right, hands down. But yet the last administration didn't really seem to do it. We had district attorneys that weren't prosecuting people that were clearly prosecutable. Right. We just had what somebody that had, I believe they said 42 arrest. How do you, how do you not look at that and go, well, that not. Not following the law there is. Okay, but we need to follow law when we're going the other way.

I mean, yeah, I wouldn't say it's okay. I think you break the law, you shouldn't be here or, you know, you should be. We should deal with it. Right. No doubt. The challenge is the administration didn't. Doesn't have resources to prosecute everybody. And when they tried to pass a bill, an immigration bill to increase the resources, that was blocked. So, you know, I don't think there's a policy not to follow the law. It's the policy to do as much as you can given the resources that you're given. But we're not, we're not disagreeing about you ought to be following the law. Everybody ought to. And what gets concerns most concerned concerning to me is like when it's, when it's at the very top. Okay, let's let. I'm interested to know because we didn't talk about this before. So I was kind of surprised that when he came in, he pardoned every one of the J6 rioters. Not, you know, I kind of thought he was going to come in, he was going to say, let's look at them and let's see, the ones that were not violent, maybe we'll pardon them. But the ones who organized are like the proud boys leaders or the people who, you know, actually committed violence against police officers. All of them, doesn't matter. All of them were pardoned. How did, how did that strike you?

I'm probably just like you, Larry. Some of the, it should have been reviewed. I, I get it. I definitely someone that was there and, you know, crawled over a bike rack. Yeah. I don't, I'm not interested in that. And then like you said, if there was actually some violence in this person, we have it on film. Yeah, I, I think in a perfect system, absolutely. I think they, they should have at least whatever situation, you know, warrants, whatever type punishment, whether it was on probation or whether it's, you know, some jail time or whatever. I agree with you on that. I don't think there's any reason to, you know, just stroke the pen to, you know, get rid of a problem. Right. And I, I felt that way with, with, you know, president, by President Biden. When he left, he started partying a lot of people and, and doing that. And I'm thinking, well, certainly there, there's some things that we get right. I mean, if you go back to biblical time, somebody should have pardoned Jesus, right? I mean, you know, he was convicted of a crime, you know, and, and sentenced to death. Somebody should have been smart enough to go, you know, but that's a whole different story, obviously. But I agree with you, you know, this, this across the board, you know, we're going to let everybody go. Well, obviously there was some things that happened that shouldn't have happened. And I, I can agree with you on that. I mean, it's the same thing when I go back to the, to the immigration, you know, it's, it's. You broke the law and everybody's, everybody's out. No people again. You know, is that what you do to human beings? You know, and you know, even so then should you prosecute the guard that shot the woman that was coming in and, you know, she just a mother is there and you use violence on someone, so should that guy be prosecuted? I mean, you know, you have to look at all of that and you

know, it'd be weird to prosecute the police officers, but not the, not the violent rioters, right?

Yeah. Why, why would you not, you know, prosecute one versus the other or, you know, even, even a lot of the. Larry, I, I even a lot of the things with the, the joy George Floyd. I mean, they say he died of fentanyl overdose. Right. And you could see at one point throughout the thing, you could see the actual. Looked like a pill, something in his mouth, you know, but again, it's all, it's all speculation. What's the truth? What isn't the truth?

Well, that, that wasn't what the coroner found, that he died from fentanyl. Found it died from the asphyxiation of the officer's knee on his throat. Right. But, you know, who knows? Obviously you and I haven't, haven't looked at that. But, but okay, I mean, so this is good because, like, we find common ground here. Like, this was, this was too far. I mean, I wouldn't have part pardon any of them, but. And I think Biden was outrageous in like issuing blanket pardons for his whole family. I mean, we've now set a precedent. Basically every president on the way out is going to issue pardons for all his friends. And so talk about accountability or rule of law, like, they get to do whatever the hell they want and then they pardon themselves as they leave.

Yeah, I agree with you. Terrible. Exactly. I mean, you know. Yeah, I just think that was a, like I said, both, both. Everybody, you know, you pardon things and, and you know as well as I do, Larry, sometimes there are circumstances that, wow, you know, this just doesn't seem right or whatever then. I don't. But, you know, to pardon everybody with a blanket swing and, and you know, what if somebody's not guilt and why, why are you pardoning them if they're not guilty of anything, you know? Well, they could be. That's ridiculous. Yeah. So I agree with you that, that part of the. How do you, how do you regulate abuse of power in those positions as well? Right. I mean, it's, it is, it is one of those things that, you know, ethics comes in and, and different things come in. I mean, if you want to, you know, pick on Trump for his ethics, you can also pick on Biden for his ethics and some of the stuff that he said about, you know, racism and, and things, you know, 20 years ago. Well, I get it. Right. But the ethics is what we really need to be, you know, focused on. And, and again, you know, I think it, I do think it starts from the school. I, I'm, you know, teaching ethics and, and courses on ethics that, you know, are being, should be taught. Right.

