Loading summary
Transcript137 lines
- [00:02]
Isaac Saul
This is Car Tracks with Turtle Wax. Your car says a lot about you. So if we asked your car what it would say about you, what would it say?
- [00:12]
Camille Foster
Listen, you dropped one of those tiny cheeseburgers under the seat like last week and now we're both dry heaving the stench. Do us a favor, grab some Turtle Wax and let's get to work.
- [00:26]
Isaac Saul
This has been Car Tracks with Turtle Wax. You are how you car.
- [00:30]
Ari Weitzman
You know that feeling when you clear your inbox or end a meeting early or finally check your pipeline and everything's actually under control? That's what Monday CRM feels like. It's fast, easy to use, and with built in AI, it helps you move faster without the busywork. Try it free@Monday.com CRM because sales should feel this good.
- [00:52]
Isaac Saul
You know how we all have that one friend we go to with all our financial questions? Well, meet Experian, your bff. As in big financial Friend. I'm telling you, Experian is gonna be your go to app when it comes to taking control of your finances. Experian not only has a bunch of ways to help you save, but lets you check your FICO score. Matches you with credit cards and a bunch more things you'd expect from a big financial friend. Just download the Experian app and get started for free. Trust me, you'll be up to speed with this BFF in no time. Based on FICO Score 8 model offers an approval not guaranteed. Terms apply. Offer offers not available in all states. See experian.com for details.
- [01:32]
Will K. Back
Coming up, we talk Zorani, the Iran strikes and some love for Trump so far on the outcome. Camille responds to some Juneteenth related criticism we got via email and then some grievances and lots of talk about tick borne illnesses. It's a good one.
- [01:55]
John Lowell
From executive producer Isaac Saul.
- [01:58]
Ari Weitzman
This is Tangle.
- [02:10]
Will K. Back
Good morning, good afternoon and good evening and welcome to the Tangle podcast, a place we get views from across the political spectrum, some independent thinking and a little bit of my take the still unnamed Sunday pod, soon to be Friday podcast with a new name. I'm here with Tangle Managing Editor Ari Weitzman and Tangle Editor at large Camille Foster. And we're all living in Zoram Mamdani's world. Now, fellas, how are we feeling? Socialism's here. Sharia law is around the corner. Get ready boys.
- [02:40]
Camille Foster
Couldn't be more terrified.
- [02:41]
John Lowell
New York City is all of us. I guess I'm just having a hard time. I mean, we've experienced this already. A lot of M's A lot of N's in that name. Not sure where to put them.
- [02:51]
Will K. Back
Mom, Donnie.
- [02:52]
John Lowell
Mum, Donnie. We've had difficulty in the dock.
- [02:56]
Will K. Back
I have zero difficulty saying Mom, Dani. But every time I write it, I write it as Mamdani, something about the Ami my fingers want to do.
- [03:06]
John Lowell
And every time I write his last name, I write Zamdani. Because I'm like, there's got to be a Z in there, right? I know the Z's got to be there, Camille. Let's see what happens.
- [03:15]
Will K. Back
You're a man actively considering a move from the beautiful lands of California. San Francisco, just outside of the city. Non socialist of San Francisco. Yeah. I don't want to give away too much about where you live, but maybe back towards the east coast, maybe to New York City. Does this increase or decrease the odds or impact your decision in any way?
- [03:38]
Camille Foster
Yeah, I don't know if I've even formally mentioned that, although it's been hinted at many times. And this, I should say would be what the force cross country move for my entire family in about five years. Maybe just under. Just absolutely insane. But yes, I'm contemplating it. And one thing I'm definitely not doing is moving back to the city of New York. I am happy to be someplace in the orbit, but I will tell you that both because New York politics is crazy and because I have a seven and a three year old now, I think the period of my life where I live in a city is probably over, at least in that particular city. Even in Brooklyn, it's not suburban enough. Like, I need ready access to the city, but I can't deal with the travails of living there. And I certainly don't want to buy my groceries at a city run grocery store because. Are you, are you kidding me?
- [04:29]
Will K. Back
Yeah. Well, I mean, it's interesting. I guess there's, you know, we talk a lot about. I feel like there's a new kind of commentary that happens in the political world today about how, you know, Bernie Sanders and AOC are at 10 o' clock and Donald Trump's at 2 o' clock and they're not at 12 and 6. They're kind of like close to each other. I feel like, Camille, your Politics is at 12 o' clock and Zoram Mamdani is at 6 o' clock. Like, you guys could not be further from each other in some ways, at least on the economic stuff.
- [05:01]
Camille Foster
Certainly.
- [05:01]
Will K. Back
I mean, you're a self described libertarian. He's a self described socialist, Democratic socialist, which I know does a lot of work.
- [05:09]
Camille Foster
Yeah, that's one way to put it. I mean, I might say my ideas, economically speaking, are totally rational and his are totally incoherent. But, you know, whatever, yours is fine too.
- [05:21]
Will K. Back
Well, let me put this to you because we talked about this a little bit in tangle. There is a kind of generational divide here, I think, where anybody under the age of 40 hears the word socialism and hears we're gonna tax the rich and provide more social services. And anybody above the age of 40 hears something very different. And I know this might sound, I mean this question earnestly, and since you just sort of lobbed the alley oop, like, why don't you want to shop in government provided grocery? Honestly, I think there are probably people who don't think that the answer to that question is obvious.
- [05:57]
John Lowell
Nobody. Cat. It's easy.
- [06:00]
Camille Foster
Yeah, I'm sure there are lots of people who don't think the answer is obvious, which is why a candidate like this has any shot in hell, despite the fact that economic history is pretty clear. The first response I'd give is, milton Friedman is actually really smart. And people have written great accessible books about economics like I Pencil, and you should find them and read them at length if you don't understand why I might be skeptical of this proposition. But the first thing I'd say is that grocery stores, apparently, I know this now because I've gone and looked recently, have very thin profit margins. And the presumption here appears to be that, oh my God, the grocery stores are gouging their customers. They have this weird variable pricing that's all over the place. And why can't Why? I mean, there should just be one kind of cereal that's really cheap. What's going on here? Why can't food be more affordable? And the reality is that the grocery stores and companies like Walmart, for example, have profit margins that are close to like 1 3%. You aren't squeezing out a tremendous amount of value by running the. Having the state run them. And the presumption here that the state could actually run them efficiently is something else entirely. My suspicion is that they won't run them efficiently. They'll probably run them the way they rub the subways or the public schools or the buses or public housing. Imagine that, the equivalent of public housing as a grocery store, perhaps as your core grocery store. Do you really want to shop there? And the short answer should be absolutely not.
- [07:39]
John Lowell
Well, maybe that's actually a good analogy. It's not the public housing portion of it, but the public transport portion of it, because the Easy comeback is the free market hasn't given us any public transit. So we maybe should be rethinking what we can invest in in terms of government run services. So if we put more money maybe into public transit, maybe it'd be a better service. Just as like, why haven't we considered putting more money into government run groceries? And I think that maybe that last one's a bit of a lob. But another second question to consider is you mentioned the economic history here being clear. What is the best analogy of something that's happened before to government run groceries? Because that's something that Isaac and I were actually kind of struggling over. Is that a thing that, I mean, we could say like, yeah, that wouldn't really work. But the things that I think of today are like public transit, healthcare, government run housing, they're all kind of different because there's no, I mean, other than housing, there's no existing market where like grocery stores are fine. We know what they are. They work. The market's providing a good solution, the government's entering it. Is there like a good analogy for that happening before?
- [09:03]
Camille Foster
Yeah, I'd actually need to give that some more thought. I'm not sure. I mean, I've offered up a couple of analogies, but I think that's a great. It's an interesting question and I'm not sure I've got a straightforward answer right now beyond the ones that I offered. But I would say that a lot of those places, interestingly, like public transportation and education and all these other places, I'm not even sure that there aren't private offerings for those things that work relatively well and perhaps could work even better if they didn't have to compete with a free, quote unquote free option provided by the state. You've got Uber, which works pretty well and is competing with, in New York City, the medallion controlled taxi and cab system, Taxi and Limousine Commission. And with public schools, you've got private options. And the private options tend to be much cheaper on average than the public options. It is certainly true that there are really expensive private schools that are way more expensive, but they're also really cheap private schools that tend to provide pretty high quality educations at a fraction of the cost per pupil of the competing public options. And the best thing about private schools in some instances is if they're really, really bad people stop sending their parents, their children to them and they go out of business.
- [10:22]
John Lowell
Yeah. I mean, let alone their parents, there's no way their parents are gonna do that. Exactly. But that's actually, you know, not to. Maybe we can get into it a little bit here. But what do we mean by cheap though? Because public school, certainly you would say, well, that doesn't cost anything, but then we're talking about the cost of the taxpayer then, like maybe not the ticket price that you're buying as the consumer, like off the shelf as much as you can. Off the shelf, public education. But just by cheap, do you mean the cost that it requires for us to produce this as a society? Or are you actually talking about. Oh, no, no. Actually you think about the cost that you might have to incur to send your kid to public school if you're in a rural community and you're far enough away, like that's the cost you're talking about.
- [11:02]
Camille Foster
No, I'm direct. When I say cheap, I mean relative to the per pupil costs for a public education like a public school in certain areas, and I haven't looked at the numbers recently to know exactly what it is here, but maybe $20,000 in some states and there will be private school options available in, say a religious institution, for example, where you could imagine like $9,000 annual tuition for your kid. Certainly there are again, way more expensive options, like a 40, $50,000 per year tuition at a private school in New York City, some of the really elite schools, but it's not unheard of to see nine or even $12,000 tuition for an individual student. So it's complicated. But here I am now making all sorts of libertarian cases for economic policy. And I'm sure there's some critique that someone might want to offer. But I'm not running the mayor in New York.
- [11:58]
Will K. Back
I mean, I think a few things are interesting about this. Yeah, a few things are interesting about this proposal. I mean, first of all, I think, Ari, like the thing that we struggled with, when thinking about the historical examples or that I struggled with, I said, I don't want to speak for you.
- [12:11]
John Lowell
Is like, no, I'm struggling too, man.
