A Burden For The Times
A Burden For The Times
Navigating Trump's Legacy: Between Character and Policy Part 1
A figure who has left an indelible mark on our current cultural and political landscape: Donald Trump. We tackle the formidable task of objectively dissecting his controversial influence, mindful of the current legal trials surrounding him, and the complexities they introduce into his enduring legacy.
Our conversation delves into the ripple effects of policies enacted during Trump's tenure, from the First Step Act's strides in criminal justice reform to the economic shifts for the self-employed due to changes in the Affordable Care Act. The thorny issue of immigration policy under Trump is examined with a critical eye, considering both the 'America first' stance and its impact on Dreamers and humane policy approaches. We don't shy away from discussing Trump's significant Supreme Court appointments and the ever-evolving challenge of immigration law reform, highlighting the nuanced debate that goes beyond any single administration's policies.
Concluding our episode, we walk through presidential history, discussing the moral and leadership standards that have both evolved and regressed, and how these influence our perspective on figures like Donald Trump. This discourse on the intricate balance of personal morality, public perception, and effective leadership promises to provoke thought and introspection long after the conversation ends.
Thanks for Listening! Follow us on Facebook and Instagram!
Hey and welcome to another episode of the podcast. You have probably already seen the title of this podcast and it's probably going to go a number of directions. Typically, we stay pretty neutral on different political fronts, but for a personality as large as Mr Donald Trump, we need an episode just to talk about the man and really his effect upon our culture currently. Well, usually what we do before every podcast, we ask a light question before we jump into the heavy stuff, but today we're doing something different in the sense of want to bring honor. We have different people, groups that listen to our podcast, and there is a community that is law enforcement community that listens to the podcast.
Speaker 1:Well, on the date of our recording, a tragedy has recently taken place in the Charlotte area. In fact, it's a tragedy that really hits close to home, since Anton you've heard in the past has worked in the law enforcement community and, as he has, he's really had some brother in arms that have fallen doing their service, and so we just want to take a little bit of time in the podcast. Even though it's not something that's light, I do believe it is something that would bring honor to those ones who have given their lives in the law enforcement community. So, anton, can you give us as much detail as you feel comfortable with, and even how this personally affects you as we begin this episode?
Speaker 2:and even how this personally affects you as we begin this episode. Yeah, so here in Charlotte we just had a shooting on law enforcement while they were trying to deliver a warrant. Several law enforcement officers were killed, some of them friends of mine, some of them colleagues, some are people I don't know, but obviously, anytime a brother in arms is hurt, it always is a painful time. So, um, uh just to I know some people who do listen to our podcast and I know actually one few who passed away did also um, that we care about the families during our prayers. Um to CMPD, uh, charlotte Mecklenburg police department they also lost an officer. To the federal marshals who lost people. You know, they are in our prayers and hopefully within the next several days we can say goodbye in a more permanent way. But yeah, that's really all I can say.
Speaker 1:Um, yeah, and so, like I said, typically you know news events and different things was something that for a former listener for it's just so many different ways this affects and we're me and Aaron are learning about this news very recently Anton's had a little bit more time to process and even heavier for him to process, since again being close to some of the individuals that were involved and so, even though it's not typical, we're not really concerned about what the optics may look like. I just want to have a quick word of prayer here before we begin our podcast episode and just, really just have a time of just praying for those families that have had such tragedy. Father in heaven, lord, we come to you. We're grateful, lord, for that. You are, adonai, deserving of all honor. Lord, all glory, just that, by your name, lord, we come and we bow down. And, lord, we know that we live in a sin-cursed world and so, with this, that there's tragedy that strikes in such ways, why do you pray, lord, for the families that have been affected in this way? And, lord, unimaginable pain, lord, the phone call, lord, that everyone dreads to get, and we do pray, lord, for your grace. Lord, we pray for your kingdom to come. Lord, this makes us long, that this is not our home. We are just passing through. But, lord, these painful reminders, lord, I pray that you would just really just give Lord just supernatural grace and pointing people to the gospel. That will then heal, lord, those spiritual, eternal wounds. Lord, we pray, lord, for the police department that's involved. We also do pray, lord, for the people that were even doing the shooting. Lord, they need Lord salvation grace. Lord, we do pray for swift justice, lord, we pray, lord, that sin will be, lord, definitely handled. But we do pray, lord, for that you would just provide a way, lord, that this person as well, lord, could be able to come to the knowledge of the saving grace of the Lord Jesus Christ. Lord, as we lift all these different things to you, lord, there's things that we don't even think to pray about, that we should be praying about. Lord, I pray you fill in those blanks. Comfort, lord, those families and friends. Lord, as the time comes in, just a little bit to Lord, lay these men to rest. Lord, I pray that it will be a time of Lord, absolute honor. And, lord, I pray the families will be given the due respect and, lord, just the love they deserve. We do thank you, lord, for our country, lord, for those who are willing to lay down their lives in the law enforcement community and are willing to lay down their lives in the law enforcement community. We thank you for everything you've done and will do, in Jesus name, amen.