You know, but wait, you teach courses on ethics too?

I did. I never did. No, no, no, I think I did. I think I Did Larry, in a roundabout way, with. With when I taught agriculture. So, for example, you know, everybody, you know, gets upset about butchering animals. Well, you know, when you do it ethically, that's what we're looking at, you know, and, you know, like, for example, I did butcher in front of students and so on. No cameras. We're going to talk about what this means, what we're doing, you know, and why we're doing it. This is not something, you know, that you want to do. Oh, you know, I've heard different people that have obviously mental problems that would say, I killed a person because I wanted to see them die. Okay, well, now what you're going to see here is you're going to see a living thing and you're going to see. Okay, so you actually see what's going on here, you know, and the kids took a different perspective, you know, like it was a necessary thing. And then I was able to, you know, take the animals and, you know, take the offel and the injured and actually explain the functions of them, you know, so it was always very interesting. And, you know, you would think that a bunch of motorheads, you know, shop guys and all that, and girls would be, you know, gibbering. But when I would do, like, the reproduction part of it and show them the reproduction part of a cow and say, this is the closest thing you're going to see to a human being. And then there was dead silence, you know, and, you know, the people, the kids. And I said, now this is a. You know, this is why, for example, I would pick out something like, this is the fallopian tube. So when you have a tubal pregnancy, you can see why this would have to be aborted, because it would not, you know. And so I said, this is a case where you look at and go, abortion is not necessarily, yes, we're aborting this fetus, but now it's a medical condition. And we need to have that in our books where you say abortion or a medical abortion is certainly legal. That makes sense. And they would be, oh, okay, I get it. So, you know, because most of them are like, you know, pro life, and they say, well, we are against abortion. Yeah, but this is an abortion that is going to explode, that it's going to kill the baby and the mother. So it's a necessary medical abortion. And they. And you can just see that, you know, the gears thinking. So they're the ethics, you know, that's ethics, you know, to me. And. And even, you know, when you're explaining to a bunch of teenage kids how you can get pregnant, you know, and they have, you know, here's the ovaries and here's what happens and, you know, happens on a cycle, you know, and all that. They're very interested in that because nobody's actually showed them that. You know, that's back to. You go back to the Nancy Reagan years where they said, just say no to drugs, but didn't explain why, you know. And so the ethics part of it really came in with a lot of the stuff that I taught, whether it be with that, whether it be even, you know, we raised chickens and eggs and, you know, the whole thing with the reproduction part and so on. So ethics was really important as far as, you know, agriculture and life. So I never taught a class, you know, entitled Ethics, but there should be some things going and it should be done right.

And I think what we know about teaching ethics is that the best way to teach it is as part of another class. And the worst way to teach it is a class called Ethics. Because you don't fold it into your life if you do it like that.

Yeah. And that's what I be honest with you. The first, when. When people started, you know, hearing about my teaching, and so when they started, they said it was life skills. And I always associated life skills with people that, you know, were mentally challenged. And I even had to, after the first couple realize, oh, yeah, life skills, what these kids are learning, you know, to. To do in life, and it's going to help them in life. So then I. I took a very different approach to it. Like, like you said, teaching other things in my class that. That helped students and, and shot them in a direction, hopefully, of, you know, work ethic, morals and moral ethics and different things like that. So that's. I know when you asked me about Elon and, and, you know, shutting down the education, I'm looking at it from that standpoint. So I'm not really looking at it from shutting it down, which I know is what you're asking me. I'm looking at it. What can be the benefit that comes out of this? I'm hoping the positive is that we're going to look at this and, and, and say, you know what? You're right. We need to start hiring teachers that are good teachers and not good students. I want them to be good teachers. Right. And I've always fought with the administration on that. You know, they get 50 applications and I say, how do you even start? And they'll say, well, the guys that have the 4 0. We're going to pick those 10 first. And I think that's a terrible way to do things. I want the guys to, you know, I want the guys that played football, wrestled, play lacrosse, that were in, you know, ffa, collegiate FFA and musicals and band. I want all those people, you know, Larry, I, I'm that kind of guy that once, if I had wrestlers that had to miss practice because of music practice or so, or course, absolutely. Go. That's important too. You know, if I had my Rathers, I would have every one of my kids on that wrestling team playing an instrument, you know, reading a book every week, you know, play an instrument, learn how to play, because that's the kind of dedication you need to be a good, successful person, you know. And, you know, so you, you made, you made jokes about, you know, being a band geek. Oh, man, I, I always push, push the kids into that, do those things, you know, because that's what really makes you a good person.