- [12:12]
Will K. Back
I mean, but I'm saying, like public transportation has existed for basically all, like, you know, it started in like the early 1800s. So, you know, the first kind of examples of it popping up. So what's hard for me, it's like hard for me to think about a world, an American world without public transportation. And so the, the analogy to it is like, is really difficult because there aren't any of these public grocery stores yet. Like, the transportation market is already deeply impacted by the long standing existence of public transportation. And like the private market has Kind of been built around it, you know, that like if you're going to start some sort of half public, half private endeavor, something like Amtrak or whatever, it's, you know, it exists around these public buses that are there and then the private, like Megabus and you know, Uber exist in the context of these other options. Like if you're going to bring Uber into New York City, you're naturally competing with the public transportation system that's there. So it's just kind of like a difficult thing in that sense. I do think there are parts of Mandani's. I think this is a terrible idea. I wrote about this in Tango. I think there's a lot of evidence for why it wouldn't work well, but to just like steel man a little bit here for the rationality of his proposal. I mean there, there are parts of it that I think are actually, it's reasonably constructed. For instance, like the tenants of it are basically that the stores would operate on city owned land or in city owned buildings so they wouldn't have rent and property tax expenses, so there'd be less overhead cost. They would focus on, you know, keeping prices low and being in areas that, you know, resolve some of the food desert stuff rather than generating profit. They, I mean, this part I don't is very vague. I don't know how they would do it, but centralized warehouse and distribution. So that seems just like kind of BS language. But there's more direct stuff like he wants to pilot a program, one store in each borough, and he thinks it would cost about $60 million. And he proposes redirecting funds that are currently used to subsidize private grocery stores, which is like $140 billion of tax breaks and incentives to finance the public stores and then have them focus on, you know, not providing, not, not profit margin, but just like a sustained operation. There are apparently some city owned grocery stores in rural Kansas. There are initiatives happening in places like Atlanta, Madison, Wisconsin, Chicago. I haven't heard enough about how those are going. Most of the reading that I've done on them seems like it's all very preliminary and tbd, but you know, that's sort of like the general outline of how he plans to do it. And if I think you're talking about costs, how we're going to pay for this thing, taking subsidies away from the private sector to fund some public version of what they're doing, I don't know. That seems like that's not like an insane thing to do. I don't think if the private Sector's already getting that money and you're going to say, hey, we're going to put this into this thing that we actually control as the government. I guess my biggest, more anecdotal and experiential view is just I have like four options for grocery stores in Philadelphia. You know, like one of them is sprouts this sort of like kind of yuppie like Whole Foods esque market. And then I have like, what's it called? Adler? God, I can't. I can see the sign but I forget how to pronounce it. Whatever. It's like a sort of cheaper, like giant, Giant type grocery store. Aldi. Yeah, that's like, it's just opening around the corner for me. It's like the prices are way cheaper and it's like not as much like organic, whatever. Then I have like this sick. My favorite Asian market store that's like everything's dirt cheap. It's like the food is just out there on ice for the day and if you get it on that first day it'll be good, but if you don't, it's like going bad in the grocery store. But it's awesome. And I love that place. Like I just don't. And they all serve different needs and they compete and I go to them for different reasons and you know, like, yeah, sometimes the prices seem insane. There's $10 eggs and stuff and I, I get the impact of that. But like if I want to find two dollar dozen eggs, I can still do that because there's so many places I'm just not totally sold, I guess on like the premise, you know, I know prices at these stores have gone up, but this was like some of the research Noah Smith did that we cited was like. And to Camille's point about the profit margins, like these grocery stores are not gouging people. It, it's, you know, there are things that impact the cost of these goods that the government will be impacted too. Like bird flu makes egg prices go up. You know, that happens. Tariffs increase the cost of certain meats that we're importing. Like that happens. But I don't know, it just doesn't seem like a great example of what I'd want the government to work on.
- [17:35]
Camille Foster
Yeah, I think you've made the case there pretty well. I'd also say though that your initial infrastructure you laid out there to say, well, it doesn't seem totally crazy. I think, I don't know that you're really looking at it carefully enough because when you take into account that these are going to be public employees. I'm not even talking about whether or not they're kind of competent or good at their job. But public employees tend to be pretty expensive. They've got pensions and all kinds of other stuff. Even if you can do the trade off of not having to pay property taxes and not having to pay rent, you still have to maintain the building and you still have to pay the high salaries that these public employees are going to have. And again, there's all manner of other stuff that comes along with having public employees doing this work. So I can't imagine a universe where they'd actually be able to offer lower prices, let alone better overall service. And they're, as you laid out in many instances, competing with lots and lots of other people who are providing food. And I mean, one of the real problems in New York City is perhaps to the extent there's a unique problem there, a supply issue. It is the case that if you live in Brooklyn, as I did for a number of years, you might be buying your groceries at a bodega on a pretty regular basis, and the prices there tend to be a lot higher. Because as everyone knows about food deserts, they're food deserts. Why are there food deserts in a city that manages to still have so many vacant buildings, that probably should have more grocery stores and supermarket options and perhaps could have them, but for certain regulatory constraints, like maybe loosening the regulatory constraints would make more sense than trying to actually run the grocery stores yourself? And I think if the now nominee for his party in New York had some experience actually running a business and having to make payroll and do all the other things, he might have a better informed perspective on the appropriate way to try to make groceries more affordable, as opposed to his approach, which is, well, we'll just do it ourselves.
- [19:55]
John Lowell
Well, can I ask, maybe this is a position of ignorance for me. I'll admit I don't know a ton about this sector, but there are a couple things that you each said that I actually don't know about, and I want to learn a little bit more here. So when you say there's regulations in this industry that could be relaxed, that could help food prices go down, that are, you know, you're implying they're causing these food deserts, what are some of those regulations that are choking the industry? And then, Isaac, for you, while Camille's handling that ground ball screamer to third pop fly to you, here is, what are those subsidies that you mentioned? Because you said that there are government subsidies in grocery stores and I'm not aware of that. Is that something that's just like in those rural communities that you were referencing before, or what were you referring to there? But there I knocked my pop up and my grounder. So, Camille send it to you first?
- [20:53]
Camille Foster
Yeah, no, that's a great question. I was speaking more generally about the regulatory setup in New York City, just suggesting that there are lots and lots. And it's surprising, actually, when you look at the volume. And I wish I'd known this question was coming up because I would have.
- [21:07]
John Lowell
Looked up exactly what they did now.
- [21:09]
Camille Foster
On vacancy rates throughout the city for commercial properties. But there are lots and lots of spaces available to open new things like grocery stores. And to the extent it is expensive to open something new in New York because of the regulatory setup, because of the kind of taxation regime that exists there, then you're going to necessarily have less competition. In a place like Bedford Stuyvesant, for example, where I lived, or Prospect Heights, you'll find entire vacant buildings that stay vacant for, in some cases, a good little while. Why isn't someone else moving in there to try to offer some of these specialty grocery options that Isaac was just describing a moment ago in places where people have to shop at bodegas if they want to get something that's right down the street? Well, that could be part of the reason why just some of the regulatory constraints.
- [22:01]
Will K. Back
Ari, the. The program that these private. The private grocery stores are receiving subsidies under, primarily, as I understand it, is through. It's called Fresh, which is the food retail expansion to support health program. This is all according to this article that I read, but it's stuff like tax, land abatement, mortgage recording, and tax deferral. They give zoning incentives like they'll, you know, waive parking requirements, stuff like that. It seems like the requirements or the eligibility is for places that are addressed. Trying to address the same thing. Food deserts that are being built in specific areas of the city where there aren't grocery stores already. So, I mean, it would be basically. And to me, this is sort of points against. Against Mamdani is Zamdani. That's a new one. Is like these are points again, him, which is that he's removing some of the private sector momentum in this direction, too. So it's like, not only does the program have to work, it has to be better than what the private sector is already doing, which. That's a comparison that needs to be made. All right, just to focus us a little bit. I don't want to spend this whole time talking about grocery stuff for anybody who hasn't turned this podcast off already. We'll be right back after this quick break. I'm not big on trends, but I am big on clothes that feel good and last long. That's why I keep going back to Quince. Their lightweight layers and high quality staples have become my everyday essentials. This summer I ordered a ton of new linen gear from Quince and I've been telling everybody I'm just a big linen guy now. And you know what? I look good, I feel comfortable, and it's a great way to enjoy the summer. The best part? Everything with Quince is half the cost of similar brands. By working directly with top artisans and cutting out the middlemen, Quince gives you luxury pieces without the crazy markups. And Quince only works with factories that use safe, ethical and responsible manufacturing practices and premium fabrics and finishes. So stick to the staples that last with elevated essentials from Quince. You can go to quince.comtangle for free shipping on your order and 365 day returns. That's quince.comtangle to get free shipping and 365 day returns. Quince.comtangle Here's a stat that stops people in their tracks Nearly half of American adults say that they would suffer financial hardship within six months if they lost their primary income earner. That stat hits close to home. You're not alone, and you're not out of options. Policy genius makes finding and buying life insurance simple, ensuring that your loved ones have a financial safety net they can use in case something happens to you, whether to cover debts and routine expenses or even to invest the money and earn interest over time. You can compare quotes from top insurers and find coverage that fits your needs and your budget. With Policygenius, you can find life insurance policies starting at just $276 a year for $1 million in coverage. It's an easy way to protect the people you love and feel good about the future. You can secure your family's future with Policygenius by heading to policygenius.com to compare free life insurance quotes from top companies and see how much you could save. That's policygenius.com I think we should talk a little bit about lessons learned from this. I mean, I wrote a bit about this. It's been very interesting to me to watch the reactions from people to his victory in the primary. I don't want to say Meryl victory because we're not there yet and I do think the Democratic establishment is probably going to pull some strings to try and keep him out. Certainly he's not going to run unopposed or with ease to the, to the mayorship. But, you know, my reaction was just like, it was so obvious to me that he had traction, that there was something there, that he had a chance even a month or so ago. Like, I didn't think his odds were good. But when you compare him to somebody like Andrew Cuomo or even Lander, it's just like, clear to me why so many people in New York, especially younger voters, would be drawn to him. He's a great speaker. He's running really good campaign ads. He's asking people what they think on the street. He seems like receptive to this kind of feedback loop. He's not doing the kind of preachy progressive purity politics stuff. He's doing the really open minded, like, I want to be a big tent movement kind of guy. And he's making a ton of promises, like, you know, like the rent control stuff. I mean, like, it's all the kind of stuff that in the past has done well in some of these mayoral races in New York and other big cities. So before we get totally to the hysteria, I guess I'm just interested for you guys what you feel like maybe lessons or takeaways are like, what if you're, if you're the Democratic Party chair? Let's, let's do that game. Like you put your Democratic Party chair hat on or you're, you know, Kamala Harris or a leader in the party, you're Hakeem Jeffries. Like, what do you think the party should take away, if anything, from this outcome? I'm just curious how you guys think about that.