Speaker 1:As we open this podcast up, obviously coming with heavy hearts, but we do want to shift, I guess, shift gears as we look at to probably one of the most controversial characters of our current time.
Speaker 1:When we go through a podcast episodes, typically we try to make sure to be as objective as possible, and I tell you, in the research of this topic, it has been difficult, because the sides are so very strange and the gap is so inevitably large that it's really hard to even read content to be able that does not present a biased view.
Speaker 1:And so we decided to take on the enormous challenge of going ahead and still doing a podcast episode on a polarizing figure like Donald Trump. If you're listening, however long it is into the future, then you will. Right now he is in trial and going through all these different depositions and things in court, and so this is the season that we are in right now, as we are recording, and so, as an introduction to this question started with you, aaron. I know there's always this tendency to dramatize what's happening in our current situation, Like the situation that we're going through right now is the worst ever, or whatever it is. With that in mind, can you, though, honestly and objectively think of a more polarizing person in our lifetime than Mr Donald Trump?
Speaker 3:I mean as far as like presidency, no just person Anybody, movie, star, anybody.
Speaker 1:That's that polarizing.
Speaker 3:No, not right. I mean, the only reason oj simpson comes to mind is just because we just went through his uh, walk through his passing, but outside of that, I mean he's probably not even that controversial, but just popped my mind.
Speaker 1:Um, not that I can think of, just to be honest okay, I I was going through in my mind, anton, I'm sure you've given this thought of who exactly? Is there any more more polarizing than Mr Trump?
Speaker 2:See, I'm going to take the opposite side, which I always do. I actually think most presidents outside of, like Bill Clinton and maybe Joe Biden in our lifetime, are equally polarizing. I think, again, it is a prisoner of the moment kind of mentality, even like, if you want to talk about non-presidents, I would say someone like on the Internet, like an Andrew Tate or a figure of that nature, I think, like really George Bush, no one like George Bush, like it was a running joke, like who doesn't think like it. And I would say something about Obama. It's like he was wearing a tan suit and everybody hated his guts. It's just, I don't know that this is, again, unique. I think it's unique in the fact that he's not a politician. I think that's what makes it different, because he says things that are even more out of line with what we consider the status quo. But I think there's been a lot of polarizing politicians.
Speaker 1:I was ready for you to take the opposite opinion, because I do believe this is a slam dunk. There is nobody in our lifetime more polarizing than Donald Trump. Your kids know Donald Trump. They don't know Andrew Tate. Aaron, does Shiland know Andrew Tate?
Speaker 3:No, because I'm not sure I know Andrew Tate Okay.
Speaker 1:I'm just pointing out. I'm just pointing out, like you look at, yes, there's different if you go to different subset cultures, there are people that are, like you know, very popular. I would even like like LeBron James. He, he would be greater than basketball. Right, people know him, even that don't know basketball, but they don't really know the up and comers. They don't know Anthony Edwards of the world, they don't. They Steph Curry's maybe, but, like I'm saying is, it's like when you transcend even your area of like politics, I think the only close second place would be Barack Obama.
Speaker 1:And because of the fact that he was a black, the first black president, how can you not be in some way a polarizing figure? But I mean, ok, if you were to reverse it back a generation. Maybe martha the king, but he died at what he was killed in 68, so I mean not even close to our lifetime. So I'm thinking like I don't know anton, what do you? What say, ye, about the fact that this man is known by the children of our society and not just just politicians and pundits?
Speaker 2:But again, I think that's unique because, as I said, he came from a world of business first. But I don't think that's what I'm saying. You didn't even bring up George Bush. I don't think that's unique. That's most presidents, that's just the way presidents are.
Speaker 2:That's why you conceded on Obama. The only one who can really not is joe biden. I would say, if hillary clinton, I put her in the same category. That's like if I say the name hillary clinton, half the people are going to tell me that she's going to break a glass ceiling. It's the best thing ever. The other half is going to say she needs to be in prison, like that's.
Speaker 1:That's the nature of high level politics, all right, so so I don't know, I still see the high nature politics. I am a prisoner in the moment, and so therefore, I will then acknowledge that I am not sure if there's anybody more polarizing, but hey look, we might find it after this election cycle and then there's one where we can, like, start over as a country, that we might find there's somebody who's even close. But we're going to try to be objective as we move through this. But let's go, and first off, we're going to speak to his political career and, with that being said, policies that Trump implemented back when he was elected in 2016,. There is some type of things that he already put in place, and so we want to talk about some of those policies that he did very well.
