Real Coffee with Scott Adams - Episode 1784 Scott Adams： The Wokeness Pendulum Is About To Turn Around. That Changes Everything

00:00:00.000 Good morning, and welcome to an experience that I think you're going to call later, I

00:00:09.960 don't know, you'll have a lot of words for it, you'll say spectacular, hard to describe

00:00:15.640 orgasmic perhaps, but let me tell you, you have stumbled onto, or possibly through your

00:00:23.700 own good work, you have come upon the high point of human civilization, it's called Coffee

00:00:32.720 with Scott Adams, everybody's talking about it, and it begins with something called the

00:00:37.080 simultaneous sip, have you heard of it, yes, it's sweeping the live streams, and all you

00:00:45.780 need is a cup or mug or a glass, a tank or a chalice or a stein, a canteen jug or a flask,

00:00:50.360 a vessel of really any kind, fill it with your favorite liquid I like, coffee, and join

00:01:00.720 me now for the unparalleled pleasure, it's the dopamine hit of the day, it's the thing that's

00:01:07.220 going to make everything better, it's called simultaneous sip and abs and alcohol, oh god,

00:01:20.360 well, are you in for a treat today?

00:01:25.060 Because today the news served up little golden nuggets for us, you know, some days it's just

00:01:32.100 turds, it's nothing but turds, but today, nuggets, golden, here's the first one, did you think

00:01:40.860 there was any way that the January 6th hearing committee could make themselves look more absurd

00:01:48.220 and less credible? Were you thinking to yourself, well, I don't think there's anything they could

00:01:53.400 do, I mean, really, I'm going to brainstorm a little bit, but like, what, they could wear

00:01:59.760 clown faces? I don't know, that wouldn't change much. What could they really, really do to look

00:02:06.500 more ridiculous and less credible than they have already looked? And then I look at the news 0.98

00:02:14.340 today and it turns out that Sean Penn will attend the January 6th hearings. So, well, I guess

00:02:23.580 fuck me, apparently there was a way to be more ridiculous. Now, let me be fair, I like 1.00

00:02:32.660 Sean Penn, and I actually like the fact that he's an activist. He does seem to put his own

00:02:41.140 body and reputation and probably money of some amount in two causes. So I would say he's not

00:02:49.900 like the regular Hollywood people, right? I like the Hollywood people who are, you know,

00:02:55.960 really putting their sleeves up and getting involved. That's why I like Melissa Milano,

00:03:03.120 even though I disagreed with practically everything she said. I always had full respect for her because

00:03:08.460 she was a full participant who also happened to be famous for something else. Those kind

00:03:14.960 I like because I think I'm, you know, a minor version of that. So I want to defend myself,

00:03:20.140 I suppose. But if you're actually trying to help, we should be happy about it. It doesn't matter

00:03:26.820 that you also were a good actor at one point. That said, the way the public will view the January

00:03:35.140 6th thing when you add a professional actor is that it's theater. Am I wrong? What does your brain say

00:03:46.060 when you say, well, today's broadcast will be the January 6th hearings and this episode will feature

00:03:54.100 Sean Penn. Sean Penn will be making a celebrity appearance on the January 6th hearings. Those will

00:04:02.620 broadcast on all the major networks. Am I right? It's just the association is the only thing that

00:04:09.920 could have made it look more ridiculous. Even though, like I said, I respect Sean Penn. He does 0.62

00:04:16.100 the work. All right. There's a, I saw a Clay Travis tweet in which he was tweeting a video. I'm not sure

00:04:24.900 who made it, but it was 10 minutes of Democrats saying elections had been stolen. 10 minutes. But he's

00:04:32.580 to the clips, you know, the clips are very short, but it's just, yeah, everybody from, uh, you know,

00:04:39.920 Hillary Clinton to everybody, you know, lots of pundits saying that, uh, the election had been stolen

00:04:45.160 in some election in which a Republican won. You know, it was more than one election. And when you see

00:04:52.400 10 minutes of it, solid Democrats saying this election was stolen,

00:04:56.960 it just reminds you who controls the propaganda machine in this country. It's got to be the left

00:05:06.660 because it is just generally true that whoever loses thinks the election was stolen.

00:05:15.240 And it's always been that way. It's just always been that way. When you lose, you're like,

00:05:20.220 I think that election was stolen. So maybe it's not a left or right thing. But they sold us to,

00:05:28.080 sold it to us as, uh, if you say it and you're on the right, you're supporting the insurrections.

00:05:35.460 Well, I did a long thread yesterday on an idea that I'd already shared on a live stream here. So

00:05:40.560 you've heard it. The idea was that Trump, uh, instead of running for president,

00:05:48.420 starts a media, uh, let's say debate centered media entity in which he would host debates

00:05:56.140 on major topics. And it would just be a big event and it would support truth social. And it would

00:06:01.840 allow him to run air cover for somebody like DeSantis, just as an example. And

00:06:09.640 it's interesting. If you look at how people responded to the tweet, there were a lot of

00:06:17.060 people who liked it. You know, they would check the heart, but very few people would retweet it.

00:06:24.060 Why is that? I think average people are afraid of Trump or Trump supporters. I think an average

00:06:32.920 person who is a Trump supporter who sees this idea and says, yeah, actually Trump would be even

00:06:39.240 better as the person who helps us beat the fake news monopoly. Like that, that would be a higher

00:06:46.060 calling than president, which is sort of a rerun in his case. So a lot of people responded to the

00:06:53.000 idea by saying, yeah, I like it enough to hit the like button, but I'm a little concerned about

00:06:58.660 retweeting it because it suggests that Trump would have a higher role than even being president.

00:07:06.200 But it would be different than being president. So, and I'll tell you one of the things that's sort

00:07:10.920 of emerging in my understanding of things is that a lot of Trump supporters just want revenge.

00:07:18.220 or, or as one person put it, vindication, basically just to see Trump win to say, okay, he probably won the

00:07:28.160 other time too. You know, so here we go. I told you Biden was a mistake. You know, now, now I'm, I'm right.

00:07:37.080 So a lot of this is about being right, getting revenge, you know, vindication, ego.

00:07:47.000 And I want to contrast that with something that I've said publicly a bunch of times, that when I

00:07:54.940 supported Trump in 2016, it was because privately, I don't think I said it as much during 2016,

00:08:03.300 but after the fact, I'll tell you, privately, I wanted him to break everything

00:08:08.340 because I thought we were just becoming a constipated nation. I thought the Republic,

00:08:16.060 the Republic was just constipated. It just couldn't do anything anymore, but we're really good at fixing

00:08:22.740 stuff. Am I right? We're really bad at like improving things that have ossified. But if you break the

00:08:32.600 shit out of everything, we can put things together better, better than maybe anybody, any culture, 0.95

00:08:40.320 all right, I'm going to be a little, you know, American centric here. But I think America could 0.93

00:08:44.660 probably put things back together better than anybody. We're really good at creating. But you

00:08:52.920 can't create if your atmosphere is that everything's stuck. And that was the world that called Trump,

00:09:00.760 basically. I don't think Trump decided to be the president. I think the world called him.