- [27:55]
John Lowell
I swear to God, this is an answer to your question. I promise you. You just gotta trust me with this. Have you seen the new season of the Rehearsal with Nathan Fyodor?
- [28:06]
Will K. Back
I actually have not. Even though I'm a massive Nathan Fielder fan.
- [28:10]
John Lowell
It's really good. He gets into restrictions in the FAA and all that, but one of the things that he covers that's sort of a sub theme of it, is how he struggles to come across as authentic. One of the things that he does when he, one of his shticks in the rehearsal is trying to see what people who are effective at X, whatever the thing is, do and then just write down very surface level observations. And I feel like that is the dnc. It's like, oh, we just need to say the word socialism. We just need people out there to say that and like the thing that they're struggling with is just being authentic. And that's the hardest thing in the world to coach or to do. Like, definitionally, being authentic is the one thing you cannot fake. And I think it's gonna be tough for them to shake this, like, Nathan Fyodor esque desire to just get all of the measurables down on paper and say, okay, we need to be younger, we need to be more minority, diverse, we need to be bilingual, and we need to be talking about socialism. Let's throw up people who do that. And then that should check the boxes. Right. I think that's going to be the lessons they learn. And I think it's going to be the wrong lesson.
- [29:18]
Camille Foster
I want to come back to the authentic conversation because I know that that's one of the things that has been attributed to my. I'm going to mispronounce his name now. Isaac, can you help me? So I don't.
- [29:31]
Will K. Back
Zoran Mamdani.
- [29:33]
Camille Foster
Mamdani.
- [29:34]
Will K. Back
Okay. It is kind of fun to like, to meld it all together. Yeah. Moram Zandani. Yeah. It's a sick name. I mean, to be clear, it is an awesome name. Zoran.
- [29:46]
Camille Foster
I like it. I'm just. I'm afraid of it because I'm going to this clown. So it's just a matter of time. So Mr. Momdani said, like, Mr. Democratic voter, I think. Yeah, I want to talk about. About his alleged authenticity. But look, I think the number one mistake is to try to extrapolate from New York City Democratic primary to even national Democratic primary for president. That is not the same at all. It's a totally different universe. And while someone like Bernie Sanders has had some success in national politics and has, in a number of instances, kind of threatened the establishment candidate on that national stage, I don't think that that is the right lesson to draw here for Democrats in terms of the lessons that they ought to draw. Certainly younger candidates is probably a good look for you at the moment. The thing that most surprises me when I look at this particular race is the fact that the major opponent here was Cuomo, a man who left the governorship under a cloud of shame and suspicion and who I've been scathingly critical of in other contexts and won't necessarily go through the litany of things that he did wrong while he was governor. This is the best candidate that you can field. And now the hopes for kind of mainstream Democrats depend upon Eric Adams. I mean, it's just. Is the bench so totally devoid of talent, even in a place like New York City. And the answer appears to be, yeah, kinda.
- [31:43]
John Lowell
I mean, I'll say everything that you just said about running against an unpopular incumbent who left office in a cloud of controversy, who mishandled the COVID pandemic towards a. The end of his reign and who had sexual abuse scandals against him, who rubs a lot of people the wrong way. That guy just won the presidency. All those descriptions. So like, why did they. Why didn't he win here?
- [32:05]
Will K. Back
Yeah, that's the question, I would say.
- [32:08]
Camille Foster
So it's not Donald Trump. I'll say that.
- [32:11]
John Lowell
Donald Trump. A little extra special sauce?
- [32:13]
Will K. Back
Yeah, yeah. Nobody. I mean, that's a separate conversation to me because it is a truism that like all the Trump impersonators fail. They just. It happens globally, it happens in Congress. It's like Matt Gaetz, you know, it's just like he comes in and he thinks if he just embodies the Trump personality. But it's like Trump is, to your point, I think, authentically himself, like love him or hate him and like part of his authenticity is that he's full of shit a lot of the time and he's a bloatiator and lies and whatever. And there's something inauthentic about that, obviously, but it is like he's being himself when the cameras are on. And I think that is an important element. I just did this. We just did this video trip to Washington D.C. with Representative Jake Auchincloss where we shadowed him for a few days and we're going to do a whole YouTube video about that. I'm really excited about like A Day in the Life of a Member of Congress. I think it's going to be a really great video. And I think, I happen to think this particular politician, he's a Democrat, he's kind of a middle of the road moderate Dem. I think I respect a lot of his views and how he carries himself and all this stuff. And he gave us incredible levels of access to him and his office that like no other politician I've been able to get to give to us. But there was still something that happened with him that I noticed. And I'll probably talk a little bit about in the video where like the cameras are on and he's just a little bit different and the cameras are off and like his shoulders drop a half inch and he's just a little more relaxed. And I personally liked the version of him with the cameras off more and I wish he gave me more of that. Just in my interactions interviewing him and talking to him, you Know, like, there was one kind of off the record moment where he just, like, let a. Like, he was talking casually about something and just, like, let a curse word slip. And it was like, the only time I heard him curse all weekend. And I was kind of like, oh, you're like, really just being yourself now with me in this moment. And it was, like, relatable in a way that I appreciated. And I'm curious. I mean, Camille, you sound skeptical of the fact that that authenticity applies to Mamdani. I think that he is very assuredly politicking a little bit. I mean, like, seeing him on Colbert and answering questions about the anti Semitism charges and stuff. Like, he's clearly not canned responses, but he's hitting talking points and threading needles that he knows he needs to thread and in order to like, not lose the support of some of his base that's there and also become less threatening to maybe, like, American Jews who are a little bit more moderate or conservative living in New York. But I did, personally, I got a strong sense of authenticity from him. And, like, I listened to his interview with Derek Thompson. I'm like, you know, I'm seeing him do these. These live television hits, going on podcasts, the campaign videos, chopping it up with people in the street. And, like, he looks pretty comfortable in his skin in a way that a lot of politicians just don't. And I don't get the sense that he's, like, tripping over himself to try and say the right thing. And I think the reality of that is he's saying what he actually believes. And when you say what you believe, it's a lot easier to be loose and just talk because you're not trying to remember what you wanted to make people. Yeah, like Kamala Harris. Not to, like, just find a way to go back and trash her, but, like, I mean, most recent, relevant example. I mean, Ari, to your point, like, why didn't Dems beat the Cuomo version at the national level? Which I agree there's a lot of similarities with him and Trump. It's like, you see Kamala Harris get interviewed for an hour, and it's like, oh, my God, this woman said nothing for an hour. Like, I have no idea what she thinks. And. And she's so guarded, and she's so prescripted and protected. And it's like, I get none of that from Mamdani. So for me, that was kind of. That was one of the things that I definitely took away. I mean, I. Camille, I think you made a great. I had A couple friends text me this week and said very similar things to the effect of, see, I knew Dem should run a more progressive candidate for president. Like, look at how well these. And I'm like, no, no, no, no, no. Like those. That is not. I don't think that. That is. You know, if Mamdani ran for president right now in a Democratic primary, he would get obliterated, to be perfectly clear. But he does generate. Yeah, I think he would. He does generate a lot of excitement with a very young, highly educated liberal crowd. And there is a super high concentration of those people living in New York City right now.
- [37:25]
Camille Foster
So the conventional mainstream establishment candidate is an experienced practitioner of these stylized vagaries that are routinely deployed in all kinds of media contexts when they are speaking on the stump. It's a speech that they've memorized and it is safe and sanitized. And they do their very best not to sound like an extremist. They don't want to be mistaken for a democratic socialist. So they try to avoid sounding too much that way. They are speaking in. They're trafficking in euphemisms. Opposite that, however, are the kind of AOC Makdani candidates. And I'm sure I said that wrong, but I want to now I'm leaning into it. And they are a bit more direct, in fact, generally a kind of searing directness. And there's this kind of grandiose, almost superfluousness associated with the way that they talk about policy. There are these dramatic, profound promises, and they are things that people want to hear in many instances and perhaps would even very much like to believe are real, but that are very, very hard to deliver on. And you can kind of pair with that also the other battery of various perspectives that are perhaps somewhat controversial for mainstream Democrats. They're a little bit afraid to talk about Gaza in the way that some of these other candidates are willing to talk about it. So they're careful and they're trying their best to thread needles. But these outsiders have absolutely nothing to lose. And leaning into some of these more hot button topics and saying something dramatically different is a huge differentiator between them and some of these other candidates. And while he's had to walk certain things back, like defund the police, for example, he has perhaps leaned a little bit more on the fact that he has a very different perspective than a lot of establishment candidates when it comes to Israel. And even there, he's had to walk things back. But what I was getting at with the authenticity thing, and I agree with most of what you said there, as you could probably tell. But what I was getting at with the authenticity thing is that there is still a great deal of stagecraft with this particular candidate. The sense that he is just this guy who understands what the working man is going through. It's absurd. No, you're not. You're different. And you come from a pretty privileged background, to use a somewhat charged political word. And when I see political ads of him eating rice with his fingers on camera, I see comments associated with that that say, oh, wow, it's so interesting to see someone do this. It's kind of beautiful to see him doing this. That's not authentic. It is stagecraft, and it is the most absurd, over the top kind of stagecraft. And it's the sort of thing he does pretty routinely. And you see it from AOC as well, this kind of claim to ethnic authenticity, the code switch in a very deliberate way in lots and lots of contexts. I get it. I'm first generation American. My family's from Jamaica. I could switch on the patois and most of the people who aren't Jamaican would find it very credible. And the people that are would laugh because it's not very good. But that's inauthentic, exceedingly inauthentic. And it's the sort of thing that some politicians occasionally slip into, like that pastoral cadence that some, some politicians adapt when they go to particular churches. But I find that some of these other candidates are even more deliberate and over the top with their attempts to try to seem authentic by being anything but.
- [41:25]
John Lowell
You know, it's such a difficult thing as we circle around this word. It's so central to the way we see these candidates. But that is common. That's almost the through line for any successful politician, is they know how to put on the right performance. You have to be performing a little bit in order to get the job you want in anything. We're all performing in some ways. We're right now speaking on microphones to each other in a way that's really not scripted and real. But we're also thinking about the people who aren't us who are gonna be hearing it later. We're all performing a little bit in some ways, but this idea of authenticity, we need to actually believe the performance and it has to feel real. And when you see some politicians put on the. The folks kind of pastoral voice that you were talking about, you can see it. You can, you can see right through the veneer. And others you're like, oh, he. I can see this as part of who this person is, they're showing us a manicured side of them, but it's still a side of them. And I wonder, like when you say, is this the best politician that they have that the Dems have in New York? Apparently, and we were talking about Kamala Harris before and saying, is she the best that the Dems had nationally? And you compare these two things like who do we feel is more believable here in the way they present themselves? And I think it's no contest. And if that's actually the thing that matters more, then maybe this really is the best that Democrats can run because it's somebody who we, you know, it is presentational, it is an act, but it's also, I kind of see that as who this person is. Not all the time, but a part of who he is. He's not acting like somebody who's not. And maybe it's just like we're rewarding better actors, but I don't know, I feel like we'd be able to see it more clearly.