Speaker 1:I know, sometimes this might seem like we're just going to be like a. You know this is going to be a punching match and Donald Trump is the one who's going to be the person that we're going to be the punching bag toward, but I do want to honor the things that he's done. Well. Now, anton's probably the most objective and probably the most political out of all his brothers, and so, anton, I think about the wall, I think about usually. People usually say Trump did well the economy and different things, so policies that you notice from your perspective at least I know other presidents are going to be. Well, I put it in place and then he took the credit for it. I understand that but, as much as we can tell, can you name any policies that he implemented that were very much of a help to our country?
Speaker 2:I think there's a lot of them, so I'm not going to sit here and try to belabor the point. But I would say I do think repealing part of the Affordable Care Act, especially the part of the mandated, everyone having to be mandated to have health care.
Speaker 3:Okay, I can agree.
Speaker 2:I think that was incredibly helpful to a lot of people in the United States. I think that the renegotiations of NAFTA was incredibly, or the North American Free Trade Agreement, I think was incredibly helpful to our global power and global economy, as well as foreign policy, I think that taking us out of the Paris climate accords because I think, again, the overall climate change mandates were really hurting our economy I think it's one of the reasons our economy grew so much. I think some of the decisions he made during COVID financially helped us a lot to avoid it being a lot worse than it could have. I think the First Step Act when it comes to criminal justice reform was the most meaningful criminal justice reform we may have ever had passed.
Speaker 2:I think that let me go border wall. I know that's going to be controversial, but building any part of the border wall which had not really been done. Again, people make fun of him for saying it over and over again and the weird let's just call them Trump isms that he used to surround it. I think he did actually do a lot more than most presidents have done for immigration policy as well. So I mean those are a few items, okay.
Speaker 1:Now, only one I'll push back on is the immigration policy portion of it as well. Now, let me first do with the agreeable ones. I am a beneficiary of the fact of the appeal of the Affordable Care Act and different things, that being penalized being penalized, you know, for these insurance things, especially as a self-employed guy. And when that was lifted, I mean that was like a personally, like the dude came in office and this was immediately something that I began to notice. So I was understanding.
Speaker 1:I thought you were going to say something about Russia. I'm not sure if that would be on there as far as his stance, I mean his position with Putin, but again, that stuff is above my pay grade. I just know that there wasn't a war when he was in office, but again, it's above my pay grade and I'm not going to pretend that I understand all that was taking place in that. So, aaron, any of you want to highlight any type of policies that you're kind of like? Let me double up on that before I kind of ask Anton a little bit more about one of the policies that I kind of thought was a little bit I wasn't sure about.
Speaker 3:I do not. I'm going to go ahead and claim my ignorance to this topic and say that I'm just going to call it what it is, no excuses. I should be more politically leaning and understand some of these things, but this is not how I have this. This is not how I was geared, and so I'm going to opt out, other than just listening and learning see, can I say something?
Speaker 2:because I thought you guys were gonna say before you push back, okay, I I would also dislike you, because at first, when we talk about foreign policy, russia is a big factor. I think the way he renegotiated some deals with china I think was excellent as far as foreign policy, but also I thought someone else was going to say it so I didn't say it. I think his Supreme Court justice choice were excellent. There's just absolutely no way you can get around the fact that the people that Donald Trump put on the Supreme Court are some of the best jurists that have been, in my opinion, in quite some time. I would have to go back to someone like Scalia from someone else that I would actually concur is as good as a Brett Kavanaugh per se.
Speaker 1:Interesting. Yeah, I hadn't even got into those yet. As I was looking at the policies though, the immigration policy, obviously, you had all these people in airports sitting around the country. There's a freeze on different passports, the extent of that. Obviously, he put an American first policy I mean, there's no doubt about that and, as you do, though, obviously there's the alienation of those that basically are not from this place. Then you had those that were in the middle of it, like the dreamers, and different things about what would their role be now that their parents are gone. It seemed that the immigration was very beneficial to policies in America, but it did seem in some ways, though it wasn't as thought through. Now, are you saying that these were good policies in light of hey, if you're talking America first, awesome, and if you're talking about humane first, then maybe not so awesome. Am I looking at it too naively, but can you speak to that?
Speaker 2:I think that you are, to a certain degree, okay. That's fine, because I believe that there are policies that you don't like that are necessary. A starving man can't break into your house and steal your food it's still a crime. So I think that there is. It's hard to walk this fine line because he inherited a lot of immigration problems from his predecessor and there's no way to avoid that. And, again, I'm not an Obama hater either, but he did inherit some immigration policy issues. So exactly what are you supposed to do if there's, let's say, 10 to 20 million people unaccounted for who commit a crime? What are you actually supposed to do about that? I think, again, it's almost an impossible situation. Sending them back is irrelevant, because they can just come back. Arresting them? Under what pretense? Immigration law is so complicated? Because America really needs comprehensive immigration reform, the same way that needs comprehensive criminal justice reform that you're asking him to solve an almost impossible problem.
Speaker 1:Okay. And again immigration needs its own space, its own airtime. It is very complicated and things that go into that the COVID negotiations and stuff that were made during his time obviously it was made during a tense time, handoff time that took place and so, with that being said, you felt that was one of the positives of his time in office.