00:09:07.640 Because it said everything's stuck. We need somebody who will just break the shit out of everything. 0.98

00:09:13.500 And then we'll fix it. So I think he did that to some extent, right? And maybe some people would want 0.98

00:09:20.380 more of it. But I think for sure he broke the news, meaning that there was a fake news industry

00:09:29.400 that was really controlling the people, almost like that movie, The Matrix. I mean, I felt like we were

00:09:35.820 in The Matrix because we believed the news. And we didn't quite understand how illegitimate it was.

00:09:43.160 And then Trump comes along and he basically, you know, pulled up the cover and said, all right,

00:09:48.500 look what they're doing to me. You can see it right in front of your eyes. Look what they're saying

00:09:53.220 about me right now. And then look with your own eyes. Here's the transcript. I mean,

00:09:58.380 he never said those words. But that was the effect. The effect was he proved to us

00:10:04.140 that everything we knew about everything was wrong. Because it came from the news.

00:10:09.540 And the news was just made up propaganda.

00:10:15.020 So he did break everything in terms of our mental models. Would you accept that?

00:10:21.780 He didn't break the systems, which is probably a good thing. He broke all the ways we think

00:10:27.440 about them. Right? The way you think about the world is really different. Because of just,

00:10:34.220 you know, the conflict he brought, the, you know, the, the mental destruction, that he was like,

00:10:41.620 he was like a psychological bulldozer. And it didn't matter what the, what you were thinking

00:10:49.860 before he got there. He just bulldozed your thoughts away and then said, hey, how about this idea? And

00:10:57.200 you might have loved it and you might have hated it. But all of your other stuff got bulldozed away.

00:11:02.000 And now you were talking about his stuff. So it was a really fundamental destruction of the

00:11:07.460 American mind. And maybe global, I don't know. But far more than the American mind.

00:11:13.520 So I got what I wanted. I wanted destruction. He delivered it. Now the second part is, can we fix it?

00:11:22.020 That's what my idea was about. My idea is that if we could form some kind of a system or a model

00:11:31.760 in which you could have good information delivered to the public without the propaganda, in other words,

00:11:38.180 a fair debate with experts. But here's the important part. It has to be interesting. It has to be

00:11:45.260 provocative. It has to be entertaining. We've never really had anybody who could do those two things.

00:11:52.020 You know, Trump could bring the seriousness and the entertainment at the same time. Name one other

00:11:59.900 person who could do that. Nobody. All right. I'll shortcut that. Nobody could do that. He's the only one.

00:12:05.660 And that's the thing that needs to get fixed. Because if we don't understand stuff such as,

00:12:14.960 you know, is nuclear energy good for us or bad for us? Imagine if we'd had, let's say, more effective,

00:12:23.540 fair news for the last 20 years. Do you think we would have an energy problem right now

00:12:29.100 if the news business worked? I would say no. Because if the news business worked,

00:12:37.520 it would have been a long time ago that people said, you know, we really should keep these nuclear

00:12:42.440 plans running. We figured out how to keep the nuclear waste on the site that produced it. Because,

00:12:48.780 I mean, that can't be that much worse than, you know, what was already there. At least in people's

00:12:54.100 minds, it's not that much worse. And so it solved the psychology of where does this waste go.

00:13:00.080 That was solved. How many people knew it? You don't have to take it to, you know, some Yucatan

00:13:07.100 mountain or something. Just store it on site. And how about the danger of the nuclear plants?

00:13:13.840 We were all 20 years behind in our knowledge of it. We thought that the, let's see, is it version 2,

00:13:21.680 Gen 2. I think Generation 1 is the only one that's had meltdowns. And we're on Generation 3,

00:13:30.000 which has never had a meltdown. Never. Nowhere. So the technology that we use for nuclear power now

00:13:39.280 has already solved the big problems. And it's been a while. It's solved them for a while.

00:13:45.020 So if the news had been telling us that from the start, instead of saying, hey, look at Greta,

00:13:52.280 because this is more interesting. Wouldn't we have electricity now? Oh, shit. I'm looking at the

00:13:58.700 comments. Roe got overturned. Well, did that just change my show? Yeah, I assume you can confirm that

00:14:07.120 over on YouTube. Oh, over on the Locals platform, the comments are faster. Roe was just overturned.

00:14:13.200 All right. Well, then you weren't even listening to what I said, were you? Wow. Live, live streaming.

00:14:21.740 This is kind of cool. Now, can somebody tell me in the comments, so I don't have to look at it

00:14:27.360 myself, was the actual ruling the same as the draft? The actual and the draft were the same? Does

00:14:36.760 anybody know yet? Or is it too soon? Alito was the majority opposing? What?

00:14:51.920 Let's see. Just looking at your comments. Too early to know? All right. Well, that's interesting.

00:14:57.300 The opinion is on 213 pages. I guess we'll find out if any of it changed.

00:15:07.480 Wow. So they pick a Friday. And when does the Supreme Court session end? Pretty soon? Or is this it?

00:15:19.540 Okay. And what was it? Five, four. Next week it ends? Okay. So it happened just as people

00:15:27.880 said it would. All right. So one of the things... Six, three? It was a six, three decision. Okay.

00:15:40.920 I guess we expected that, right? So that's interesting. So here are some of the things we've learned

00:15:55.640 from that. Number one, when you see a draft opinion that looks that complete, maybe it's

00:16:03.440 the actual opinion. Or it will be. The second thing is, did that just guarantee that the Democrats

00:16:17.520 will keep power? So now the Democrats have the Supreme Court two issues, right? They've got the gun 0.98

00:16:29.240 issue. The New York Supreme Court decision about concealed carry in New York, making it okay to do a

00:16:37.960 concealed carry in New York, according to the Supreme Court. Now, and then this. So these are the two

00:16:47.260 things that, of course, you know, conservatives would want a lot. But it's going to be expensive

00:16:54.740 because it might affect the election. Do you think this will affect the midterms and then 2024?

00:17:03.840 I think it would affect the midterms more.

00:17:08.560 I'm seeing yeses and noes. It's sort of mixed.

00:17:15.100 So the states still have laws on abortion. So the states can do what they want now. That's the point of

00:17:20.960 taking the federal government out of it. No effect on midterms? I don't know. We'll find out.

00:17:31.180 Scott sounds a tad disappointed. About what? Do I sound disappointed? About what?

00:17:40.860 I'm not sure which topic you're on that I allegedly sound disappointed in.

00:17:44.840 Maybe I just sound disappointed. But now, I feel like it would be ridiculous to talk about anything

00:17:53.300 else. Because this is the only thing anybody's going to talk about today. I have such a good

00:17:57.620 show planned. But now it's irrelevant, isn't it? Because you only want to think about that.

00:18:03.960 Wrong on this, Scott. Only 19%. I don't know what 19% is.

00:18:07.640 213-page ruling.

00:18:14.960 All right. Well, we'll get back to that.

00:18:20.420 James is saying, Scott doesn't care about abortion as an issue. No, that's not true.

00:18:26.220 Now, let me clarify. It's always hard to summarize somebody else's opinion if it's even a little

00:18:33.720 bit complex. Because nobody's going to like your summarization. My opinion of abortion is not that

00:18:41.840 I don't care. My opinion is I'm not a person who should be part of the decision. In other words, I think

00:18:49.800 that I make the decision-making process worse by participating. Now, if you think that you make

00:18:58.320 it better by participating, then you have every right. I wouldn't talk you out of it.