Okay. I have two other subjects I want to make sure we get a chance to touch on. One, we, we touched upon at least little the first talk, but let's, let's do that second. So the first one is, how do you understand all this stuff about tariffs that's going on right now? I mean, you know, we have this, you know, we have this tariff announced against Mexico and Canada and then 24 hours later it's pulled back and tariff against China, which is not pulled back. And then China launched a tariff against us bigger than the one we launched against them. I mean, you know, what do you understand this about?

I, I listened to Ron Paul. Now he's very much against the tariffs. Right. He was one of the guys that was, I guess he's a Republican. He, he's against the tariffs. But, but he also added, well, you know, we, we put those against Canada and Mexico and it got us talking. And I think one of his comments was made was that, you know, Trump is a businessman, so he's, he's getting him talking and then, and after that, we deal a little bit. And it seems like he's gotten what he wants to a degree from Canada and Mexico. Now the whole China thing is still up in the air. I get it. I understand what Ron Paul was saying. It always falls back on the middle class and so on. But again, is it a tool to get them talking? Is it a tool that's going to be that? Because if you look at, you know, if you look at the map of the United States, we do an awful Lot of dealing with Canada.

Yeah, of course.

I mean, that's where a lot of our trades go. And, and of course, you know, Washington and Portland, I think they, they mainly with China, but other ones, you know, the lower, the lower 58, there's a few that go to Mexico, but China or Canada is an extreme, you know, trade partner with us, which is, which is great. So, yeah, I, I mean, I don't fully understand it. I know you're into the economics part of it and you probably have it. But let me, let me say this. I, I know what the rules are. Right. You know, I can understand what the rules are, but sometimes the rules have to be broken or, or whatever, you know, and it's like, I don't know, the exception to the rule sometimes, you know, it's like I try to tell the kids, wrestle for me, for example. You know, this is the way to do it. Then you have a kid that comes in and doesn't do it that way and he ends up winning a state title and you go, well, I was wrong. Right. And I don't know what your take is on that. I think we've discussed it a little bit.

Yeah, no, I'm with Paul on this. I think it makes absolutely no economic sense at all. It's a tax on middle class people. The last Trump tariffs, they spread, they promote them by saying, well, we created all these jobs with these tariffs and then they calculated the cost of those jobs. It was $800,000 per job created. It's the most expensive job creation program we've ever had. So it makes no economic sense. And then when it happened, I also thought, wow, maybe he did a deal. Maybe it was like, this is the strategy. You scare them and then they do a deal. But if you look at what they actually agree to when with Canada, it's exactly what they had already agreed to with Biden. With Mexico, it was what they had agreed to in Biden. But Trump agreed to something more. Trump agreed to stop guns flowing to Mexico. So this was a whole big brouhaha and we went back to where we were, except that we got more. We have to give more to Mexico than I had to give before. So I just don't get it. I just feels like, again, it feels like it's a way to get ratings as opposed to a way to govern. Like, how do you get attention to make sure you're watching me, as opposed to what are we going to do to make the economy work here? But then that transitions to the last issue, which we did Talk about this a little bit. Like last time I said, when you were thinking about whether to vote for Donald Trump or not, were you thinking about invading Greenland or Panama? And we both kind of laughed about that because obviously that was not much of the campaign. Now is, in addition to the continued threats against Canada, for example, the president saying that they will continue the tariffs until Canada is the 51st state. Now there's this talk about Gaza. We're going to occupy Gaza, we're going to own Gaza and we're going to clean out the Palestinians and we're going to tear it down and build a Riviera in there. It's a real estate project. Now, you can't hear that and think this sense makes. Make sense, right? I mean, you're not, you're not attracted to that idea?