Speaker 2:Yes, I guess it depends on what you mean by positives. I think it is a better outcome than I think any other politician who was running for president would have given me, and that's the only thing I can really compare it to. Not optimal in my view, but I'm not president Understood.
Speaker 1:Well, I do think that. Okay, I just want to go through a couple of policies and just we're not going to spend the entire time here, but really nailed down Supreme Supreme Court justices. I think it's not arguable unless you're not coming from a biblical worldview. I don't really think that you're going to be like you might have somebody else, that your cousin's brother, who is better, maybe, but at the end of the day, I don't think that these things are definitely there's really no going back and forth about which is huge for the future of our nation, wouldn't you agree?
Speaker 2:Oh yes, to me it's again. A lot of people were saying that before he got elected, that was a good reason to be in office. I think a lot of people, including myself, were skeptical of the picks he'd have, and I'm pleasantly surprised.
Speaker 1:Gotcha, all right. So now, again, baseline understood of the positives that that Mr Trump has definitely brought to the nation. Now I'm going to say some statements and, aaron, I want you to respond first. Ok, because undeniably, donald Trump has brought much to the table as it pertains to a America first type situation.
Speaker 1:Undoubtedly, the economy was doing better, which that's usually what it boils down to, because people want to have a good life, and when they say good life, they think to themselves having extra money in their pocket. Kids are going to school. That is truly what we equate in the American culture, and so, right, wrong, bad ugly. That's just how it goes. And when you are able to help me be able to perform what my dreams are, then you're a good guy. Right, you make it. So his name is obviously understood, that he did those beneficial things. However, there's no way to separate the reputation that Mr Donald Trump has and so many things could be said that Mr Donald Trump has, and so many things could be said. I think anybody listening to this podcast has any type of just newsworthiness knowledge can be able to understand he's not a very good man. So, aaron, do you really need to like someone for them to perform well at their job. Is it necessary for you to like the man, as long as he does his job well?
Speaker 3:I don't think there's a necessary to like them. No, I mean, I know lots of. I mean pretty much. If you look through history, most leaders uh, in some way are unlikable. I mean, if you go back to abraham, abraham is likable to us, but if you're, uh, ishmael, he's a very unlikable guy who sends you and your mom off with just bread and water when he's one of the richest people in the world. So, yeah, I would say you don't have to like them for them to be a good leader. Effective Let me back up Be an effective leader.
Speaker 1:Okay, that's where I wanted to go, because to be effective, do they need to necessarily need to like them? And that's a great example, I think, of other leaders who are very abrasive. In fact, I go to the New Testament and I look at. You know, again, I'm always going to take a biblical lens at it and, as I do, I'm looking at.
Speaker 1:Paul, I'm not sure if he was a very likable person. You know what I mean. Like, obviously he persecuted the church, obviously, but before that, after he persecuted the church and he got saved, he was a very strong personality. We can agree there. Now, with that being said, paul Barnabas hey, barnabas, you disagree. I can find another man. And he did, and he went and traveled with somebody else. What I'm saying is he was a very strong character. Like I said, he was very effective but strong personality. Anton, do you see this differently? Do you really need to like someone?
Speaker 1:if they're going to be effective at their job.
Speaker 2:No, not at all. Again, we don't even have to belabor this point, okay.
Speaker 1:No reason I'm going somewhere. I'm going somewhere because I'm trying to give this man as much credit as I possibly can. Okay, okay, all right, okay, okay. So, with that being said, so, with that being said, you will all concur you don't need to like them for them to be able to do their job. I think we would all agree that that's the case, because there's been many unlikable characters, as you've gone through history, that have done their jobs well. So let's take that a step further Now.
Speaker 1:Let's start getting into the character, then portion of it. Usually, especially as it pertains to the Stormy Daniels situation, the affairs, the womanizing I mean, how many counts is he being charged with currently for sexual harassment and sexual charges, I mean. So obviously, the man has a checkered past as it relates to women. He has an extremely checkered past as it relates to the handling of finances and tax evasion, and let's not get started on January the 6th, okay, so the man has quite a past, right? So I have heard this statement. Aaron, tell me how the statement lays with you, okay? Well, aaron, we need a leader. We don't need a pastor, we need a leader. We don't need a pastor, we need a leader. Just that statement again you don't need to like the guy for him to be effective at his job, but I'm just wondering how does that statement set with you?
Speaker 3:um, I would disagree with it because I believe that part of being a leader does require some, uh, semblance of character. But this is when I know I don't think Anton's gonna disagree with this part, but I think I know where Anton's going to be going for some of it. Well, I think I know. So I'm going to say no, we don't need a. I'm saying I believe part of leadership whether the leadership mantra that our current culture speaks, I do believe it requires competence and character and he obviously, from what you guys have said and from what we've talked about, there's some competence, but I think the other part is character and so I would struggle with that part.