00:19:05.880 I'm just talking about my own moral, ethical decision. Now, somebody's saying that I'm being

00:19:12.580 a coward. No, I'm being consistent. Let me explain it in the simplest way. The reason I don't

00:19:18.520 participate in that question is the same reason I wouldn't want a woman to tell me if boys should 1.00

00:19:25.060 get vasectomies or if boys should be circumcised. So let me explain it. If there's a question

00:19:35.780 that is specific to men's bodies, I don't fucking want to hear a woman talk to me about it at 1.00

00:19:43.040 all. Stay away from my body. How about the men will decide what we do with our bodies? Because 1.00

00:19:50.880 we have more appreciation. This is some kind of hypothetical situation. How about you stay the

00:19:57.400 fuck away from our bodies with both of your opinions and your tools, and I, in turn, will stay the fuck 0.99

00:20:04.820 away from your body? Is that not fair? How's that not fair? So if somebody says that, you know, like I'm 1.00

00:20:13.020 afraid to get into the issue? Seriously? You think that's bothering me? Not at all. I'm just trying

00:20:20.780 to be consistent for the first time, you know, that you've ever seen it in your life. Maybe that's

00:20:25.340 why it throws you. When people are consistent, people are like, oh, I don't know what I'm seeing

00:20:29.500 here. Well, what if the baby is male? That's an interesting debate point, but I'm not really

00:20:39.320 sure worth focusing on. Somebody says, as a father, I don't agree. My wife should be able to abort my 0.99

00:20:47.900 child. Okay. And then jump right in there with your opinion. And by the way, if I were in that

00:20:59.520 situation that was described, then maybe I would think I had something to say about it. Maybe. I

00:21:07.700 don't know. I'm not in that situation. So at the moment, I'm not, and I don't plan to be. So

00:21:12.080 take myself out. All right. Here was an article in the Wall Street Journal, and Brit Hume summarized

00:21:23.600 it this way. And I was going to say this in public too. And I have to chastise myself because

00:21:32.700 the only reason I didn't is that I thought I would be mocked. Now, I'm not really driven

00:21:40.720 by embarrassment. But I just didn't want to bother. You know, the trolls come in. I'm like,

00:21:48.180 I don't know. It's like extra work. So I'm chastising myself for not doing something that

00:21:55.280 was worth doing. I just didn't want the extra work. But Brit Hume did. And he tweeted about

00:22:04.340 the Wall Street Journal article. He said, and this is about January 6th. He said, far from

00:22:10.060 proving Trump nearly blew up our democracy, the testimony has shown his effort collapsed

00:22:15.980 because Republican officials who voted for him refused to go along. Now, that's pretty

00:22:22.100 close to what I've been thinking. And it goes like this. What did you learn from the hearing

00:22:29.320 so far? I learned something that I didn't know. And let me ask you, did you know this?

00:22:37.500 What I learned from the hearings is that Trump had no fucking support for keeping office if 0.95

00:22:44.860 the system, even if it were flawed, even if flawed, every Republican in the room, his own 0.98

00:22:53.760 family. He didn't have support from his own family. You know, as soon as you saw that Don

00:22:59.940 Jr. was saying, shut this shit down, that should have been the end of the conversation. 1.00

00:23:07.260 Right? You know, as soon as you saw Ivanka said, well, I thought Bill Barr was probably right 1.00

00:23:11.960 about that. We should have been done talking about this completely. Trump didn't even have

00:23:19.080 the support of his children. And you know why? Because his children are smart. And they

00:23:28.460 agreed with every other Republican, apparently, who was close to him and had any power. Nobody

00:23:34.700 wanted any part of it. Now, that's what I learned. Now, you did learn that there were lawyers,

00:23:41.180 lawyers, keyword lawyers, who were providing him an argument for keeping power.

00:23:49.080 That's what lawyers are. They're the people who give you the argument that will allow you

00:23:56.960 to get what you want. It's their job to tell you how to weasel the system. It's not their

00:24:03.400 job to not weasel. They're paid weasels. And I say this with complete respect. Because if

00:24:09.620 they do a good job of it, that's why you hired them. You know, you could hate what Mark Goliath

00:24:15.300 as folks did, changing some election rules before the election. But it was legal. And it

00:24:24.000 was kind of awesome. You could hate how it turned out if you're on the other side. But

00:24:30.480 if it made a difference, that's why you pay lawyers. Because they can get some stuff done.

00:24:36.360 So what I got out of it that I literally didn't know, is that the base of support for Trump

00:24:46.260 keeping power was so weak, it was basically non-existent. And we spent four years listening

00:24:54.260 to Democrats say that it was sort of a fact that Trump had the support that was sort of

00:25:01.500 fanatical. And it was Republicans who would suddenly violate the Constitution to keep their

00:25:10.160 hero worship guy in power. And the Democrats sold that primarily to each other. Because I

00:25:18.020 feel like Democrats believed it because they were telling each other. But let me ask you this.

00:25:25.660 How many of you who are Republican, so you have to be Republican to answer this question, right?

00:25:31.980 How many of you who are Republican would have ever supported throwing the Constitution away

00:25:37.820 to keep Trump in power? Now, I get that you wanted more visibility on the election.

00:25:46.340 Separate issue. You know, demanding visibility on election, demanding audits, demanding a delay

00:25:53.120 to make sure who won. How many of you, if let's say there had been a delay, and let's say that

00:25:59.700 somehow the election had been audited, and let's say you were satisfied that the audit actually did

00:26:06.740 prove that Trump lost. And let's say you knew it. You're like, oh, well, I was pretty sure he won,

00:26:15.160 but this is a very credible audit. People even audited the audit, and now I'm sure he lost.

00:26:21.720 Hypothetically, let's say that happened. And you're a Republican. Do you really want him to keep power

00:26:27.640 anyway? Because you like his policies? I feel like that's not one Republican anywhere ever. Like, none have

00:26:34.880 ever been born who would ever have that feeling. And yet the Democrats sold that like that was just

00:26:41.780 obvious and observable. I mean, just look at it, they would say. Look at those big crowds. They're

00:26:46.780 chanting, they're wearing his hat. They'll do anything he wants. Not even close to true. Not only was it

00:26:56.000 not close to true, but didn't you all know that? I'm not the only one who knew that, right?

00:27:03.800 You all knew that. You all knew that zero Republicans would support a man over the Constitution. You knew

00:27:13.640 that. Because that is almost the definition of what a Republican is. A Republican is somebody who's

00:27:19.560 going to favor the, you know, the Constitution over just about everything. Like, that's the whole

00:27:27.180 frickin' point, right? So, it's amazing that they sold that. And it's equally amazing, I think, and I credit,

00:27:38.040 you know, Britt Hume for pointing the sound, having, you know, more guts than I did, that that's actually

00:27:45.460 the only thing I got out of it. The only thing I got out of it is how right I was that there was never any risk

00:27:52.300 of an insurrection. Because, because what if, you know, now that we know, even if these insurrectionists

00:27:59.240 had, you know, what, taken control of a room, a room in a building with no weapons, and that, like,

00:28:06.360 even if they succeeded and said, this is our room, we take over the country, you need every one of

00:28:12.700 those advisors to Trump, or at least most of them, to at least say, yeah, yeah, good on you for

00:28:19.540 violently, or in some cases, getting into our Capitol. I don't think any of them said that.