No, I, I'm not. And, and yet it's the businessman that I would look at coming out in him. You know, I, let me, let me just back a minute. I would say it's like all the people. I was kidding. A guy, a friend of mine the other day went to a meeting and his wife had put on. He's the, you know, happy birthday, Chris. You're the best husband, best this, best that, you know, everything. And of course, I walked in and I said, happy birthday, Chris. I understand you're the, you're the best of everything, you know, and making light of it, obviously. And that's what we do, you know, And I think this is one of the things that, that m, that President Trump did. He, he looked at it as a business deal. Do I want the United States in that? No, absolutely not. But then I also have listened to some people that think, well, you know, for 100 years we've been dealing with, dealing with this stuff. What, it's a, what's a new radical idea and if some people over there don't like it, maybe then you'll take care of it and stop, you know, making the mess of it, for lack of better word, you know, bombing the crap out of. Obviously, it's, it's, it's kind of like Hirozima, right? When we dropped that atomic bomb. And you look at that city now, it's just a, it's a beautiful, beautiful city, right? And you know, there's always that joke with somebody on a drop a bomb on in another city like Detroit, you know, that's just burnout or some of these places, so that we would invest and do that. So, no, I'm not, you know, I don't want to have anything to do with that as a person. I mean, if there's businessmen that want to do that, that's great. They're beyond my, you know, pay grade or whatever.

But as an American, I mean, I mean, you know, if you look at the, like you look at the rest of the world, just imagine what the rest of the world now looks at us like. We've had a guy who says he's going to invade Greenland, he's going to occupy, he's going to take over Canada, he's going to take over the chunk of land in the Middle east and displace 2 million Palestinians. When do we unite and we should be able to agree that this is just not on. We are not that nation. We are not a nation that's going to go occupy and take over and wage war against other people and in order to steal land. That's. That's Putin. That's what Putin did in Ukraine. Right? And now, now we're talking about the same thing. It's just kind of crazy, isn't.

Is kind of crazy. I agree with you. It is kind of crazy. And like you, like we said right from the start, Larry, it's about America first and trying to get this taken care of. And I, and I totally agree. I mean, but I've also heard people say, what. So what do you do? Do you put your armed forces around, you know, each one of the coasts and say, hey, we're going to take care of our own. We're not going to worry about what else is going on out there. We're going to spend all of our resources right here. And I get that. I, you know, I might be in a younger state, might say, yeah, that's a good idea. Let's just block ourselves off from the rest of the world. But, you know, do that from the standpoint of, you know, getting the things that we need or enjoy or whatever. And I think a lot of it's talk. I think it is a lot of bait and switch. I think it is a lot of, well, it's like a possibility. You know, I think he does talk about possibilities more than probabilities, if that makes any sense. You know, this is a possibility for us to go in there and look, it's already rubble. You're going to clean it up, make a, Make a place out of it or resort, whatever. But. And then, you know, and then once you start to think about it, you go, well, maybe it's not such a bad idea.

I don't think it's. I've Never had that thought. Maybe it's not a bad idea. I mean, it's a way to make us the pariah of the world.

Yeah, I don't think it's about. I don't think it's for the United States. I'm saying maybe it's not idea. You guys that have a lot of money and you want to invest, maybe that's not a bad idea. Maybe, you know, you know, go over and do that, maybe that's not a bad idea. But I, I'm, you know, that's beyond. Beyond me. I, again, I think it's more about the attention. You know, there's always those people, Larry, that, you know, it's always about the attention of what I did. And I think President Trump is definitely one of those guys. Whether it's. Whether it's right or wrong or whether it's good or bad, that's who he is, and the country elected him for who he was. So, like, you had to accept. You have to accept Trump. I had to accept Biden or I had to accept, you know, other people. You know, that's what we need to do, but we need to learn to accept it. And I. And that's what really bothers me more than anything, Larry, when I'm looking at. And I'm sure you, you maybe don't see it as much as I do, or maybe I see it more, is why the Democrats seem to be so unhinged about some of this stuff and can't let it go. Like, if you, if you're really upset about Gaza and you think that that's a possibility. I don't, you know, can you let that go? Is that something that you're, like, it's just him talking, or do you find it really offensive to yourself and think that's ridiculous?

Well, it's just him talking. He's the President of the United States talking. Right. And so if you're a Palestinian and all of a sudden the President of the United States is talking about, like, moving you out and bulldozing your country, I think you're okay to be upset about that. And maybe this is like an interesting point. We can think about this difference between us about this. I think in a democracy, what happens is the president says, I want to do this. And the people who agree with it say, that's great. And the people who disagree with say, that's not great. We should not be doing that. That's what the system is. You've got a Congress, you've got a president, you're Supposed to be working stuff out, and it's not Dear leader and huzzah, of course, that what you're saying is great, and we're not going to. To criticize you. And he's doing a lot of stuff, so he's going to get a lot of criticism for it. And, you know, I think there's no, there's no way around that.