Speaker 1:Okay, anton, I'm going to swing to you because I do have commentary upon this, but I don't want to reiterate what Aaron has already said, and I have a nuanced view of even how I see it a little bit. But, aaron, anto, you see this statement, because this statement is made so often we need a leader, we don't need a pastor. So does this character matter really when it comes to, as it pertains to him, leading this?
Speaker 2:country. See, I think both questions and I'll be that person are fundamentally flawed. Just like you need to like them. No, what you need to like is their ability to do the job. I buy a plumber because I like the way he does plumbing, not because I like the plumber. So, again, I go with the second premise as well. When you say, do we need a leader, not a pastor yes, you need a leader, not a pastor, that's obvious. Because they're not. They are mutually exclusive things, in the same way that liking you and liking your abilities are mutually exclusive things, it doesn't really have a fundamental meaning. When you say, in my opinion, do I like Donald Trump? Because I don't know Donald Trump, the only thing I can like are his policies as a person, that's almost, again, a completely separate discussion in my opinion, which is why I think we're probably going to disagree, because you're looking at them as the same thing and I don't. Can I just throw?
Speaker 3:in here why you're saying that. But the thing is, I do want a plumber of character. That's why I'm not going to just pick up the phone book. That's why I'm going to go ask people.
Speaker 2:Let's be honest, though If you have two plumbers one is of higher character but a worse plumber, and one is a better plumber with somewhat less character which would you honestly choose?
Speaker 3:Okay, so this is going to be the pastor in me. The pastor in me is going to say I want a plumber with character.
Speaker 1:No, you don't, Because that's a lie, bro. I mean, okay, aaron, go for it With character?
Speaker 2:Yes, but I'm saying if you had to choose between two options, you wouldn't even have a plumber If he can't do the job at all, then I might as well do it myself, because I'm not a plumber.
Speaker 3:But I'm saying if he knows how to do the job and he can get the job done like hey, 80% of it and a guy can do the other 100, I'll take the guy with character every time.
Speaker 1:No, no See, I disagree with you, aaron. But hear me out, Aaron, before you think I'm throwing you under the bus. Oh, I'm okay, okay, but here, because the thing is, it's like no, I don't need a guy. If there's a guy with character, because the only thing he's going to influence is my toilet, I do not care if he's influencing my toilet, but the thing is, it's like, as soon as your leadership influences me as a human, like, basically like, do I want a character, a guy with character, to do his job well and do with integrity? But if you're telling me that the guy does like, let's just say he goes out, he's a womanizer on the weekends or whatever it is, but when he shows up he does it on time, he does it efficiently, like.
Speaker 1:What I'm saying is he does his job well. I, I can't argue with that and I'm going to let you do your job now. I'm going to hope that the power of the gospel gets a hold of your life one day, that you do come to Christ and see the error of your ways and be able to then see the power that God can mend those things together, and I hope to have gospel influence. But that's not the point, but the thing is is like Anton, I think the leadership matter is who is this person leading? This guy is leading toilets. One person is leading people and I do believe that character does matter. When you start adding that into the equation. Can you speak to that?
Speaker 2:First, I'm never saying character doesn't matter, as if you should never, as if no one should take into account character. That's why I gave you a very specific whatever. The question is, who is the better alternative to Donald Trump right now Policy now policy. Who does a job of president better than donald trump? If you can name people, let's go for those guys. I, again, I'm a guy who usually votes third party. That that's the way I've always seen it, because there are people who, again, I don't think are moral enough to lead. But if you're asking me right now who's a better version of donald trump, it's much like the plumber situation. I don't know a guy who can do the job as well. If you have that guy, produce him and let's talk about him. If you don't have that guy, then I don't know what we're arguing. To me, we're arguing theoretically. If there was a very moral man who could be president and would run the country in the most godly way possible, would you vote for him? Yeah, where is?
Speaker 1:he. If he's not here, then who are we talking about? We're talking about a theoretical thing that doesn't exist. But let's not lose track of the question. I understand that you're saying that character doesn't matter at all, but the question is we need a leader, not a pastor. Does character, then, matter? And I would say that it does, because of the audience, of the individual. And I would then even say is there somebody better at the job that would do it? Like let's switch the situation around and it's not a plumber influencing my toilet, but switch it around of saying there's a person who has higher character and not as good as good or affect at their job, but he's leading me, or leading people. Give me with the guy with the complete package of character all day long. There's no exception, and to me I would say that his dearth of character would then affect me, saying I don't really care what you do. Well, I really don't, because there's such a lack on this side. Now you're getting ready to say something and I interrupt it.
Speaker 2:Okay, I'm just saying I think this comes and I'm not trying to be the person from a place of privilege, because it's silly. You can say that, but if that were true, let's go back to, and I was thinking when you were talking of the Civil War. Abraham Lincoln initially started with multiple generals who were of high character but were terrible generals, and they were losing the war. He went and found Ulysses S Grant, a drunk that people made fun of, who was aggressive and fearless. He had about one virtue, and I'll give it to Donald Trump. I think he has the same virtue. It's courage and stubbornness. And they won a war.