00:28:29.540 Has there been one, one person who's not a lawyer who was really trying to literally do an

00:28:39.660 insurrection? There's zero evidence of that, right? So if you ask me, the January 6th thing has proven

00:28:46.520 to the country that there was, not only was there no insurrection attempt, but it was never even

00:28:53.920 possible, and everyone knew it. That's what I'm getting. Are you, you know, of course, it's my

00:29:03.340 biased lens on this, but that's not that bad, is it? I mean, is that unbiased, or is that closer to,

00:29:11.240 closer to neutral? I don't know, I feel like it's neutral, but I'm also aware of the fact that I

00:29:18.460 would have a bias there. I don't know. It's hard to judge myself, and I don't think you're necessarily

00:29:24.760 a better judge either, but it's hard to know if that's an objective opinion, isn't it? What do you

00:29:30.420 think? I don't know. This is one of those situations where I'm completely aware that I would not be

00:29:37.400 able to judge my own opinion. I think that the January 6th proved that there was no risk,

00:29:45.140 but I could be wrong. All right. There's big news about, you know, people making fun of Biden

00:29:54.660 in his little cheat sheet. Did you see that item? So we had a little cheat sheet for some event,

00:30:00.000 and on it was, you know, one bullet point at a time saying what was going to happen and then also

00:30:06.960 what parts he was supposed to do. And he's being mocked because they would, the sentences, some of

00:30:12.820 them started with uppercase emphasized you. You introduced the speaker. You go to your seat and

00:30:23.960 sit down. Now, he's being mocked for that. I have to defend him on this. I have to defend

00:30:31.700 him. If you've spent any time doing public events, this is what you want. He's just well prepared.

00:30:41.460 I'm just going to give an A plus to his staff. You know, this is complete, this story is completely

00:30:47.120 backwards. This story should have been, Biden has a good staff. This is exactly what I want

00:30:54.160 you to give to me if I'm running for president or I'm president. I want my staff to give me this.

00:30:59.200 Let me tell you why. Right. Prior to Biden walking into that room, how much thought did he give to

00:31:07.540 the event? He should have given none. That would be the right amount. Because if he's just going to go

00:31:14.600 in and say some words and leave, you know, it's not a debate. He should put the least amount of

00:31:20.340 effort into that as possible. And his staff has done literally everything, you could tell by this

00:31:28.240 cheat sheet, to make his thinking zero. Now, the way you've interpreted this is, the way you've

00:31:37.060 interpreted it is that he's so incompetent and his staff knows it that they have to, like, treat him 0.96

00:31:41.980 like a baby. Possible. Possible. But let me tell you that when any time any, like, famous person 0.98

00:31:53.100 or a public figure has lots of events, do you know what the support people would try to do really,

00:32:00.240 and they'll really try hard? They'll try to remove all of your other thinking. It's a service.

00:32:06.040 They try to remove all of your thinking so that you can only think on things that, you know, your brain

00:32:12.300 is important for. So the part where it says, you take your seat, here's why that's important.

00:32:21.320 If you saw on there, take your seat, would you interpret it as, oh, I'm supposed to tell everybody

00:32:27.100 to take your seat? Or would you interpret it as, you just go take your seat and somebody else will

00:32:33.740 take care of the opening remarks? You actually do need to be that clear. It's very important that

00:32:40.160 his notes said, you take your seat. That really does help. So this story is completely backwards.

00:32:47.720 All right. And the reason I defend Biden every now and then is because you have to understand it's

00:32:54.880 both sides doing this nonsense. Now, here's the defense. The defense could be this. Trump wouldn't

00:33:05.080 need that, right? Trump didn't need it. I'll bet Obama didn't need it. But it would be useful.

00:33:12.640 I would need it. I wouldn't say I would need it, but I would find it useful. If somebody gave

00:33:17.800 it to me, I'd say, oh, good job. But Trump was a different character. Trump could go into any room

00:33:24.720 without preparation and somehow make it work, right? And that was his specific skill. You could throw

00:33:31.760 Trump into any room, any room. It doesn't matter what's happening. And he makes it work. So he wouldn't

00:33:39.180 need to have the, you know, the perfection. He could just say, who says this? All right, you're up here

00:33:44.800 next. And then he would just, you know, orchestrate it and everything would be fine. And if he didn't

00:33:50.000 like the way other people were orchestrating it, Trump would have said, no, you do this

00:33:54.180 over here. All right, well, I'll read this. You do that. And he would have just, he would

00:33:59.240 have turned it into what he wanted to do. So you never had to tell him what to do because

00:34:05.060 he's, you know, such a micromanager. He would just do what he wanted to do anyway. So I defend

00:34:12.660 Biden on that. All right. I'm watching the collision, I guess, of wokeness versus Title

00:34:22.120 IX. Now, Title IX is what gave young female athletes the same resources for sports as boys

00:34:31.900 have. And so it's been hugely successful. So female sports are like way up since before 1.00

00:34:41.120 Title IX. And it's been, you know, an entirely positive thing. So could we all agree? I'm

00:34:49.880 not sure if you do, actually. I guess I'll find out. Do we all agree that Title IX did what

00:34:55.760 it was trying to do? It promoted female sportsmanship and stuff? And that it worked? Yes? Yeah, say 1.00

00:35:07.300 yes. I mean, I'm sure that probably conservatives or somebody else argued against it back in

00:35:13.280 its day. But it worked. All right? So here's another thing I'm in favor of. Wokeness. You

00:35:20.260 don't like it so much. My complaint with wokeness is it just goes too far. And it's sort of unforgiving.

00:35:27.880 So, but I don't have a problem with referring to people in the way they would like to be referred.

00:35:32.220 I consider that just good manners. But wokeness, which I like, not the extreme version, and

00:35:40.880 Title IX, which I like, have a little bit of a problem, don't they? Because it's hard to

00:35:48.700 be in favor of both of them. Here's why. Athletes are the opposite of wokeness. When you say,

00:35:59.800 hey, hey, let's have a system that really supports worshiping the best athletes, because that's

00:36:10.480 what sports do. It ends up being about the good athletes, right? It's really reward goes

00:36:16.360 to the good athletes. Here's the problem. What makes somebody a good athlete? It's kind

00:36:22.800 of how you were born. Now you're going to say, no, it's not just how you were born. It's

00:36:27.880 also hard work and practice and all that, to which I say, do you know what makes a person

00:36:34.700 work hard? And it's probably the way they were born. Sorry, it's probably all the way

00:36:44.740 you were born. I have a good work ethic, meaning that I'm willing to work hard to get what I

00:36:56.060 want and always have been. I was born that way. I worked hard in first grade. I mean,

00:37:00.780 just always. There's no way in hell I learned that. I was just born into it. And there's

00:37:07.580 no way in hell people who just don't have that learn to be lazy or something. It's just

00:37:13.360 part of what you're born with. It's just your chemistry. My chemistry makes me stand up.