- [43:20]
Will K. Back
I mean, there, there some people, there's a lot of people who are clearly concerned that he's covering up some part of himself that is, you know, would be threatening or dangerous. I mean, I do think we should dedicate a little bit of time here to the hysteria element of it and some of the like responses to his election because the view from a lot of people, including many listeners and readers I know because I've heard from them, is that like this guy's an anti Semite. You know, he has really radical views around Israel that align him with, you know, the people who are like genuinely dangerous or scary or whatever. And the response from a lot of national like Republican pundits, I mean an exceedingly and frighteningly common response in my view is just been like total. Like this guy is going to try and invoke Sharia law in New York City. He is a radical jihadist sympathizer who, you know, hates Jews and is going to shut down synagogues. And I mean like I've seen just like level 10 freak out stuff happening about his election hilariously in my view. Again, I just think this is so wrong. It's funny is like the Stephen Miller crowd has just been hammering this thing. Like this is what happens when, you know, half of New York City's foreign born or whatever. It's like, no, actually a lot of the low income immigrants voted for Cuomo. Like the people who overwhelmingly voted for him were educated white progressives. So it's like they're blaming his election on immigrants in New York City when really it was like the wealthier educated people who kind of carried him across the finish line based on a lot of the data that we have so far. I mean, for instance, Cuomo only. The only like economic bracket he won was people making under $50,000 a year. So. Yeah, I don't know, I mean, I'm curious to hear you guys responses or like thoughts about some of those reactions, how much of them are justified verse, you know? Yeah, just like what you think, where you think those reactions need to be tempered. I truly don't think that this guy is an anti Semite. I know there's a lot of my fellow Jews who disagree with me. I think he's radicalized on the Israel issue. I think for a lot of people like him, that is a very separate issue. The Jewish state is a very separate issue from Jews. And like, you know, he has literally all these political associations with Jewish candidates who he's worked with or worked for or you know, been endorsed by or endorsed. And it's, you know, I pointed some of this out on Twitter and a lot of. One of the common response I got was like, you know, Donald Trump isn't not a racist because Tim Scott endorsed him or because he put Ben Carson in his administration, whatever. I'm like, yeah, I'm not saying that like this is proof positive that this guy is an anti Semite. I'm just saying if you're going to claim that he's anti Semitic, I think you need a little more than him. Like, yeah, yeah. Trying to like him. Trying to explain or justify globalizing Intifada as like a non violent call to action, I think is idiotic. I don't think it means he hates Jews. I think he's just like, he's been deluded by a movement that I find, you know, just like is attempting to rewrite history. The Hamas love, it's not unique. I know people, I have friends who use that term. We have huge differences in our politics but like they'll come to my Shabbat dinners and they love me and they have no issue with Jews. They just, they're pretty different and radical than me on the issue of Israel and Palestine. Um, and that's fine, we still love each other despite it. But like it's, it's a political view, it's not like a religious whatever. And the rap lyric thing to me is so dumb. I mean, I will say the one thing that did give me pause, I'll just Say this, and I found this out after I wrote the piece, was that, you know, he has this. He, like, makes this reference to this extremist group. Related. The group of people, whatever, Lady Mawson. He has not addressed it. He has been asked for comment about it and has basically refused to answer questions about it, which, like, I think it's a silly thing. Like, he's trying to have some rap career seven years ago, and he's doing, like. He's doing a character, you know, that's like this tough street Arab dude who's, like, you know, rapping about all these different intense things. And he has a rhyme that is about, you know, an extremist Muslim group. Like, I. I just don't take that seriously. I'm sorry. I don't. I don't care. But he would do well to just be like. To say that, to explain, but he hasn't. And that. I didn't realize that. I assumed that he had, like, addressed it somehow. But somebody wrote in to Tango and said, like, you know, just for the record, he's been. There's, like, news organizations have said they've reached out to him and asked him about it, and he was, like, not offered comment or address it in any way. He's talked about the globalized Intifada thing. I'm like, all right, I don't love that. I guess that makes. That gave me a little bit of, like, an eyebrow raise. Like, you could spend one tweet on just sort of knocking that stuff down. But, you know, anyway, I'm hogging the mic here, but this is just some of my initial reactions, I guess, to some of the stuff we've been hearing.
- [49:20]
John Lowell
There's an easy political response there where it's just anything that you say that's talking about it more just prolongs the story. So that's something where I could just as easily say that that's a critique against the way that we handle political coverage in general, because we want to get those answers from lots of people in lots of different ways. But I understand that the calculus a lot of the time is, like, it's better to not even talk about it, which is frustrating.
- [49:45]
Camille Foster
I think that I was gonna say something very similar to that, Ari. I think ultimately you've got all these inbound requests from media, and sometimes they can get you on the street, and if there is an opportunity to evade addressing something that could be kind of misconstrued in different ways, however defensible it might be, sometimes it's just better to do that from a political standpoint, as opposed to trying to get around to everything that someone might, that you anticipate someone might criticize you for later on down the line. And I suspect that's probably what happened here. I think you're correct, Isaac, overall, in that there is a great deal of hysteria surrounding this candidate, the proposition that he might in fact be genuinely anti Semitic. And there's just, this is a problem of the Israel debates writ large, that ultimately you are both talking about a political institution, a nation and a people, so to speak, and a religion. And it can be really, really hard to disentangle those things when the criticisms are being made. But I think, interestingly, it's also the case that because of the bizarre relationship we have with race and identity, broadly, perhaps doing a little foreshadowing here, we often do this thing without even thinking about it, where we begin to talk about stuff in an essentialist sort of way. And while we all know, and I mean all right thinking people, most of the people in this audience, most academics, certainly most of the journalist class, that this is a social construct, we certainly talk about it as though it's immutable, as though it's essential. And I think that that's part of the reason why the Israel thing oftentimes gets. Gets screwed up, because people just kind of slip between the two things casually, in addition to the fact that there is also real avowed antisemitism out there. But I do think it's a mistake for critics of particular candidates, for people who are, say, advocates for Zionism, for example, to get into the habit of simply tossing out the allegation that, well, you disagree with me, therefore you're racist, especially when a lot of those people were previously quite critical of wokeness, quote unquote, and were generally skeptical of people doing that sort of thing. I think the frivolous allegations of racism and antisemitism aren't cost free. They actually exist at the expense of our being able to talk seriously about the actual racism and antisemitism that exists out there in the world. And I think getting ourselves into a lather this way about a candidate who there are so many reasons to believe he is not, in fact, anti Semitic. That's probably not a great thing for us to be doing with our time.
- [52:40]
John Lowell
One of the more tangled things I think you've said so far, just good. A lot of the people who have been saying wokeness reduces us and we need to be less or we need to be more careful with the way we throw around words like racist and accusations. A lot of the same camps of people. I don't like saying, like, it's the same people who are doing this. We don't really know that, but from the same sect. We hear also the refrain of that's anti Semitic. The way that you're criticizing Israel is anti Semitic. And it's okay to be to say, like, there's a cost when you overplay that card.
- [53:18]
Will K. Back
I think all of this again is worth contextualizing in that this guy is not mayor of New York yet. And it's going to be really interesting to see how he responds now to leaving the Democratic primary and entering the general. What issues he sort of softens on. You know, I'm talking about like this rap lyric thing that he hasn't addressed. He's going to get questions about that before the general election. I'm sure he's going to at some point have to talk about it, how he addresses it. I'm just very curious to see like, if or how his campaign changes. I mean, this authenticity question is live to me still, because it's like the big challenge now is going to be he's going to have to beat whoever the Democratic establishment runs with in this general election, which I think is going to be Eric Adams.
- [54:11]
Camille Foster
Just his name is Eric Adams.
- [54:13]
Will K. Back
Yeah, maybe they, it's just, it is a little hard to imagine the Democratic establishment throwing their weight behind him given all the Trump relationship and all that stuff happening. Maybe they hate what Mamdani stands for that much. They'll do that. But who knows? Maybe I throw a real legit Democrat. Maybe Cuomo doesn't drop out and runs as an independent and then it's a three person race in the general. I mean, I don't know. Like, there's a lot of stuff that could still happen. So. All right, I want to make sure we spend a little bit of time on the other big development I think this week, which is kind of the aftermath of the World War three, which happened last week. In case you guys missed it, it was really quick. It came and went.
- [54:56]
John Lowell
We wait now it happened.
- [54:58]
Will K. Back
Yeah, dude, we crushed. Yeah. So it's interesting. I, I'm not ready, quite ready to do like a mea culpa here. But I don't know, I, I had a few things that were not. I had some instincts on this that I think were maybe a little bit captured by some of the hysteria. I mean, I think if you asked me last week where we were going to be this week, I would have said Israel still bombing Iran. We're still bombing Iran. We're, you know, there's like, infrastructure in the United States being threatened by Iranian hackers. There's like chatter about what big name countries like China or whatever might get involved or Russia supplying Iran with weapons. I would have expected things to be in a much dicier spot. Again, it's early yet, but to give the Trump administration credit here, this was a really targeted strike that again today. You know, there's, there's, there was this CNN report about how there wasn't really lasting damage. Maybe the program, the nuclear program was set back just a few months. Trump administration has been pushing back really hard against this in a way that I think is not just like, they understand it's a PR battle they have to win, but they earnestly feel like this was a bullshit news report and they're pissed about it. And there's some evidence for that. I mean, I saw today that the IAEA chair, his name's Rafael Grossi, he did an interview with Radio France International and said that the centrifuges at Iran's underground fordonuclear site are no longer operational after the US strikes. He said the IAEA officials know the installations like the back of our hand, can deduce fairly precise conclusions from looking at satellite images. And added that given the power of these devices and the technical characteristics of a centrifuge, we already know that these centrifuges are no longer operational because they're fairly precise machines, they're eroders, and the vibrations from the bombs have completely destroyed them. This is not the trumpet. This is the chair of the International Atomic Energy Agency. That is a pretty conclusive statement to me from as trustworthy a source as we're going to get. And I think it's, you know, if this is the reality, Iran has not done anything for days. There's a real legit ceasefire with Israel. I mean, I don't know how could it have gone much better if, like, you were drafting this up a week ago is kind of a question that I think is worth talking about. So I am sort of thinking like, oh, maybe I had a bad read on this or I was really skeptical. Certainly I was, you know, I wasn't doing the Tucker Carlson thing, talking about Americans dying and whatever. I mean, he is, I think, has been totally tanned by this entire affair. Yeah. Which we, you know, he should be rightfully dragged across the Colts for that. Even though I think his intentions.
- [58:24]
Camille Foster
It won't matter.
- [58:25]
Will K. Back
Of course it won't matter. I respect him because it was sort of from, like this really strong anti war podcast, I think seems authentic. Yeah, Yeah. I listen to his podcast and he's like, I was really wrong about the Iraq War, and I'm really scarred by that. And I spent months, years at this propaganda network, Fox News. He's really big on hammering Fox News right now. He talks about them in every one of his podcast episodes. And. Yeah. So I don't know. I'm curious what you guys think, but I'm sort of starting to be like, maybe this went pretty much as well as it could have gone. And if this holds, that's like a huge win for the Trump administration.
- [59:05]
Camille Foster
Yeah. I mean, I will underscore that IAEA point that you made a moment ago. This is not an organization that you would expect to say things that are kind of favorable to the Trump administration just because they want them to. The Iran, just In the past 24 hours, I guess, formally has decided that they are no longer going to be cooperating with the iaea, which, again, you would expect them to perhaps raise more consternation about that. The two reasons why Iran may not want that is one, if they plan to try to ramp up their program again, or two, because they don't want it to be fully confirmed that all of this stuff has been hopelessly broken. The mystery surrounding it is actually quite good for them and is certainly better than confirmed reports that suggest that there has been kind of a massive, devastating blow dealt to their program. Overall, I do think a lot of the early response to this, and I'm surprised, as you are, Isaac, that things have kind of wrapped up so quickly. One of the lines from, I think it was Monday's newsletter, was with respect to the Trump administration and whether or not they can be trusted to respond proportionally when Iran hit back as they were expected to. And not only did he exercise restraint, what we've learned subsequent to all of this is that the Trump administration was reaching out to Iran as they were preparing to go through with this bombing, not informing them that it was happening, but trying to make it very clear, hey, this is it. This is what we're doing here. We want to de escalate. And Iran responded in kind and was giving similar sort of notification, in fact, advanced notification, of their interest in trying to have there be some sort of kind of reciprocal strike on a US Target. But they didn't want it to be devastating. It was very limited in scope. It was telegraphed in advance so that they could kind of defend themselves and move around assets so that no One got hurt. There was a bit of theater there. And the Trump administration has, pretty reliably here, seemed to be calibrating their responses. Even that now infamous moment where the President of the United States drops an F bomb on camera during a press spray at the White House, it felt almost calibrated in the direction of, it's not just Iran, it's Israel, too. He's like, kind of perhaps a little more forcefully critical of them than he needed to be in that instance than you might expect him to be, considering they're a close ally, and perhaps because he was trying to signal to Iran that we want to be a partner here so we can figure out how to bring this to a close. No one wanted the smoke, in short, and that turned out to be a very good thing after the United States achieved its own objectives, seemingly with respect to this strike. The one thing that I continue to wonder about, though, is if the Trump administration missed an opportunity to, in my estimation, do the right thing, which is go to Congress, get authorization for this strike in advance, and perhaps be really vocal about the fact that you are going to get this authorization and use that as a mechanism to try to force some sort of peace accord that would actually give you direct access to some of these facilities you're most concerned about, in which case we wouldn't be talking about whether or not the strike was successful. You would have actual the ability to be on the ground to take a look at these facilities to find the things and to make determinations about the nature of their program as it exists today and whether or not this is currently active. And that's not really an option now. So I think doing what I just described would have been kind of constitutionally better. There would have had to be quite a bit of kind of diplomatic skill exercised in trying to do that as well. And it's not clear that they have the tools to do that necessarily, but it was at least a real alternative to sending bombers. And the moment that you deploy bombers, you're no longer engaged in the difficult work of diplomacy. And there's a sense in which there's already a kind of fundamental loss for a politician.
- [63:31]
John Lowell
You know, I'm hearing all that, and that's a good caveat at the end of, we like the strike went well, went as well as it could us is accomplishing its objectives, but there's still a trade off with the door not walked through, as it were, of the diplomatic path not taken. But I'm also a little skeptical about declaring these strikes to be successes. So Far, I think in terms of their objectives, saying we want to hit these facilities, even on those narrow grounds, I still think it's probably not an A here. Destroyed centrifuges sound like that's how you enrich uranium. That's how you create weapons grade uranium to get a bomb, that's crucial, but at the same time that's not destroying the entire facility itself. Centrifuges are things that you can, like Iran can find more of. They still, I assume, because this isn't part of any report, will have some yellowkick uranium, some partially enriched uranium already. It's not as if these entire facilities have been devastated, which is what we were also hearing in the immediate aftermath. So it's not the entire death knell that I think the administration was hoping to get from this. And as such, to Isaac's point, to also your point, Camille, it is early days. And what that means here is these facilities are crippled, they are hurt, they are set back in significant ways. They are not destroyed. And Iran's ability to create a bomb is not completely destroyed. So when you choose this path, the non diplomatic path, the militaristic path, you are saying you're committing to a destruction of this capability. And I still, I still believe that the initial response is correct. That being, if you're going to choose that destructive path, you kind of can't half measure it and you got to go the whole way. The administration seems to be super committed to making sure these strikes are targeted. Saying the J.D. vance line of we're at war with their ability to create a nuclear weapon. We're not at war with them. I still am not certain that that's going to be able to last. I appreciate that they're committed to it. They're certainly more disciplined in the aftermath than we anticipated. So they definitely deserve plaudits for that. But at the same time, they're already on this path. The fact that they chose the path is the issue that I think a lot of people are responding to. It's one of the things that I think Isaac was responding to and my concern is whether or not they're going to be able to follow through with it. Because if they don't, if Iran's in the year, we start hearing centrifuges are back up, uranium enrichment's back up, and guess what? The IAEA is not allowed back in. So we don't have visibility. What do we do then? And maybe it happens before that. But yeah, they're coming to the table. So I could end up being wrong. Here still. And we could end up being wrong in implying that you can't walk both paths at once. But it's still. I think that the door to be concerned is still plenty open, and I think it's swinging on its hinges still. And we gotta be careful about, you know, as much as we're crediting the restraint and the administration's ability to stick through with their objectives, just remind ourselves what the end goal here is, which is to remove their capability, this regime's capability to acquire. Create a nuclear warhead and say that that story is not completely told yet.
- [66:51]
Will K. Back
Yeah, I mean, I do think there, all of this is framed in the things are going to happen in the next six months or year, two, three, four years that we'll have to revisit. But I do think there were pretty explicit concerns and thoughts about this escalating the situation. Iran immediately killing or maiming US Soldiers across the Middle east with attacks. I mean, just stuff that so far hasn't happened that I think we expected to have happened. Now, again, it might be the case that in two weeks, you know, some bomb goes off at some US Base or something, and then the regime is out there on Twitter talking about payback. I think they would be idiotic to do that, given what's happened and where things are now. I think there's an element of, like, the display from the combination of Israel and the US that is sort of left them debilitated and made it clear that they can inflict a lot of damage really quickly. So it's. The regime is weak, and that's the reality. I think that's a calculus that the Trump administration made in this attack. And so far, that calculus seems to be paying off pretty well.
- [68:04]
John Lowell
So I will say, Isaac, just just real briefly here, that there are still reports that Iran is we trying to execute cyber attacks within the U.S. i don't think that's completely sailed either. Like, that ship is still kind of in the harbor.
- [68:17]
Will K. Back
Yeah, that's true. I mean, the strikes, they're like missile firing was sort of a, hey, we're gonna do this thing, make sure there are no soldiers on the bases so we can blow some stuff up and then talk about what we did. I mean, it was kind of the classic theater of war that sometimes you see Iran participate in. But, yeah, maybe some of the cyber attack stuff breaks through. And again, even that, if it gets enough coverage, I could again see a world where the Trump administration responds to that. But to Camille's point, I think Trump has exercised a good deal of Restraint so far certainly was welcome to the off ramp after Iran's response and enthusiastic about it. And then, yeah, again, like, the. The sort of press gaggle where he's like, these guys don't know what they're doing, I do think is a really great way for a president in his position to handle that moment is just to be like, I've given them a chance to stop and neither of them are taking it. And, you know, sort of being equally scornful towards both. I mean, he's obviously much more aligned with Israel on this. I mean, he just coordinated all these attacks with them and everything. But he struck a deal and both sides were breaking it, and he didn't position it as, like, Iran is breaking the ceasefire deal. He was like, neither of them know what they're doing and I'm gonna handle it. You know, which is like, I think, a good way for, again, someone in his shoes to approach that.
- [69:50]
Camille Foster
Yeah. Especially in a situation where. And it seems this way, the fog of war is difficult and challenging. So we don't know for sure, but it seems as though what happened was there was a volley of rockets fired from Iran that the Israelis responded as they had been doing, and in a very reasonable fashion, attacking the site where those rockets came from to try and destroy it, so it no longer poses a threat and that material is gone off the board. To use a chess metaphor, I've been getting in the chess with my little girls. A lot of fun, actually. So I think that that even more so underscores what felt like a bit of deliberation on the part of the Trump administration. But if I can quickly comment on something else said earlier, Isaac, I'm kind of similarly looking at the Trump administration's response to the criticism that they're kind of overstating things or that the strike actually went badly when it does, in fact, seem like this might be one of those cases where Marley's Razor applies. And while they may lie with some great regularity, it might be the case that this time they are more right than wrong and that the strike was potentially a lot more effective then they thought. And I just can't miss an opportunity to further inculcate Marley's Razor into the kind of culture and milieu of this podcast in hopes that other people will begin using this publicly. And one day I'll fulfill my dream of having a stranger use it on me and be like, that's great. That's great.
- [71:22]
John Lowell
I worry that that's the reason why you agreed to co host the podcast.
- [71:26]
Camille Foster
That'S pretty much it. That's.
- [71:31]
Will K. Back
Do you need a. Do you need a. Should you redefine Marley's razor? Cause this is not something anybody who's listening or hearing that for the first time is gonna understand what you're talking about now.
- [71:39]
John Lowell
They should google it. Don't google it.
- [71:41]
Camille Foster
Well, unfortunately it won't come up. There's another one.
- [71:43]
Will K. Back
And I don't even know if this.
- [71:44]
Camille Foster
Is worse, but Marley's razor. Marley being Bob Marley and Marley's song being I shot the sheriff but I didn't shoot the deputy. Both of those things could be bad. One of them he insists he did. The other he insists he did not do. Also he insists that he shot the deputy in self defense. So that is Marley's razor, which has nothing to do with whether or not his self defense claim is true, but presumes that is at least possible or at least acknowledges that it's at least possible for you to be guilty of one alleged crime and not guilty of the other alleged crime. We should extend it further to say that if someone suggests something like Marley's razor, that is not whataboutism and it's not making excuses for someone, it's just pointing out an actual tangible fact. And I say all of that. I offer that qualification as someone who's been bruised many, many times for trying to point out, to make a nuanced point about someone who is complicated, who they may not even like, and being hopelessly smeared and bashed for it. Foreign.
- [72:55]
Will K. Back
We'Ll be right back after this quick break.
- [73:01]
Ari Weitzman
I want my dog to live a long happy life. Maybe even hit 19. So I feed them Ollie. Ollie's fresh and nutritious human grade meals are made to support their health and happiness with protein packed recipes dogs go crazy for like beef with sweet potatoes, turkey with blueberries, or lamb with cranberries. Honestly, you might start thinking, dang, my dog eats better than I do. And that's probably true when it comes to ollie. Head to ollie.com healthypup and use code Healthy Pup to get 60% off your first box of meals. Plus they offer a clean bowl guarantee on the first box. So if you're not completely satisfied, you'll get your money back. That's O l l I e.com HealthyPup and enter code Healthy Pup to get 60% off your first box. Feed your forever friend with Ollie. You know that feeling when you clear your inbox or end a meeting early or finally check your pipeline and everything's actually under control. That's what Monday CRM feels like it's fast, easy to use, and with built in AI, it helps you move faster without the busy work. Try it free@Monday.com CRM because sales should feel this good.
- [74:18]
Will K. Back
Well, speaking of being guilty of varying degrees of crimes, I think before we get out of here, we have to address some reader feedback about Camille's guilt in spreading false history and nonsense. I'll set the table here for you. Yeah, yeah, for you, Camille. So we got a reader, thoughtful and I think delivered gracefully and with care. Email from a reader named Sarah in Galveston, Texas, who objected to some of Camille's commentary about Juneteenth last weekend. At the end of her email, she said, I'd really appreciate a response here, if not to me, then to the whole podcast audience. And, you know, there's a. I'll quote from the email and then summarize some parts of it because it's a little bit long. But she basically said, I'm a listener here from Galveston, Texas, the birthplace of Juneteenth. I was disturbed by Camille's comment that the observance of June 19th as the apocryphal date of slaves in Texas finding out about the Emancipation Proclamation. What is he basing this from? And then she explains that she's just attended multiple events for the 160th celebration of Juneteenth and there's this kind of year round cultural supportive celebrating of the origin story that happens in Galveston. And she said, I think the podcast chatter and comments and observations come off pretty disrespectful and uninformed. And since you do not note any research you have done or historical knowledge you have about the observance of the holiday and its inception, you leave listeners like me without concrete information. Just more conjecture. And then she kind of goes on to talk about the way the holiday's been recognized and the existence of it lasting and its history a little bit, and then links to a galvestonhistory.org page that's sort of like archival documents and historical references about the holiday. So, yeah, she sort of floated at the end that she wanted a response on the podcast. I thought, you know, one of the things we always do on this show is, is respond to criticism and feedback. This is one of your first weeks here with us. And finally some criticisms directly with somebody that's not me. So I was like, hell, yeah, let's put Camille in the hot seat for a bit. But yeah, I want to give you a shot here to reply to this email. And I will say there was also criticism of Ari and I that we didn't question your claims about the doubtful date of the history or why we didn't bring an informed opinion to the POD in the opening moments. I will say I thought the beginning of the podcast last week was very obviously a little bit in jest, but nevertheless, I think it's worthy of a response.
- [77:10]
Camille Foster
Yeah, look, I mean, it's extemporaneous commentary on various things and there's not a whole. There's not a rehearsal beforehand. So it's possible to get things wrong. In this case, I'm pretty sure I didn't get things wrong. And Sarah, I do, in fact, genuinely want to thank you for your note. I did think it was, you know, thoughtfully written and it merited a response. The charge here is that I suggested that June 19th is the apocryphal date and to quote from her email, of slaves in Texas finding out about the Emancipation Proclamation. And I would say that that is in fact a true claim that it is the apocryphal date of slaves finding out about the Emancipation Proclamation. Because as historians like Henry Louis Gates and various others have suggested, and I don't know, I guess we can put a link in the show notes to a piece at CBS where they interviewed Gates about this. But you'll also find a number of different articles from conservative stalwarts like NPR going over the many myths associated with Juneteenth. And one of them is this assertion that the slaves found out about the Emancipation Proclamation. When I know Gordon is his last name, but I'm forgetting his first name right now, it's Gordon Granger issued this general order number three to free enslaved black persons in Galveston, which was essentially just saying what the Emancipation Proclamation already said. The challenge, of course, was that it couldn't actually be enforced because there were no Northern soldiers there. So it is true that a number of slaveholders moved to Texas and tried to maintain slavery there for as long as they could. And it is true that there were some actions taken by slaveholders to try and ensure that slaves did not find out. But as Gates and others have talked about, there was a grapevine and the Emancipation Proclamation was reported on widely in newspapers and it was discussed. And it is certainly the case that many slaves knew about the Emancipation Proclamation in advance of Juneteenth and that even this declaration on Juneteenth by Gordon Granger didn't settle the matter. It wasn't until December of this year, the same year in 1865, that you actually got an amendment to the Constitution that actually got rid of slavery. And even after that, in fact, in some Northern states, you still had slaves being held. So it wasn't. Juneteenth wasn't the end of slavery. It wasn't the date that all slaves in Texas found out about the end of slavery. And it wasn't even. I mean, it just. It doesn't actually do those things. So it's kind of an odd, unusual date to choose as the kind of particular marker of when slavery ended or when slaves were emancipated, because it isn't, in fact, that thing. It instead is a date about around which a tradition has grown. It started in Galveston, Texas, and I think, you know, there's nothing wrong with that. It's totally honorable. But as I was pointing out in our conversation, there is just a modern infrastructure, intellectually, philosophically, politically, that surrounds the date. And I think an important point that actually Gates made to me, Henry Louis Gates, I interviewed him on the podcast the Fifth Column, the other podcast that I do sometimes some years ago, and we had a great conversation. And I was listening to it recently, and he and I talked about the fact that history is not something that is about reflecting the perspectives that the persons at the time that this thing happened had. It's not about their perspective on what this meant or what it looks like. History is about what we think about those things. History has everything to do with our modern perspective and lens being cast backwards and putting these things into a particular context. And that's what we do with slavery. It's certainly what we do with emancipation. And it is reasonable for it to be what happens with a holiday that is supposed to commemorate something. And even holidays as simple as, like, MLK Day, which is supposed to honor a particular man. We have a sense of MLK that is, it's a lens that we look through. And it has everything to do with who we are and what MLK says about us. And it's less so about what MLK was in that moment. There's a sense in which you're always kind of crafting something, and there is a sense in which those historical narratives are kind of more or less true. And I think I was alluding to that with respect to Juneteenth. But again, the core of what I said about Juneteenth was it was just kind of a weird holiday because it seems to place the emphasis, at least in the apocryphal way the story is generally understood, on the kind of the strange ending of the institution and not the fact that it ended I think it's a bit odd to want to celebrate the holdout finding out or not the holdout, but the kind of last person to know finding out versus the fact that this very good thing happened, that this institution of chattel slavery was defeated, that this thing that's older than writing slavery was being shut down in a country that has kind of committed itself to becoming more perfect over time, that believes in freedom as a fundamental precept for every person in it, that we managed to get there is extraordinary. And that it was hard is important and worth talking about as well, urgently. But I do think that kind of doing it in a thoughtful, nuanced way is always appropriate. So I think I'm on pretty firm ground here. Don't think I actually made a mistake. And I hope the sourcing that I provided for the claim that I made is sufficient for you. And if it isn't, I suspect you'll write back again. And that's cool. I love so much that there's an active conversation here about all of the topics that we get into, that there's always an invitation to have a serious, sober, well informed disagreement. And I will do my best, even in the context where I'm talking extemporaneously, to say things that I am pretty confident of that I can support with facts. And to the extent I'm speculating, I will let you know that too.
- [83:47]
Will K. Back
Yeah. As always, don't forget, if you want to reach us or you believe that Camille's wrong about Juneteenth, you can email willadtangle.com w I l l.com he's the one to reach.
- [84:02]
Camille Foster
But you better bring your A game because I'm usually sorry.
- [84:07]
Will K. Back
I appreciate. No, it's a thoughtful answer. I mean, I'm sort of. I will say, I think I might disagree. I don't think it's weird that this day is the one that we celebrate. I mean, it makes. I think. I mean, I don't know, I guess it's a break from maybe the historical. Like, you know, we don't celebrate. We celebrate the day the Constitution was signed or Declaration of Independence was signed. We don't celebrate the day that everybody found out about it. You know, I mean, I get that, but there is something about this particular event that seems significant. Like the ball really was put across the line in a way that I can certainly understand why it has so much historical significance and why the celebration around the end of slavery has coalesced around this particular day. And I mean, I definitely think it's A good. I like the holiday of Juneteenth. A, because it's another day off, and federal holidays are awesome. I think we should have more of them.
- [85:12]
John Lowell
But B, because it's your anniversary and you get your anniversary, and because it's my wedding anniversary.
- [85:18]
Will K. Back
Yeah, it's my wedding anniversary, and my first son was born on MLK Day. So you can take from that what you will. I.
- [85:25]
Camille Foster
You're shooting for it. That's the best.
- [85:27]
Will K. Back
Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.
- [85:28]
Camille Foster
Aiming for.
- [85:32]
Will K. Back
I think that significance is resonant for me. The day is resonant for me, and the idea of celebrating the end of this practice in some capacity is resonant for me because it is sort of what you said at the end there, Camille. It's like such an American thing, just this horrible piece of our history that we found a way to resolve through the North Star of, like, these founding principles that we have that I think, you know, that's the kind of stuff that makes me feel really patriotic and, like, it's like we, you know, we screwed this thing up for a little while, but we figured it out by virtue of, you know, living up to the ideals that the founders set out to. And, like, they didn't do it, but they drew the map for us and we found our way because we had these, you know, these North Star guiding posts. I think that feels celebration worthy. I'm really. I'm more weirded out by the people who are so angry about the existence of Juneteenth than I am by the existence of Juneteenth, I gotta say.
- [86:37]
Camille Foster
Yeah, I mean, I appreciate that perspective. And again, I think most of the people weirded out by it. Again, even Trump, as we pointed out last week, wasn't weirded out about it initially. The weirdness has been something that's happened subsequently. And I don't think it's because he's suddenly become racist, although some people insist that he's always been racist. But I'd respond this way, and I'll try to be succinct, and I did tweet this out at someone at some point, but imagine marking the end of World War II not with VE Day, but with the day the last Access holdout surrendered in some remote jungle someplace. Juneteenth doesn't commemorate the triumph of emancipation. It is commemorating its neglect. And I think that that is uniquely pessimistic and in a very real sense is actually indicative of a lot of the things that I find most irksome about America's, quote, national conversation about race. I Think even the fact that most people. And my good friend Coleman Hughes actually wrote a piece about this around Juneteenth for the Free Press, in the way that we kind of talk about slavery suggests that it was this kind of unique form of depravity that was essentially invented by us and perfected by us. And then never in history did it exist in kind of a wider, broader, more devastating way than in the American context. And that is a kind of absurd hubris that suggests a lack of understanding of history that I think is pretty profound. And I think it's actually. It doesn't degrade the. It doesn't diminish the importance of the suffering and the awfulness of slavery to try to put it into a global context and to acknowledge that most people throughout most of history have been subjugated, profoundly subjugated. And we're all quite fortunate to live in a modern age where freedom is the bizarre expectation that we have for ourselves. I think that that's, like, beautiful. And I think that a lot of the pessimism that is associated with the way that we talk about America's past is more so about the fact that America was bad in the ways that most of civilizations have. Most civilizations have been bad going on back through eons. And we don't talk enough about how remarkable it is that America is as just as it is, that there is as much equality as exists, and that it wasn't brought about by virtue of someone just decreeing it. As a species and as a country, we've been following this moral arc that bends towards justice in a really profound way that I just don't think we talk often enough about. And again, that's why the pessimism. I'm sensitive to it. It stands out to me.
- [89:38]
John Lowell
You know, something that's interesting about that, though, is you said that we're not. It's not about the decree. It was something that you just said towards the end. And in that way, celebrating the Emancipation Proclamation itself would seem to reinforce that pessimism more than celebrating this day when we're. We're not necessarily. I don't think it's celebrating the holdouts to slavery. It's celebrating the end of the holdouts. And it seems, like, inherent in this weird date. And I think it's actually kind of a good thing to me. I'm gonna play both sides in an annoying, frustrating way. It's kind of a good thing to me that we pick a strange date to commemorate parts of history because it tells us more of a story when we ask why? Like, why do we celebrate July 4th? Well, it's when we declared our independence. We didn't really start the war. We started a war, but we didn't finish it. And then we had the Constitution signed. That was later. And, like, it's an entryway to telling more of the story when we pick a strange day. And at the same time, there's part of the date where we're choosing not to celebrate one of the other days that's intentional. Like, we choose the Declaration of Independence. And the word declaration is so interesting because we're not signing the Constitution and writing our laws. We're saying, like, you know what?
- [91:01]
Will K. Back
This.
- [91:03]
John Lowell
That's such an American thing. And when it comes to celebrating something as huge as the end of slavery in our country. And I really, really enjoyed that story that you're telling about how the US Was able to live up to its principles against this historic worldwide infection of our global society, that just celebrating a proclamation wouldn't be enough. But some date that implies the imperfectness that led up throughout its ending and the way that it still perniciously continued afterwards maybe tells that story a little better, I think. Cause without it being the state, I don't think that's something I would have been able to appreciate.
- [91:44]
Camille Foster
Hmm. Hmm. That's interesting. I do. I mean, I should have done it myself. But your allusion to July 4, the Declaration of Independence, like, you're declaring it, you haven't yet won it. You have to fight for that. But the Declaration is the thing. And in much the same way, the actual analog to that in this context would be Emancipation Day. And you could take the date that the Emancipation Proclamation was instituted, or you could take the date that the constitutional amendment was ratified. But what seems almost perniciously odd to me is the weird thing in the middle. It's just. It's kind of strange, maybe a little bit pernicious. But again, just. I think your arguments are worthwhile. And I do expect that at some point, the political kind of backlash associated with this date becoming a thing federally will go away. And if past this prologue, we will not even be asking the question, why is it that the date that we celebrate it, we'll just stop really talking about it altogether. No one will remember. And again, real victory, real progress is when there's a mattress sale on Juneteenth, and Isaac doesn't have to wonder whether or not it's okay to get married on Juneteenth, which, interestingly, I think that is indicative of the problem that it belongs to those people. For me, Emancipation Day ought to be something that can be celebrated by everyone. My predecessors lived in Jamaica. They were never enslaved in the United States. There's no sense in which kind of Juneteenth or Emancipation Day has anything to do with me directly. Right. But I can still celebrate those things because the March of freedom is something that's wonderful that we're all partakers of. And the notion that there's any sort of culpability in a modern context that is apportioned to anyone related to the actual institution of slavery is just so preposterous to me as to be absurd on its face. And it is the case that there are certainly people who talk about it as though there's something else that exists, like a more active dynamic there with respect to the relationship between victims and perpetrators as it pertains to kind of the history of this country.
- [94:09]
Will K. Back
But we're going a bit long now, I gotta say. I just. I really do. I like the. The word choice of predecessor over ancestor. It's got real king vibes, you know, I'm going to start. I'm never referring to my ancestors again. Predecessors only.
- [94:25]
John Lowell
Starting now, I guess.
- [94:26]
Will K. Back
Yeah, starting now. All right, that's. Yeah, I think that's a good place to wind down a little bit before you get out of here. As always, we need to share some. Some space for our grievances of the week. So my good friend John, you can play the music for us. The airing of grievances.
- [94:51]
Camille Foster
Between you and me, I think your country is placing a lot of importance on shoe removal.
- [94:56]
Will K. Back
All right, I've got one teed up, but I'm happy to. How are you feeling? Who wants to batter up?
- [95:03]
John Lowell
There you go. Tickets to you, man. You got it.
- [95:06]
Will K. Back
I've been. Okay. I've been holding out on any parenting or child related grievances. I'm just like. I don't want to applaud you a.
- [95:14]
John Lowell
Little bit for that. I think you've been doing a really good job of holding back.
- [95:17]
Will K. Back
Thanks. I don't think I've had. I don't think I've had a kid related thing in like a month or four or five weeks or something. So I'm trying to be conscious of like not turning into one of those people who has nothing to talk about except my newborn kid. Cause I. It's a tough place to be. Um, but I will. I do have a grievance this week which is just. We're doing sleep training. It's going pretty well, actually. He's Taking to it, which is awesome. Super pumped about that. Um, we've had, in fact, I think we're on like night eight or something and we've already had two or three nights where he's done like a full 7am to 6am or 7am to 7am night. He's also doing a thing a couple times a week or he's done a thing twice, two or three times now where he's just gone to bed at like 6:30 and woken up at 4am and just squeaked in his bed loud enough to keep both of us awake but not gone back to sleep himself. So I've just woken up at 4am a couple times this week, which is tough. But like, the sleep training thing is you don't take him out of the bed. You have to teach him like 6am at the earliest is the wake up time. So you don't take him out of his crib. You just kind of go in and check in on him and then come back. Anyway, this has all been going really well. We're very happy with development. And yeah, we just like, he's been really fussy all of a sudden. Last 24 hours. We're like, what's going on? He's not napping. He's like kind of squawking, being a squeaker all day, making like pterodactyl sounds. And yeah, we found today, while I was at work, Phoebe texted me and was like, he's got teeth coming in. It's happening. And so now we are teething in the middle of sleep training, which is not where you want to be. In fact, the woman, the culty sleep training leader who goes by like, taking care of babies is her business. All my friends use her to sleep train their kids. So we're on our program. It is a literal cult, but it seems to work really well.
- [97:18]
John Lowell
It's not a literal cult.
- [97:21]
Will K. Back
It has very cultivated vibes, but it is not a literal cult. But she says at the top, like, don't do this program if your baby's sleep training or if your baby's teething. So we didn't start it while he was teething, but now he's teething in the middle of it. And I've just been getting updates all day that he's just refusing to nap. He's just sucking on it. So I don't know what to do. We're googling. How do you help babies? So that's my grievance, is that I know that I am in for a hellish few Days while he goes through this where he's to be cranky and refuse to sleep. And if anybody has advice about how to handle teething babies and sweet at home tricks they've learned, I'm all ears because I'm bracing for the storm now. So, yeah, it's like, it's what I always say, what everybody always says. The moment you figure it out, you've got three days of enjoying what you figured out and then there's just a whole new thing you have to deal with and it all changes. Is that's my big takeaway from five months of parenting, is like spend a week figuring something out. You have three days to enjoy it, when you've perfected it and then some new variation, new variable shows up and blows the whole thing up and you have to start over again.
- [98:37]
Camille Foster
You know, the piece of advice I would offer is surrender to the suffering.
- [98:42]
Will K. Back
Which is to say his or mine.
- [98:46]
Camille Foster
Exactly like the reality. Actually, that exactly is right. I think there's a sense in which the best thing that you can do for yourself is just be super present. Cultivate some empathy for him in his circumstance. Like these teeth are ripping through your gums. You've never experienced anything like it before. It's absolutely horrible. You're tired, you're exhausted. So exhausted that you can't sleep. You're in pain, you're exhausted and you can't sleep. And it's just hard, so you scream. And I feel like the moments when I've really been able to just climb into my child's mind and imagine what it looks like from their perspective. God, Daddy, all I want is this popsicle. It is literally the only thing I want in the world. Nothing else can make me happier. In fact, I can't even think about anything else. Do you understand how overwhelming this is? Even as I'm talking about it now, living in the mind of my 3 year old, it makes me get a little emotional. Like, yeah, you're right, it is outrageous that I have the power to grant you the permission to eat this popsicle or not. And I'm just, I'm denying it to you. I'm denying it to you by fiat. And I'm not gonna have a conversation about it. And you are outraged. So outraged that you fall to the ground. You can't walk, you can't, you can't speak, you can only scream. Like, how can I not be empathetic? I can't spank you for that. I gotta say I'm sorry, buddy. I know it's tough. I Know I love you and I'm here for you and we can talk about it. How about you eat this apple instead? That's the job, Isaac. And it's good.
- [100:26]
Will K. Back
Yeah. Good advice. I'll take it.