Speaker 2:If you would have went with all the good guys who were nice, you would have lost, and that's repeated a thousand times in history, because sometimes you need a general, you need a leader. That's what you need. A bully, and sometimes that's what you need, and I think it's whatever. To just act like simply because someone is. No one is looking at the Mona Lisa because they think Da Vinci was virtuous. They're looking at it because it's a good painting.
Speaker 2:He was a good painter. No one looks at the pyramids and thinks man, that's just not the way life works. There are times when you need certain skills and that skill is the only one that matters. There are times when you need certain skills and that skill is the only one that matters when it comes to basketball, when it comes to football, when it comes to painting, when it comes, in a lot of times, to military strategy, foreign policy. That's a skill set in and of its own and if a guy is again, it does not disqualify, in my mind, a man from that job because he is a serial philanderer. Like I'm not saying he's a good person, I'm not saying he should be a preacher, but I'm saying if he's a serial philanderer who can make a lot of threes, the lakers should sign him, that that's what he's hired for again, I agree with the, I agree with the, the prospect of the pragmatic situation, but to me there does come a line to the pragmatism, to where it then?
Speaker 1:because it's like okay, what's the ultimate goal? We'll win the war. What's the ultimate goal? Win the playoffs? What's the ultimate goal? Make America awesome? What's the ultimate goal?
Speaker 1:And I think that's where the core is different for me, because the thing is that's not my ultimate goal and since it's not just like I prayed earlier, this world is not my home. Now I want it to preserve it and be responsible and be a good steward. But pragmatic, to what cost? I think is a question that when you ask the question, when somebody says we need a leader and a pastor, that's the question I believe has to be asked. Is this kind of like well, what are you trying to accomplish?
Speaker 1:Like, do I want to have economy that's booming and have children who feel it's really okay? I mean, I'm not going to blame Donald Trump if immoral things happen, but I'm just saying is that their dad is okay with then, whatever it takes to get it? It's almost like you like Raymond Reddington on the blacklist, like you've got to then be that guy to be able then to do well, you got to be Jim Gordon on Gotham. You can start out idealistic, but at the end you know where the path is, and so I'm just wondering is this the montage that we're then trying to just project just over life itself, if effectiveness is the end game goal of everything that we're trying to do? Aaron, you've been silent. Any thoughts?
Speaker 3:I'm processing because at first you guys almost had me with the plumber thing and be like, yeah, maybe I don't know what's going on. But then I'm like, no, I'm double down on everything I said. As I process what you guys are saying, I hear that there is a certain thing and maybe I'm one of the nice guys. Well, maybe I'm the nice guy who's going to finish last, because in my scope of it, this is why I'd rather have a plumber who's 80% like. If I know someone down the road who's trying to take care of his family and he has good character and he's not, I'll take him like bro, I'll give you the money. Come try and fix my toilet again.
Speaker 1:And then you'll pay him again in about three months. Can I please go?
Speaker 2:There are two things about this thing and I'm going to attack it from two ways. First, there is just like Adrian was bringing up. You'd have to do it again. The issue is and there's truth in some, and again, I'm not saying you have to be pragmatic to the end and all that, but if the union loses the war because you insist on hiring good men, everyone loses. That's not pragmatic, that's not helpful. How is it helpful if you're all dead? It's not. That's what I'm saying. That's the beauty of Lincoln. It's just not. It's not virtuous. Just's what I'm saying. That's the beauty of Lincoln. It's just not. It's not virtuous just to lose. No, because you insist on some puritanical nonsense. And here's what I'll go to. The secondary is that there's two ethical systems. There is my Christian ethical system that I hold myself to. Then there is the ethical system I hold the world to, and I'm saying as a Christian, a man who is doing these things, and he is unsaved. Why am I shocked by this? Why?
Speaker 3:am I why?
Speaker 2:is my mind blown that the plumber likes to drink. Why? Why would I hold him to a Christian ethical system? That makes no sense. It makes no. The only problem again, before someone says this, because this is my biggest problem with Donald Trump the only problem I have with Donald Trump is that he conflates Christianity with himself. There we go. No, and again, that's a fair argument, 100%. That's my only beef with him. But when you say that people should just be moral again, and if they're not moral if my plumber isn't moral, I'd rather have a bad plumber well then you're just going to spend a lot of money on bad plumbers. That doesn't make any logical sense.
Speaker 2:I, I need generals who will do x. Why can he do the job? Like again, you can't run a business that way. You can't honestly do anything. You can't function. The only place you would be able to do this and this is again the thing is if and that's why I said from a position of privilege, if you live in a, a Christian space, is the only way you can make that argument, because I couldn't function as a business owner. If I took that, who would I hire? Who would I talk to?
Speaker 3:I'd have to go live in a corner. The question was would I take one over? It wasn't saying that if I so my perspective of the question was if they both exist, then I'm saying, I'm going to go for my man who's going to live right.
Speaker 2:Do you think I could survive if all of my people were worse than I knew they could be? How will I survive if everyone is hiring good people and I'm hiring 70% Because he's nice?
Speaker 3:I'm not saying because he's nice, I'm saying because he has character. There's a difference between.
Speaker 2:Let's say he has character. Let's say he's the most upstanding man but can't count to 10. It doesn't matter, it doesn't matter, that will never matter.
Speaker 1:I need programmers the best one. This is a clear example where Aaron's on one side and then I'm in this little middle ground here and then Anton's over here. Aaron's like yeah, I'll hire the guy with character For me. I'm like, I'm going to hire a guy with character only if it influences me.
Speaker 3:And Todd's over here.
Speaker 1:It's like, well, because the thing is I have kids. It's like the plumber's not going to affect my kids.
Speaker 3:You don't know that because you don't want to show if he has a character.
Speaker 1:Dude, I'm going to hire him when my kids are at school. Dude, I can get around it to be like I'm not going to have the person who's doing bad. I'm just not trying to use an example, just not doing good things to help my family. And if I cannot then control that, then that means he's influencing me, which means then I go to the other option of somebody then at that point. But the thing is, I agree with Anton 100%. If you're going to run a business, you just can't.
Speaker 1:This is a free market economy. You've got to have the people that are doing the best. Now, like I said, I would hope why would I hire somebody who doesn't? I can hire somebody who doesn't have great character and pray to God that maybe by God's grace I can have gospel influence, that their character can grow. And then, guess what? I have A person producing 100% and character at 100%, because I've seen that there's future that can be there. So I just can't just automatically assume people are always going to stay where they are. But this is getting into the weeds. Let's get back in.
Speaker 3:Can I just go ahead and apologize to plumbers? I have nothing with plumbers, just for the record, for this illustration. So if you're a faithful listener and you're a plumber, thank the Lord for you and you probably have more money than I'll ever have. I just wanted to at least say that out loud.
Speaker 1:Oh and again, you do have influence, because if he's hiring people and different things like that, I'm not saying a person doesn't have influence. I'm just saying they're not the president of the United States for crying out loud, but anyway let's.
Speaker 3:So I just wanted to make sure that was clear.
Speaker 1:Okay.
Speaker 3:This is why Aaron is the nice guy.
Speaker 1:This is why Aaron is the nice guy. Me I'm like moving on, I'm like you need some more security inside of your car, anyway, but let me just say this, because obviously this matter about lead or passer, but let me give in defense of Mr Trump, okay, because we've talked about this and it's pretty apparent which you'll probably know by the end, I'm not a big fan Now, with that being said is, when you continue this thought process and again in support of the man, do you find, though, that sometimes that all of his extracurricular activities that are immoral, that we have found and biblically speaking, immoral, right that it's been happening for years? You know, I was going through and I was just going through presidents, and I'm like LBJ Lyndon B Johnson. He had like this no, it was Harding that had his own room, it was called Harding's Room, which I'll just we're not going to rate this PG, but just use your imagination. I mean, ronald Reagan had a nickname that I can't even say on the air of just how often he would then participate in different immoral activities. I mean, honestly, he had 30 years of career as a movie star and stuff like that, and he claimed in his memoir to have lady itis first lady itis, whatever where he would fall in the lead role and he would like fall in love and have a romance with them and even, as allegedly you know, having children that were later on taken care of by way of abortion.
Speaker 1:Like, basically, what I'm saying is these weren't like good guys, you know what I mean. Like none of like you go through this time. I mean, we look at bill cl like I cannot believe this. I'm like, come on, I mean I'm not saying what the man did was not right, it was terrible, but I'm just saying like, and the reason I'm asking this and in his defense, because you've seen a long line of immoral things that have taken place in the Oval Office and people who have held that office Now is the difference that we're finding Bill Clinton on is the fact that we just know about it.
Speaker 1:You didn't know, I don't remember, and, again, I was very young, but unless you go searching, you don't really know about Ronald Reagan's extracurricular activities, right? You don't know about these things. Now, everything is public. Anton, do you think that this is a generational difference, that now we are just aware of so much more now that therefore, going forward into the future that we're going to be having these crisis of conscious because we're like thinking to ourselves like are these guys really? They're not really good people and here they are representing like what American core family is supposed to be for the moral majority, etc. Etc. Anton, do you think it's just the way the generational page has turned?
Speaker 2:uh, partially. I honestly think a lot of it is the conversation we're actually just having, because I think we have. Can we feel the need that we have to like people in order to especially? I would say, in either an ideologue way, so exactly like if you're a Republican, if you're a leftist, if you're a Democrat, that you have to like a person in order, and if you like them, you have to overlook their badness, and if you dislike them, you have to pretend their badness is worse than the badness of whoever it is that you like. I'm like.