00:37:18.540 Some other people's chemistry says, stay on the couch a little bit longer. Mine won't let

00:37:22.680 me. It's not like I thought it through and decided that standing up was better. I just

00:37:27.900 have different chemistry. So it says, Scott is jealous of athletes, to which I say, of

00:37:34.420 course, of course. I would be jealous of anybody who had any gift that I didn't have. I mean,

00:37:40.220 it's not going to change my life, but in the conceptual way, I wish I'd have those things

00:37:45.240 as well. So that would be a fair statement. But here's my problem. Wokeness is about treating

00:37:53.980 everybody with the same level of respect. Here's my own definition. Treating everybody

00:37:59.680 with the same level of respect, no matter what their situation is. Is that fair? That wokeness

00:38:07.100 is about treating everybody with the same level of respect and access, of course, no matter

00:38:13.240 how they were born, what their situation is. So that captures everything from LGBTQ to any

00:38:21.440 racial stuff, religious stuff, handicaps, or different ableness, whatever is the better 0.98

00:38:28.660 term. So here we have some people supporting a system which worships people's genetic superiority,

00:38:38.980 which is Title IX, and really anything involved with sports, not just Title IX. And then at the same

00:38:44.920 time supporting the thing that's the opposite of that, which is, no, no, no, it's not how you're born,

00:38:49.940 like we're all equal value. They are opposites. And what I like about this is that if you can hold the

00:38:58.780 opinion that we should be worshipping athletes, but also we should be woke, you don't make any sense

00:39:05.360 at all, I don't think, to me. So here's my point of view. I feel that I'm consistent. And the consistent

00:39:15.800 thing is, I think everybody's the same value. People are suited for different functions. Some people can

00:39:24.540 lift heavy objects. Some people can write Supreme Court decisions. So, you know, definitely people are

00:39:31.520 suited for certain functions. But my own view is everybody has the same worth. And if you had any other

00:39:36.780 view, it's just, it just makes everything not work. So it's just a practical view. And I take that to

00:39:45.720 athletes. They're fun to watch. But worshipping him is like worshipping luck. Because they didn't ask to be

00:39:52.680 born that way. They were just born with a certain set of gifts, including the opportunity to use them, luck,

00:40:00.020 including the hard work that's probably genetic. I saw a video in which some doctor was saying

00:40:12.680 that the triple vaxxed are the most likely to die from COVID. What do you think of that? Do you think

00:40:20.680 that's true, first of all? That the triple vaxxed are the most likely to die from COVID. So that's pretty

00:40:28.420 scary, right? And there's a related story that the people who get cancer treatments, I don't know if

00:40:37.180 you know this. This might be breaking news for some of you. But the people who get cancer

00:40:41.080 treatments are the most likely to die from cancer. Did you know that? The people who get cancer

00:40:50.020 treatments are the most likely to die from cancer. Do you know why? It's because people who don't have

00:40:59.660 cancer don't get cancer treatments. If you didn't see that coming. With vaccinations, here's the

00:41:08.700 question one must ask. And maybe it's been answered, but I didn't see it. Who is most likely? Not in every

00:41:15.360 case. Not in every case. We're only talking statistics. We're not talking individuals. As soon as you tell me

00:41:21.780 about the individual who made an individual decision, we're on a different topic. You're talking about

00:41:26.620 individuals. I'm talking about the average. Only the average. Completely, selectively, exclusively

00:41:32.520 the average. And when you try to, I know you're going to, I know you're going to say, but I know a

00:41:38.520 person. No, no, no, no. Different topic. On average, who's likely to get triple vaxxed? Would it be somebody

00:41:49.340 who's at high risk? Yes. Old people. Overweight people. People with five comorbidities. They're

00:41:59.660 vaxxing the piss out of themselves because they think their odds are better that way. Now, who is

00:42:06.000 most likely to die from COVID? Whether they're vaxxed or not, it's got to be the old people and the fat 1.00

00:42:12.900 people and all the same people who have been dying before, right? So should you be alarmed that the

00:42:20.580 people who are triple vaxxed are also the ones dying at the highest rate? I think that's just what

00:42:27.400 you'd expect. If the vaccinations worked really well, but not 100 percent. So let's not call them

00:42:36.040 vaccinations. Let's call them shots. So if the COVID shots were 100 percent effective, you know,

00:42:44.120 that'd be terrific, but they're not. All right. Enough about that. So just beware your statistics

00:42:53.860 because it's entirely possible that the shots are helping people, but they're still dying

00:43:01.580 more than they should. Maybe. I don't know. I mean, how would I know? All right. Here's a provocative

00:43:11.100 tweet that I tweeted today that got way less pushback than I was expecting, but I think it hasn't broken

00:43:17.200 out of my bubble yet. You know, there's some tweets that get a positive response because your followers

00:43:23.120 see them, and then you get one non-follower who sees it and says, oh, I take that a little differently,

00:43:29.880 and then it leaves your bubble, and then the trolls come in. I mean, that's sort of the pattern.

00:43:35.720 But the trolls hadn't come in yet when I tweeted this. I said, if things get much worse in the U.S.,

00:43:41.580 men will take back leadership of the country. Now, I'll explain myself so you know the context of

00:43:49.080 that in a moment. But it was meant to be provocative, right? Obviously. It was meant to provoke.

00:43:54.220 But it's also a real point, and I'll tell you the real point in a moment. But here's the thing

00:44:00.180 to surprise me. The number of women who agreed with it. And the number of women, women, who said that

00:44:10.060 it was a big mistake to give women the right to vote. Now, I think they're half kidding, but maybe 1.00

00:44:16.800 half not. I don't know. I can't tell. You know, I can see that some of the comments, some women are 0.79

00:44:23.540 saying I agree. Now, I'm not going to go that far, of course. But here's what I meant when I said if

00:44:31.040 things get much worse in the U.S., men will take back leadership of the country. Number one, because 0.99

00:44:37.420 I'm very woke, let me specify that when I say men, I don't mean their genitalia, right? When I say men, 0.87

00:44:46.600 I mean, there's a male way of being that encompasses a certain set of traits. But you could be a woman

00:44:53.860 who has those traits. You could be identified as anything you want, and also have those traits. So it's the

00:45:00.060 traits I'm talking about. But I hope you'll appreciate that I made every topic about trans. Can you give me a

00:45:08.460 hand at home? I made this about trans, and I promised I would. And there's one thing that the January 1.00

00:45:16.460 6th, if I hadn't mentioned this before, one thing that the January 6th hearings is missing, not enough trans

00:45:25.500 angles on that. In fact, I don't think it's even been mentioned once in the whole January 6th. And I would like

00:45:34.440 to point out that the committee, the congressional committee, has no trans members. Zero. So that's a little bit on

00:45:45.440 now. Democrats. All right. But what I was saying was, when I'm talking about if things get much worse in the U.S., men will 0.77

00:45:54.540 take back leadership. When I say men, just put that into sort of mom and dad traditional stereotypes. It's just a way to

00:46:03.480 shorthand it. So it doesn't really mean gender. But here's what I mean. Traditionally, would you say that it's often

00:46:13.460 true that in a household, mom seems to be in charge? Like mom is making the calls, you know, you know, what are the kids 0.57

00:46:22.460 eating and who's doing what when? Fairly typical, right? Now, I'm not saying it should be that way. That's not the

00:46:29.460 point. I'm just saying, on average, it seems like mom is mostly in charge in the house. But will you go with me the

00:46:37.920 extra mile and agree with the following? The reason mom can be in charge is because dad 1.00

00:46:45.820 already did his job. Dad kept you safe enough that you could go about your business. Dad's job is to

00:46:56.680 keep the mongol hordes from coming and raping and killing you. And if mom is making decisions about what 1.00

00:47:04.040 you're having for dinner, dad did his job, right? And again, dad doesn't mean male or female. I'm just

00:47:11.940 saying, you know, the relationships tend to have a protector and then, you know, maybe an operator. 0.99

00:47:19.240 You know, the operator seems to be in charge, but they can't do shit. The operator is dead unless 0.99

00:47:26.580 dad kept you safe. So what's happening in the United States right now? What's happening in America?