- [100:29]
Camille Foster
Yeah.
- [100:30]
John Lowell
What's your plan, though? I'm curious, because you aren't supposed to do both things at once, are you? Retreating on any battlefield here? I would guess he can't put the teeth back in, so that's what I.
- [100:40]
Will K. Back
Yeah, the teeth are coming. I am zero. Retreat. Yeah. I have this. A really good friend of mine who. He talks about putting his kid down for a nap. And he says every time I go in there, I put him down for bed. Like, my attitude is, it's me or him, you know? And it's like, either he's gonna break me or I'm gonna break his will and he's gonna fall asleep. And I think it's so funny. And that's. I'm just like, nah, he's got to sleep, and it's good for him. When he gets the full nights of sleep, he feels good. I know he won't. I know he's going to struggle, but. Yeah, we're too far down. We've done, like, a week of work and sacrifice on the sleep training thing, so I think it's just going to be like, teethers buying some stuff for him, like, you know, giving them ice cubes or whatever makes it. I don't know what. What tricks people have to make him feel good. A little bit of baby Tylenol, probably when it's really bad and just trying to stick to the program and see if he can make it. But tonight will be the first night, I think, where we find out how bad it is. He's been going to sleep great, so I hope it sticks. But, yeah, the. We could have definitely used this news in, like, a week or two instead of this week. That would have been a lot better. All right, who's up next, man?
- [101:57]
Camille Foster
Ari.
- [101:58]
John Lowell
I've got. Yeah, I've got such bad ones, though. So I'm gonna get in and I'm gonna get out. It's such, like. I've only got, like, bougie, very privileged options for you, so I'm gonna request that. Maybe I'll play my safe zone card here. Cause Isaac always likes to say this is a safe space when responding to his criticisms. Then when I give one, it's like, that's a shitty one. That's not great. So I'm gonna ask for a little bit of grace here. Can I Get that or am I asking?
- [102:31]
Camille Foster
No, you've invoked it in advance. I don't think it can be denied. So we'll talk about you afterwards.
- [102:36]
John Lowell
Yeah, I accept. So the. God, this feels obnoxious. We have these great trail systems that go almost from our door almost to connect with the state forest that goes to the top of the most picturesque mountain in the state, which is Camel's Hump Mountain in Vermont. It's beautiful. It's so great to be able to have that access. But I'm like, I've been trying to explore more and go and up through like the connecting trails that go from here to the state park. And we mow our community and sometimes us, but not literally me will mow the trails that lead up. And they're wide, they're like cross country trails. They're like 10ft wide. But the last stretch, it's really far. It's impractical to bring the tractor up to mow it. And the grass is just like literally waist height. And it's to the point where I really like going out there. And you can do it pretty quick and just go up in like an hour to walk or even 20 minutes on E bike, which is crazy. And getting to the point where the grass is high, you get itchy. You get covered in like all this dew and water, you get bitten by bugs. And that's kind of the whole point with, with hiking. I know. But at the same time there's such well maintained trails on one half and well maintained trails on the other and it's just like this connecting bit. It's so annoying because it's not practical to go up and maintain it. So you know, I'm just walking, walking through buggy grass. And that's, that's my grievance. It was buggy grass.
- [104:15]
Will K. Back
I get that. Do you guys have ticks up there?
- [104:18]
John Lowell
Yeah, we've got some. We. So the dog like is tick city. She's two feet tall and that's right where they live. So they love getting, getting on the dog. But she's got the anti tick medication so we're just pulling tick corpses off and it's very satisfying. I hate ticks more than anything in the world. Yeah, I think it's literally true.
- [104:39]
Will K. Back
Yeah, ticks will definitely make my grievance list at some point. I met a guy recently who got a tick borne illness that now he gets really sick anytime he eats any meat. What? Like he just has to.
- [104:52]
John Lowell
Yeah, that can happen.
- [104:53]
Will K. Back
Yeah. I forgot the name of it, but it was horrifying and he has. He basically said, like, it just goes away over the course of like four or five years. But it's like some insane tick borne illness that I forgot what it's called.
- [105:06]
Camille Foster
Yeah, I think that's the dog tick and not the deer ticks, which have the Lyme disease, which is just absolutely terrible. And I don't think there's any remedy for it. Yeah, tics are bad. I had a dog tick on me actually. It fell onto my arm and I felt it fall and I looked down and saw it on there and just kind of brushed it aside before it had an opportunity to bite me and bite down. And this was Saturday, actually, in Connecticut, which is really weird. Really, really weird. Okay, I'm gonna do my creatures.
- [105:40]
John Lowell
I. I do want to say very, very quickly, before you do yours, that, like, I did have a tick that was. This was like two years ago. We were at just like a game night with a couple of our friends when I was living in Pittsburgh, one of whom is a doctor. And we're sitting there, like, playing the game, and I'm just scratching this area by my armpit and I pull. I'd like pull my shirt up. I'm like, that's a tick that must have been there for at least a day. And at this point, at least I'm like, comfortable enough to remove them because I've been doing it from the dog, but I'm like, I'm sorry, guys, this is kind of graphic. And my doctor friend's like, oh, let's get you some screens here. I'm gonna order you some blood work. This is one of the best ways this could happen. That's nice. So shout out, Robbie.
- [106:20]
Will K. Back
Oh, gosh. By the way, the tick borne illness is called alpha gal syndrome from the lone star tick. And there are 450,000 people in the United States who are affected by it.
- [106:32]
John Lowell
Literally every detail of that sound is made up. But I believe you.
- [106:35]
Camille Foster
I believe that. I believe that completely. ChatGPT is hallucinating, but it does it very well.
- [106:41]
Will K. Back
This is grok. But, yeah.
- [106:44]
Camille Foster
Interestingly, they hallucinate in very similar ways, which tells you something about the hallucinations in the training data. So, yeah, I can tell an interesting story about that, but I won't. So my complaint for this week, I have been writing, and for people who know me, writing for me is arduous. I mean, it is perhaps the greatest pain known to man. I know a lot of women complain about childbirth and how difficult and hard it is, and I'm sure it Is. But writing for me, birthing your idea. So much worse. So much worse. And I don't really know exactly what it is. I think it might be because in this particular instance, I'm writing something for Tangle, and if everything goes according to plan, as I hope it will, it'll be out there. And you can read it now and perhaps already have. But I know that Sarah is out there and she might read it, and I want it to be sufficiently robust and of sufficiently high quality that even if she finds things in it that are disagreeable, she will be able to say, well, this is presented in a thoughtful way. And finding out how to kind of put things on paper in a super thoughtful way is really hard. For whatever reason, I always think about kind of extemporaneous presentation in a context like this, where I'm talking as far more forgiving than the thing that you put in print on paper, which people will say. They look at it and say, well, you wrote that. And. Yeah, yeah, that's not exactly how I meant it. There's perhaps a better way to phrase it. Well, you wrote it and it was the edited. And you guys looked at this a bunch of times. Well, yeah, I just didn't imagine that you would interpret it that way. It feels like there's not an opportunity for that. And I feel like I'm always writing against that in many instances. And I'd say the other challenge is that in my heart of hearts, my deepest affection is for, like, Shakespeare and Cormac McCarthy, aside from, like, my wife and my children and my mama, too. And in many instances, I want to try to write in really lyrical ways the way they do. And that is hard to do. And it's even harder to do when you're writing in really technical ways and trying to nail down something philosophically. And you also want it to be accessible. So there's just a lot of competing things. And the thing that we do naturally, without thinking talking, is very different than the thing that we do when we sit down to try to craft prose on paper. And when it's done really, really well, it is absolutely magic. And as I understand, it can be grinding and difficult for other people. But there are a few things that I do that are harder or that I do with kind of greater frustration than trying to put pen to paper, so to speak, and actually get some stuff done. But I'm working on something that's coming together well, and I think I'm curious to see what folks make of my inaugural contribution to the newsletter.
- [109:47]
Will K. Back
God willing, it'll be out by tomorrow or by the time people hear this podcast on Sunday. Or I guess, inshallah, we say now we're in Zoran's world. Yeah, that's the new joke. Yeah. There is a very funny tweet about like what white dudes in Brooklyn who say inshallah have never been happier than they are right now after so Rahmandani's win, which I thought was really funny. I love saying inshallah.
- [110:14]
John Lowell
For what it's worth, I can't attest that that has been happening.
- [110:19]
Camille Foster
I want to talk. There's something I want to mention so bad. Maybe I'll make. I'll work it into the piece I'm working on.
- [110:24]
Will K. Back
All right, that sounds good.
- [110:25]
Camille Foster
Good.
- [110:26]
Will K. Back
All right, gentlemen, good seeing you. Great Gavin. And we'll do it again next week. Our Executive editor and founder is me, Isaac Saul, and our Executive producer is John Lowell. Today's episode was edited and engineered by Dewey Thomas. Our editorial staff is led by Managing Editor Ari Weitzman with Senior Editor Will K. Back and Associate Editors Hunter Casperson, Audrey Moorhead, Bailey Saul, Lindsey Knuth and Kendall White. Music for the podcast was produced by Diet75. To learn more about Tangle and to sign up for a membership, please visit our website@readtangle.com.
- [111:12]
Camille Foster
Ready to level up your everyday Quince makes premium essentials without the premium price tag. From quality clothing and stylish accessories to travel staples and high end home goods, Quince has it all. And by partnering directly with top artisans and ethical factories, Quince delivers high quality at half the cost of similar brands. Shop elevated essentials without the markup at Quince. Go to quince.comlevelup for free shipping and 365 day returns.
- [111:40]
Ari Weitzman
Quince.comlevelup Strong relationships aren't built on grand gestures. They grow through small, everyday moments of connection. That's why relationship experts created Paired, the app for couples to nurture real, lasting love through daily practice. You and your partner pair together on the app and every day Paired gives you fun personalized questions, quizzes and games that bring you closer together, strengthen your relationship in an easy, fun way in just five minutes a day. Head to paired.com couples25 to get a seven day free trial and 25% off when you sign up with code couples25.
- [112:16]
Isaac Saul
You know how we all have that one friend we go to with all our financial questions? Well, meet Experian, your bff, as in Big Financial Friend. I'm telling you, Experian is gonna be your Go to app when it comes to taking control of your finances. Experian not only has a bunch of ways to help you save, but lets you check your FICO score. Matches you with credit cards and a bunch more things you'd expect from a big financial friend. Just download the Experian app and get started for free. Trust me, you'll be up to speed with this BFF in no time. Based on FICO Score 8 model offers an approval not guaranteed Terms apply. Offers not available in all states. See experian.com for details.