Speaker 2:Even when you bring up's like jfk is still a hero to most. It's like everyone knew jfk was with half the women of the world and everyone is completely okay with that. So I think it is not really a more, which is the thing that I was trying to allude to earlier. It's not really a moral problem that people dislike. It's far more a. I just don't like you and since I don't like you, you're bad is worse than everyone else is bad, which is my problem that I have with Trump People who hate Trump, because to me it's Trump the worst thing that's ever happened and I just don't know how you can come to that conclusion and have any view of history yeah, I mean agreed, and I again, in fairness, I did want to make sure those things were aired as well for the to be understood.
Speaker 1:Aaron, do you have any commentary upon that thought process?
Speaker 3:I know the big thing. I think that, um, I have I would say the same thing with ronald reagan in any of them when we tie christianity to him. And I think that's my, my biggest struggle, is what you said earlier, anton, and that think that's my biggest struggle, is what you said earlier, anton, and that's honestly my biggest struggle, because I recognize that I mean for every past, I mean for every president. You say I can think of a pastor who's no longer in ministry or is. I can think of people who are in ministry who have done crazy things again, and so for me, I understand that leaders do have problems. I guess my struggle with the problems and it's not just and it is with a lot of the others, but I'd say specifically with Donald Trump is that they are broadcast so freely, but then we still look to him as as a, as a savior.
Speaker 1:Yes.
Speaker 3:And that's the part that I struggle with, and I think it doesn't matter if his name is Trump, if his, it's just when you tie your open, open wrong, and really like when you hear things behind closed doors, that it's like, no, I'm not sad about it, I'm glad about it. This is what I do, like I do this and nobody's going to stop me. Who's going to stop me? Those are the parts for me that it goes beyond. You're now glorifying it and I struggle with that. If that makes sense, if that's still in the same frame of this conversation that we're having at this point exactly, and I couldn't agree more.
Speaker 1:It's this savior complex thing I don't care what person you attach to it, like whether it's reagan, whether it's you know, as you're talking about verdict or whatever it is. It's just like like we just didn't have anything till this person showed up, and maybe that might be where my contention is. But I guess the overall question simply was the difference that I began to see. The difference is this matter of like. You know, people have done bad things for so long. Now we're just having this crisis of conscience, as we now are continuing inside of this, inside of our mind, of like, is this thing, are these things okay? So, for better or for worse, that we know now more, anton, in your mind, is this better or worse? That now it's like. Well, we know they're all broken. It makes us all feel better about ourselves. Or is this situation of like, now that we know better, shouldn't we be doing better? Shouldn't we be like caring more about character, or should we still be caring about the end result at the end of the day?
Speaker 2:I think you have to care about both, and I don't think again that they're not, in my mind, mutually exclusive things, but I do think a lot of what I'm hearing is and this is again the way that I look at it versus I think the way that you guys are looking at it, and that is, these two things are still fundamentally separate. To me, trump can be a bad person and a good president. I don't think those things are mutually exclusive To me. It sounds like you're saying he's a bad person. Sure, I don't necessarily screw with that. I just don't think that would exclude him from being a good president. In the same way, I don't think it would exclude him from doing most professions in the world and being good at the profession while not being a necessarily moral man.
Speaker 1:Okay, but wait a second. But now, with our current society and culture, you cannot hide that any longer. Jfk was probably very available to many women, right he?
Speaker 2:wasn't hiding it, though I would say even he wasn't hiding it. That's my point. I don't think this is, in my mind, a morality issue. I think Donald Trump the major issue and Ronald Reagan and again I'm sure I'll get into trouble for saying this on the podcast but I think it's their tie to two things that are currently the big ills of society at least people feel that they are and that is misogyny and racism. I think his tie to those two kind of buzzwords is the thing, because it's not simply that he's a bad person or that he is promiscuous. It's pretty much the time period in which we live in.
Speaker 2:Those are crimes that are not seen in the same way they used to, Because everyone knew JFK was like this and women still wish to date him today Like no one really was offended by it. But he was young, attractive, funny and nice and charming, Whereas Donald Trump is tied to a lot of, again, usually that down-home racism. He sounds like a lot. He's not attractive, he's super old. These are the real, are the real again, in my opinion, reasons his crimes are playing differently in the media than, say, crimes of the past okay, I mean, I can see that more so, um, but we will get to this matter about.
Speaker 1:You know this character issue and then, as it relates to leadership, we'll develop that. That in just a moment, aaron. Do you have anything to say before we move to this question here about the dividers between supporters and non-supporters?
Speaker 3:I don't think so. I don't think so, can I actually?
Speaker 2:ask a question Absolutely. Do you think one could be an immoral man in a great present?
Speaker 1:present. Anton brings up a great point, but we're going to have to continue this episode next time. Thank you so much for joining us.