00:47:33.940 Is dad doing his job? Is dad keeping you safe? Fuck no. Fuck no. Dad is gone. We're like a single

00:47:46.760 mom country now, are we? It's like the country turned into a single mother situation. Dad is just

00:47:54.880 fucking gone. Do you know why dad is gone? He got insulted out of the house. Wasn't appreciated. 1.00

00:48:03.940 Said, fuck it. I don't need this. I think I'll just go do some drugs. Not appreciated. 1.00

00:48:11.820 Here's a related trend that I see in California. I don't know if you've seen it there. Do you know

00:48:19.560 anybody who's an American-born person, male or female, who won't even date somebody who was born

00:48:26.540 and raised in America? Have you seen that? I've seen it. And it feels like it's, or I'm seeing some yeses.

00:48:35.920 And there's a reason, isn't there? Do you know what the reason is?

00:48:40.000 Men are appreciated. That's it. Every other culture appreciates men. It's only an American 0.98

00:48:51.040 culture that demonizes men. So do you know what men did? They went on strike. You just didn't know it.

00:48:59.780 The men let you take over. Again, that sounded sexist. But remember, I'm not talking about gender

00:49:07.580 here. I'm just using a shorthand for a vibe. Yeah. Dad said, fuck you. Dad said, we had a deal.

00:49:20.220 Dad said, we had a deal. You just broke the deal. So you're on your own. So dad's missing.

00:49:27.340 Now, all I'm saying is that if you don't get dad back, the whole thing falls apart.

00:49:34.220 Or somebody who's willing to be dad. What was Trump? Trump was dad. And what happened when dad

00:49:43.860 tried to come back and dad actually fixed a few things? Dad made things better in North Korea.

00:49:50.120 Dad made energy work. Dad made the economy work. Dad was helping on the border. Some say didn't do

00:49:56.700 enough, but obviously better than Biden. Right? So what happened when dad came back?

00:50:04.680 And dad did his job. And dad made you safer. What the fuck happened to dad? Well, you fucked

00:50:11.660 dad. You fucked dad again. You disrespected dad. Now, he brought a lot of it on himself. 1.00

00:50:18.100 Let's be honest. You made it easy. All right? You can't support Trump whatsoever in any honest

00:50:27.760 way without saying, well, he did make the attacks on him a little bit easy, too. Okay? So,

00:50:33.100 you know, there's no perfection going on with anybody here. Let's be honest. But he did bring

00:50:39.040 the dad energy. And it did the dad thing in many areas. But he was drummed out. He was drummed

00:50:46.560 out. Can you imagine there might be a, you know, a Trump-like figure in a different culture?

00:50:54.600 Imagine somebody who had, let's say, Trump's characteristics, but was maybe running for

00:50:59.680 election in a Central or South American country. Do you think he would have been drummed out for

00:51:06.500 just being him? Probably not. Probably not. So, it feels to me that there may be a pendulum move

00:51:20.420 here and that even, maybe even especially, women are seeing it. That they drove dad out. They made 0.89

00:51:31.140 it a bad deal to be a dad, basically. Made it a bad deal to even protect you. So, if you don't get

00:51:38.340 it back, we're in trouble. But I think the pendulum will just naturally swing back. And I do think that

00:51:44.560 you're going to see something that sexist people would describe as more of a male approach to things.

00:51:52.880 I mean, you take any, if you take any topic, don't you feel like you can sense the male versus the

00:51:59.580 female approach? I think the Democrats are basically the party of women. Well, let me test this with 0.99

00:52:06.640 you. I've said this before, but I don't know if you agree with it. I say the Democrats are the party of

00:52:12.260 women who are trying to be a bigger tent than that, and, you know, including, including a lot of minority 1.00

00:52:19.140 rights in general. But it's basically women. And then the women tell everybody else what's going to happen. 1.00

00:52:27.080 Right? I mean, even Black Lives Matter was primarily a woman-run organization. And 1.00

00:52:34.140 all right. I'm sure I had some point there that I was going to make.

00:52:45.080 So, Rafsenberger, what was he in Georgia? He was the, what was his title? Rafsenberger was

00:52:59.020 Secretary of State? What was he? Secretary of State, right. So, he was in charge of elections

00:53:05.800 there, and then the January 6th people were talking to him. And here's a quote from him

00:53:09.640 that I saw in the Wall Street Journal. And so, he was, he was in Georgia. So, he said,

00:53:17.720 in Testimony Tuesday, Mr. Rafsenberger, a Republican, said, audits of the state's election results

00:53:24.300 showed no evidence of widespread fraud. And then Rafsenberger said, the numbers are the numbers.

00:53:30.600 He said, the numbers don't lie. Oh, man. The numbers don't lie. What planet is he on? The

00:53:43.360 numbers is how you lie. That's like saying words don't lie. No, words are the things you

00:53:49.820 used to lie. Numbers are the other thing you used to lie. You know, hammers don't, you know,

00:53:58.760 anyway, you don't need any analogies. But let me clarify. All right. So, here's somebody who was

00:54:06.980 elected and was responsible for like a major, you know, fundamental part of our republic, the election,

00:54:13.640 in a key place. And he would tell us in public, the numbers don't lie. Well, you motherfucking

00:54:20.360 idiot. Video lies. Video lies. Photographs lie. Data is the biggest fucking liar we've ever met. 1.00

00:54:34.640 Politicians lie. We don't have anything that doesn't lie. All right. If you can fucking find 1.00

00:54:43.360 something in this culture that doesn't lie, trot it out. I'll take a look at it. I'd be, 0.99

00:54:50.280 I'm willing to be amazed. But don't stand in front of the public and tell me that numbers don't lie.

00:55:00.300 It used to be my job to do financial analysis to decide, you know, on business cases for investing

00:55:08.800 in things within the corporate world. You know, should we upgrade our systems or what? And

00:55:14.360 I was never under the impression that my job was to tell the truth.

00:55:22.680 I can't remember ever conceptualizing of my job as to find out what was real. It never even

00:55:29.100 occurred to me. Like, that wasn't even my mindset. My mindset was my boss would tell me what we were

00:55:35.140 going to do. And then I would make some numbers that supported it. Like, the numbers are how you

00:55:41.120 fucking lie. The numbers don't lie. Now, he might be saying, let's say I imagine he were defending 0.99

00:55:50.340 himself. He might say, no, I'm saying the data, you know, the data is accurate. Is it?

00:55:56.760 How would I know? Because a guy said so. So, a politician who lies for a living, because that's

00:56:08.280 sort of what they do. So, a guy who lies for a living told me the data is good. Oh, oh, oh,

00:56:15.420 I feel better now. The guy who lies for a living, politician, he's telling me that the numbers are

00:56:23.260 good. But I wonder if there are also any lawyers who think the numbers are good. Because they

00:56:29.300 don't lie for a living. Oh, they do. Damn it. That's right. Lawyers lie for a living, too.