Right. I do, too. I just think that. Well, like I said, you know, people get very upset. And I, I heard it for what it was worth. I heard it for what it was worth. You know, I'm not thinking that, you know, we're going to do that, that the USA is going to do that. This is just an idea running off. You know, if I can share with you. I had. My family was home at Christmas time, and we were talking about, you know, maybe buying a business, you know, 1.2 million dollar business. We were talking about it. And if you would have came in on that conversation, you would have looked at me. You said, are you freaking nuts? What is wrong with you? You know, you're. You're 63, four years old, you're retired. Why would you want to do that? You know, the whole nine yards. But it's just talk, right? And, and, you know, but the kids are young and they're looking. You know, we want to have generational wealth and different things that, you know, okay, those are just ideas we're throwing out there. So it, you know, like I said, I think it is a lot of ideas. I think it is a lot of whatever you want to call it, you know, attention seeking. But I think that's. Across the country right now that everybody's, you know, seeking attention for some reason. Is it?

Yeah. It's not good, is it?

No, it isn't. And I don't care whether it's a young kid, whether it's, you know, Larry, how can. And, you know, these issues that we have. Right, right now, let's just, let's. Let's call it transgender issues. Where were these 10 years ago? You know, were they there? Maybe they were, but nobody was even talking about them. You know, and now we're so. Every other, you know, word of transitioning and, and kids and all things that have.

How.

Why would it. Why would it come to that? Right? Why would it come to the fact that you have to sign a proclamation that doesn't allow kids to be castrated at a young age?

Yeah, well, I mean, the answer. There's an answer to that question. The answer is that we've Got this infrastructure, social media, where you get paid, the more you get people to pay attention to you, like, the influencers, the influencer economy, like. And that's just not the way it was when we were growing up. The news wasn't trying to divide us and make us hate each other. Didn't pay. They just wanted to tell us the story. Right now. It's like, the more you can make people hate each other, the more attention you're going to get. That's a pretty fundamental problem.

So if I were to ask you, if I look at this administration coming in and saying, I'm just trying to find the positive, is that a good thing? Or am I. Or am I putting my head in the sand and going, he's just looking at the positive, and the negative, he's not so much worried about. I mean, I know there's negative, don't get me wrong, but I'm looking more as the positive. Is this. These things are positive. Is there negative stuff with it? Absolutely.

Well, I think we actually, I think. I think it's appropriate to say to me, I ought to be looking for the positive because, like, my presumption is it's negative. And I think it's appropriate to say to you, you should be looking for the negative because your presumption is it's going to be positive. Like, you know, let's play against our biases, not let's embrace them. Right, right.

Well, you know, and. And I think. And I. And I agree, you know, with you 100%, but you also have to make that line in the sand. Is it. Is the glass half full or half empty? And, you know, there's no difference between it. Right. There is absolutely no difference between a glass that's half empty and half full. It's just how you perceive things. And I think that's one of the things that I try to do and perceive things in a very positive way. It's. It's kind of helped me through my life, and I think, you know, more people need to do that. But when I think people are focusing on that negative and that's it, it grows to the point where it's more than half empty or half full. Right. And we're not. We're not really happy about the things that we do have. And that's my opinion. I don't know. I can see it. I can see the turmoil, you know, but does anybody else.

Yeah.

You know.

Okay, this has been fun. We'll continue the conversation. Ben, thanks very much. All right.

Hey, thank you.

This is Larry Lustig. That was our second episode of the Conversation with Ben Hepburn about about where we are and his commitment. I think he committed, I hope he committed to recognizing his natural ability to see the positive and looking a little bit more for the negative and my commitment. This is going to be hard to look for the positive recognizing. I start with the negative. We'll see how this progresses and in a couple weeks come back to this conversation. Conversation these episodes are produced by Josh Elstrow. He's the one has to struggle with quality issues and I'm going to make his life easier by changing a bit the infrastructure of these recordings. Josh Elstro of Elstro Productions. They are hosted by Equal Citizens. You can find us on the web at Equal Citizens Us and there you can give us feedback and ideas for this conversation. And I will also be posting links to things I've said that might need some support so that you can look up what I've said. And if you have questions about whether what I've said is true, you can evaluate that in light of what I link to. Thanks for listening. Stay tuned for the next episode, which will both be within this stream, but also will be including episodes about the ongoing struggle for ending the corruption of money in politics. Stay tuned for those episodes too. Thanks for listening.

Sa.