ou to understand it better by improving your talent stack. So I'm going to make you more effective in your life, not just informed. That will be my goal.

So if you're wondering why to watch this, it would be because the people who do are getting smarter and better every single day. And by the way, I think a lot of you will confirm that that's true in the comments while I'm talking about other things. For those of you who are newer, tell me if you think you've gotten anything valuable from watching me for however long you've watched me, and that'll tell the other people what's up.

All right. Biden decided to bomb some factions in Syria that are being funded and supported by Iran, in response to Iranian proxies hurting at least one contractor in an attack two weeks ago. Now I would like to say that this is a good move by Biden. Now if you're tuning in to me to watch me say bad things about Democrats and good things about Republicans, I'm not going to do that. Nothing like that will ever happen here. I'm just going to talk about what works and what doesn't, and you can play the politics yourself.

When Trump and Pence won in 2016, I talked about what I call the new CEO move, which is how you establish who you are. When a new CEO is hired, they'll often do something big and splashy right off the bat. They'll maybe fire some executives who needed it. They'll reorganize some things. But the idea is to establish who you are as the new leader right off the bat, because your first impression just has all this power forever. Whoever you are on day one, it's going to be hard to change that. So you want to get it right in the beginning.

So Pence and Trump did that when they started talking to Ford and Carrier when they first got elected, before they'd even been sworn in. It was a really, really good first move, CEO kind of play. And then Trump did it again when he fired all of his cruise missiles into that airport in Syria to give Russia a little bit of a tap on the shoulder. Now people watching it said, "Wow, that might even be sort of an overreaction," or "Wow, Trump sure went military quickly." But it was a good positioning attack because it said, yeah, there was also the mother of all bombs in Afghanistan. And I believe that Trump played that exactly right by establishing right up front, you don't know what I'm going to do, which he would say that directly. You can't predict what I'm going to do. But you did see me drop that mother of all bombs and you did see me attack that airport. So just be warned. You don't know what I'm gonna do, but it could definitely include lots of violence. That is exactly the positioning you want.

Now Biden comes in and of course our adversaries are going to be poking him. They're going to find out, hey, do we have a little more freedom under this new president? Are we going to be able to get away with a little bit more? And Biden has now sent the following message: no, no you can't.

Now I know what you're thinking. Was Biden even involved in the decision? Is he so mentally degraded that it's his staff who's making the decisions? I don't think it matters that much in this context, because whether it's Biden calling all the shots or some Biden cartel collectively making decisions, it looks the same. The message is the same, which is if you mess with the United States there will be violence. There will be violence. There will be a response.

Now I heard somebody on Twitter say, why do you wait so long, two weeks? That's all so perfect. Waiting two weeks to do your attack, perfect, because it also sends the following message: you don't know when it's going to come. We're not going to forget it. It's coming. Might be today, might be in two weeks, but the one thing you can be sure of, it's coming. Now of course you want to do it right, so it might take a few weeks to pick the right target and get the right assets in place and all that. So I'm going to give Biden an A-plus for handling this situation so far. Anybody disagree? Would anybody disagree with that grade?

Now there's a secondary question, and maybe it's not a secondary, maybe it should be primary. Some would argue the Rand Paul position that there's no authorization for this attack and the president can't just start a war, basically can't just attack another country. And I think that that position needs our full respect. In fact, Rand Paul's position is not unlike Jen Psaki's position just a few years ago when Trump was doing it, and where she criticized Trump for attacking Syria, basically not authorized, all the rest.

Now here's an interesting thing. I don't really understand the whole situation with executive orders. Do any of you understand what's going on with, let's say, the whole body of executive orders over the last few years? Because I don't quite understand how the president can just sort of do stuff that you thought Congress was supposed to do. How does the president just decide to just do it himself and then people obey it? Why do they obey it? Why does anybody obey an executive order?

Now I know that there's different kinds. There's some executive orders that are just a clarification on an existing law and that's perfectly fine. Everybody's okay with that. Somebody has to clarify the law, right? It's fairly fair game. Maybe the courts have to do it if people don't like how the president did it, but it's a good process. But what happens when the president does something with an executive order that the Constitution didn't quite foresee? We let that happen.

I feel as if, and this is just speculation, I need somebody smart to tell me how wrong this is because it's probably pretty wrong, but it feels like the country has a great, let's say a great flexibility with how they treat the executive, the president, when Congress isn't effective. Because Congress has such a low rating that we're happy when anything gets done. You see your government make a decision and then implement it and it goes well. It's hard to disagree with it because the alternative would have been to take it to Congress and nothing happens and it's a big fight and nothing good happens.

So it feels as if people are just sort of okay with executive orders because the alternative looks worse, which is to depend on Congress for making decisions. So are we sort of drifting toward a d