00:56:35.160 So, yes, we should totally believe that all data is reliable. And in fact, all the data for every

00:56:42.360 scientific study, every political event in every other realm has been wrong. I mean, all of our

00:56:50.020 corona numbers were bullshit. But one thing we are assured by a professional liar is that 1.00

00:56:56.820 the one area, the one area where the data can be accurate is our elections. So, feel pretty

00:57:04.900 good about that. All right. Michael Malice on Twitter asks provocatively. He says, not one

00:57:13.680 person who claimed that striking down the airline mask mandate would lead to mass deaths has 0.99

00:57:20.000 acknowledged they were wrong or suffered any consequences for their bullshit. Now, I like 0.99

00:57:25.800 that point. Because there were some people with strong opinions about that. And I think at

00:57:32.600 this point, we can say conclusively, they were 100% wrong. We can also say that if you believed

00:57:40.860 it was definitely a good idea to keep masks on, on airlines, you're a fucking idiot. Anybody? 1.00

00:57:49.020 At some point, right? Early on, there was some fog or... But at some point, if you were positive

00:57:56.820 that people needed masks on airplanes to keep us safe, well, you're a fucking idiot. But if 1.00

00:58:03.760 I'm going to be fair, if you were sure that taking them off would make a difference, would

00:58:10.600 not make a difference, well, I don't think you were on such solid ground yourself. And I'll

00:58:18.620 say it for the millionth time. You could have easily tested this with one flight, like one

00:58:26.300 regular flight. Let's just say you said, all right, we don't know if taking off masks is

00:58:30.780 a good or bad idea. So what we're going to do is we're going to watch one flight, you know,

00:58:35.880 that just say, let's say it just goes back and forth between two cities, any two cities,

00:58:41.040 you know, maybe something that has a few hours involved. And we're just going to watch it for

00:58:45.440 one month. And if that one airline, and then we'll follow up with the passengers, and we'll

00:58:50.820 call them and say, did you get COVID? And if there's a higher rate of people who flew that

00:58:55.600 airline, we'll say, whoa, whoa, whoa, at least we did. It's a good thing we tested it. We

00:59:00.380 didn't let too much COVID into the world with this one test. But now we know what we need

00:59:06.200 to do. Why wouldn't you do that? It's like we keep running away from something that's so

00:59:13.540 obvious, which is, can you test it? Well, if you can test it, why are we guessing? That

00:59:20.820 wouldn't be that hard to test, would it? I don't know. It seems like it's very testable.

00:59:27.240 And you could do it at such a small risk relative to the whole pandemic, that it would be certainly

00:59:33.360 good to know. I mean, the entire flight business and travel and everything just got shut down

00:59:41.580 for something that could have been tested in 30 days, with pretty high reliability, I think.

00:59:48.700 Because if you didn't find any difference between the passengers on the no mask flight, well, aren't

00:59:55.180 you done? All right. Rasmussen had a poll, asked the American public, who we think is winning,

01:00:07.780 Ukraine or Russia? 14% say Ukraine is winning, which is interesting. I thought it would be higher,

01:00:14.280 actually. I'm not saying that Ukraine is winning. I think it's a hybrid situation going on there.

01:00:19.780 45% said stalemate. And 24% said Russia is winning. 24%. It's like close to a quarter. That's about 25%.

01:00:34.780 Anyway, here's what's wrong with the poll. I think people interpret the question too differently

01:00:46.240 in this case. In my opinion, who's winning or losing depends on what time frame you're looking

01:00:53.240 at and what you thought was the goal. If you say the time frame is right now and Russia's goal was to

01:01:00.580 take all of Ukraine, well, they didn't get it. If you say they had strategic objectives to take over 0.58

01:01:09.140 part of Ukraine and degrade the rest and maybe take it over later, then they totally are winning.

01:01:15.080 So I feel like it's a weird hybrid situation where they're winning and losing at the same time.

01:01:21.880 I'm not sure that there's any smart way to answer that question.

01:01:26.080 How many people thought Biden, this is also Rasmussen, how many people thought Biden is handling

01:01:31.300 that situation well, the Ukraine situation? 31% said either excellent or good, but 44% said poor.

01:01:39.940 That is a stubborn 31%. Do you remember people used to say that Trump, am I remembering this wrong?

01:01:49.740 That Trump could always get like 31%. There was some like solid base that no matter what,

01:01:55.940 you'd have that 30% or so. It looks like Biden just has that too. So something like 30% of Democrats

01:02:02.900 and 30% of Republicans are going to back their candidate no matter what's happening. Does that sound

01:02:11.120 about right? That about a third of partisans will back their own candidate no matter how obviously

01:02:19.380 that candidate is failing. I thought it'd be higher actually, but that's not bad, 30%. At least it's not the majority.

01:02:27.980 The Department of Justice actually issued a statement saying it respectfully disagrees with

01:02:38.120 the Supreme Court ruling on concealed guns in New York, in New York. To which I say, what does that

01:02:47.480 mean? What does it mean when the Department of Justice respectfully disagrees with the Supreme

01:02:53.460 Court ruling? Is it just talk? Or does it mean they're not going to enforce it? Or they're going

01:03:00.300 to enforce something that the Supreme Court says can't be enforced? What does it mean? It's sort of

01:03:08.620 like the foreshadowing of it doesn't feel so good. I don't know.

01:03:13.680 I saw a tweet from somebody called Natural Redhead, Danielle Caniel. And she was talking about younger

01:03:25.860 people feeling doomed. Do you feel that? This is what her tweet said. She said, I said this to my mom

01:03:35.580 the other day, but I don't think older adults realize how outright depressing it is for millennials

01:03:42.440 and Gen Z to keep investing in our future when everything is headed toward a future that doesn't 0.54

01:03:48.000 seem even remotely bearable. So if you're a young person in America, is that why you've learned

01:03:55.700 that our future doesn't look remotely bearable? What? So I had to tweet back my helpful context.

01:04:05.100 I'm pretty sure every generation says that, don't they? Give me a fact check just from your own

01:04:11.540 experience. Doesn't every generation say the new generation is shit? And doesn't every generation 1.00

01:04:20.400 think that the older generation ruined it for them so that it'll be worse? And isn't every generation

01:04:27.200 better off? You know, maybe I'm biased. I don't know. I think so. You know, there are definitely

01:04:35.740 things such as home ownership is worse in some cases, stuff like that. So is it true or not true

01:04:44.940 that we're better off? See, here's the true not true part of it, because it's true and not true at the

01:04:52.580 same time. It's true that health care is better, right? We have, you know, more pills and treatments

01:05:01.040 and things. So if you were born today, you have way better health care. And that's a giant thing,

01:05:07.580 right? If you were born today, if you don't have a car, well, you can Uber if you need to. You've got

01:05:14.060 like more options. So we're probably, you know, safer from a lot of disasters than we ever have

01:05:20.980 been, et cetera, et cetera. So I have a feeling that things actually improve just consistently,

01:05:30.020 but we always think this is the last generation and it's going to be ruined. And maybe, maybe we'll

01:05:35.920 be right one of these days. Here's the story that surprised me a little bit. Stacey Abrams, who

01:05:40.740 narrowly, narrowly lost the governorship in Georgia, but is sort of a rising star in the

01:05:47.560 Democrat Party. She's very vocal about being pro-funding police. And when someone asked her

01:05:56.860 about it, she said, I was never not pro-police. And so she's putting forth some beefy proposals

01:06:04.300 to raise the pay of the police locally where she is. And basically, it's just full-throated 0.53

01:06:11.080 support to police. Now, surprising, right? Democrat. Do you think it's a presidential play?

01:06:21.500 Because if it is, it's a pretty good one. I mean, you know, in terms of finding some kind

01:06:27.120 of middle that she could peel off a few Republican votes? Maybe. I don't know. It doesn't look

01:06:33.140 like a terrible idea. I don't know if it'll work. But it's also possible, let me give her

01:06:37.740 credit, it's also possible it's just her opinion. So she's just telling you her honest opinion,

01:06:44.380 which would be awesome. Now, I have an opinion about Stacey Abrams that I want to see if anybody 0.73

01:06:50.540 else has this. She creeps me out, which has nothing to do with her capability. It's not because

01:06:59.120 she's a woman. It's not racial. It's not any of that, right? There's just something about her

01:07:05.200 smile, maybe. I think it's her smile, something. There's something, yeah, it's just off. It's like

01:07:12.780 there's an uncanny valley sort of thing there. And I don't know. I just wondered if anybody

01:07:20.980 else saw it. Because I wouldn't say that about too many other people. It's a weird thing.

01:07:30.000 Some of you know that I have a nemesis named Jen on Twitter. And his tweets are always tagged

01:07:38.720 by Twitter automatically as being affiliated with state-run media, meaning Chinese agent.

01:07:46.960 I mean, that's how your brain should interpret it. Now, I should say that Chen says there's

01:07:51.980 no truth to this. That he is, although he is associated with a Chinese state-affiliated

01:08:00.400 media property, that his opinions are his own. So you can judge for yourself.

01:08:08.720 But, so he's my nemesis. He tweets things, and we disagree on Twitter a lot. But he's

01:08:17.200 also super talented. You know, if you ever get to have a nemesis, you want one as good

01:08:23.300 as him. He's really good at it. Like, really good at trolling the American opinion and, you

01:08:29.420 know, saying, me too, you know, have you considered this context? America is not so great. And

01:08:35.580 even though I hate it, because I hate it when he's, you know, ragging on America, just sort

01:08:40.620 of naturally have an opposition to it. The things he says are actually, oh, that's actually

01:08:46.020 a pretty good point. It's actually useful. But he's pointing this out in a tweet. He said,

01:08:54.560 Twitter's discriminatory policy laid bare here since the U.S. government propaganda Voice

01:09:02.060 of America doesn't even receive such abuse. He's talking about himself being labeled as

01:09:07.720 state-run media. And he says, Elon Musk must act to remove such McCarthyist censorship.

01:09:14.240 You can see why I love him. He's such a good nemesis. But he's also right, which is Twitter

01:09:25.620 is not just an American company, right? It's an international property. And if Twitter is

01:09:31.080 going to label one country's people and affiliated people as propaganda, what would be the argument

01:09:40.340 for not labeling Voice of America as propaganda? If it is propaganda? Because that's why we

01:09:51.200 make it, right? I don't think we even pretend it's not propaganda. Am I wrong? Voice of America

01:09:57.340 is explicitly, publicly a propaganda entity. Is it not? Am I overstating that? I don't think

01:10:05.680 I am. I feel like it's designed overtly for that purpose, and we use it, and we're happy

01:10:11.180 with it. So why wouldn't Twitter label it? I mean, we're not even hiding it. And just in

01:10:19.700 the way that Chen doesn't hide that he's affiliated with a China state-affiliated company, he's just

01:10:27.640 not making a big deal about it. So Twitter does. But maybe Voice of America should be labeled.

01:10:35.680 But here's the problem. First of all, I'm not making a real practical point. I doubt

01:10:43.340 it will ever be labeled. And I wouldn't care, either way. But you wouldn't be able to do

01:10:47.820 that because then everything looks like propaganda. Because it is. So you'd end up labeling MSNBC

01:10:57.220 as propaganda, and then the whole thing just falls apart. So Twitter has an impossible task of

01:11:06.840 labeling propaganda. Now, Twitter doesn't call it propaganda. They just tell you it's somebody

01:11:11.680 associated with a state-affiliated media. You're supposed to interpret it as they're trying to sell you

01:11:18.720 a story. But everybody is. Like, everybody's selling us a narrative. So either label everybody

01:11:25.180 or label nobody. Because I'm not entirely sure if it matters that he's a spy, does it? It matters if

01:11:32.820 he's right. But usually you can check. So everybody else on Twitter is just saying stuff that often,

01:11:40.120 you know, they can't support. Outright lies. I mean, it's the nature of the beast. But only the

01:11:47.760 Chinese troll, alleged troll, but only the alleged Chinese troll gets labeled. And everybody else can 0.98

01:11:54.800 just spew bullshit about everything all the time. It's a perfectly interesting question. It's either 0.99

01:12:01.160 all propaganda or none of it. I don't know why you'd label some of it. All right. This, ladies and

01:12:09.920 gentlemen, is a conclusion of the live stream. Have I offended any of you today? Did anybody get

01:12:17.500 angry at any of my opinions today? Oh, I've got a few. Yes. I'm over the target. Oh, I hate that saying.

01:12:28.900 Ugh. Ugh. Ugh. I can't believe that came out of my mouth. Do you ever say something that's such a

01:12:35.900 cliche that you want to slap yourself in the face? Like, give me a minute. There. Okay. I just deserve

01:12:43.360 that. The things I never want to say are it's talk around the water cooler. Ugh. Ugh. Oh, I so hate that.

01:12:58.900 And he must be over the target because he's taking a lot of heat. Like, I get it. It's a good analogy

01:13:07.300 and stuff, but it's just a little too used. Touch base and to piggyback on that. Yeah, we should.

01:13:17.360 By the way, if you have any of those, like, jargon lists that people say in meetings all

01:13:24.900 the time, send those to me because I'm creating, that's going to be part of the Dave character

01:13:30.460 in the comic strip Dilbert. So Dave is a African American character who's defining characteristic

01:13:39.520 is you can't tell when he's kidding because he uses the buzzwords that people do, but he

01:13:45.680 uses them so much that he's not entirely sure if he's kidding. So much so that he, even though

01:13:54.100 he was hired by the boss because the boss wanted more diversity and he wanted to get credit

01:13:58.780 for more diversity, but Dave came in and told them that he was identifying as white, which

01:14:06.280 ruined everything. So Dave, the new character, would just be the guy you can't tell if he's

01:14:12.520 joking or not. And I think I could just do those jokes all day long. Yeah. So if you just

01:14:18.140 sat in the meeting and said, well, we're circling back with the synergy, the teamwork is operating

01:14:23.060 at, you know, full scale, that sort of thing. Yeah, lots of excellence. Aw, thank you.

01:14:34.200 I love you. I love you back. Now, YouTube, I'm going to turn you off now, after I turned

01:14:45.240 you on. So think about that. And I'll see you tomorrow.

Real Coffee with Scott Adams - June 24, 2022

Episode 1784 Scott Adams： The Wokeness Pendulum Is About To Turn Around. That Changes Everything

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript