All Episodes
Previous Next
Nov. 13, 2019 - Real Coffe - Scott Adams
42:25
Episode 724 Scott Adams: #Shampeachment, Ukraine Hoax Funnel, Loserthink, Road Coffee
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hey everybody!
Thanks for joining me.
Come on in here. Do you have your dainty little cup?
Today I will not be drinking from a man-sized cup.
And by that I mean, any gender you like.
I gotta adjust that for 2019.
But, one thing I know...
It's that the simultaneous sip will set your day off right.
I don't care what's happened so far.
It's about to turn positive.
And all you need is a cup or a mug or a glass, a steiner or a chalice, a canteen thermos, could be a shot glass, anything.
Fill it with your favorite beverage.
I like coffee. And prepare to join me now.
For the dopamine hit of the day, the unparalleled feeling, the feeling of connectedness, the thing that makes everything better, the simultaneous sip.
Go. Sublime.
There's no other word to describe it.
Sublime. All right, well, we got some things going on here.
Got some things. First of all, I'd like to give a shout-out to the best room service deliverer of all time.
If you've ever ordered room service in a hotel, you know that when they deliver the food, the one thing you want more than anything else is for the person who delivered the food to leave your room.
Leave the room.
Bring me the food.
Now leave the room very fast because I want to eat my food.
But you don't get that. Instead, if I may do an impression of everybody except this one awesome person who delivered my food today, it goes like this.
They'll bring your food down, and they'll say, and I'll say, and I do this as sort of a mental experiment.
It's part of a psychology thing.
I'll say, just leave everything.
It's great. Just the way it is.
Just leave it right there. And where's the check I can sign?
And they're so trained that they will say, oh, just leave it here, okay.
And then they'll start taking the plastic off and they'll say, no, leave the saran wrap on.
Just leave it where it is.
And they'll say, oh, okay, just leave it where it is, okay.
And we'll put this over here.
No, no, don't rearrange it.
Leave it right where it is.
Okay, okay. So I'll just pour the coffee?
No. No.
Just leave it where it is.
All right, all right. So would you like me to pull a chair over?
No. No.
Just leave it where it is.
Anyway, I've been doing this as sort of a running experiment to see if I can break any of them or their habit.
And today... And I swear to God, I've been doing this for years.
For years, I've been trying to see if I could make them stop touching my tray of food and just leave.
And today, the best deliverer ever.
He comes in with a tray, he slaps it down, he hands me the check, doesn't take anything off, doesn't move anything, and then he says, and I will love him forever for this.
I will love him forever.
He's a stranger, but I love him.
He backs up to the doorway and says out loud I'll just be here in the doorway with the doorway halfway open and one foot in the hallway while you sign the check and I held the check and I looked at him standing in the doorway ready to leave without once messing with anything on my tray and I felt love I felt love for him and I gave him a little extra tip And I believe we are bonded now.
The best server ever.
And as I gave him the money, I had to shout at him because he was already halfway down the hall.
I couldn't even give him a compliment.
He was already gone.
He was like disappearing into the hallway.
And I shouted, Magnificent Foodbringer, I love you.
You're the best I've ever had.
And then he was gone.
It was like he was never real.
An angel, perhaps. So, I shall drink to the best in-room dining experience of my entire life.
It's probably true.
So, kudos to him.
Let me tell you why in part this mattered to me.
I used to be a waiter slash busser years ago when I was in college.
I would be bussing tables with some other bussers.
And we worked a big breakfast.
It was at a hotel. So everybody would come in all at once in a shift and eat breakfast and then you'd serve them.
And my job, aside from picking up the plates, my job was to keep their coffee filled.
And I thought the best way to do good service was to be entertaining.
I'd come up to my table and be like, hey, how is everybody?
How you doing? Would you like some more coffee?
Let me top that off. How about you?
You've got like a millimeter left between the coffee and the top.
Can I warm that up? And I'd go to the tables and I'd work the tables and I'd be so entertaining and everything.
And one of my co-workers, his name was Willie.
Willie was known for, let's say, not having a good work ethic.
He would just sort of give them coffee now and then if they really needed it.
But he'd just walk up half asleep and then he'd walk away.
No entertainment. Willie would not entertain his tables.
And I'm thinking, poor bastard, I can't.
I feel sorry for him because when it comes to tip time, The guests at this hotel would come for a week, and all the tipping would be at the end.
And I'd say, poor guy, at the end, he's not going to get any tips.
He did not entertain his table.
And then at the end of the week, we busboys sometimes would compare our tips.
Yes, that's what we did. Sounds dumb when you talk about it now.
But we would take out our bills, our singles and our stuff, and put them in a little pile out of bed.
And we'd count them up and see who did the best that week.
And Willie would beat me every single week.
Every week, Willie got more tips than I did by giving almost no service.
They were practically begging for coffee.
My people, they couldn't get enough coffee from me.
I was like spraying coffee everywhere.
Here, coffee, coffee, coffee.
And it wasn't until I was old enough to become a customer in a restaurant that I learned, and this is an important tip for you, If you decide to become a waiter, it turns out, and I was quite surprised by this, that people do not go out to dinner with their friends and loved ones so that they can spend that time talking to the server.
I didn't know that.
I thought, well, going out to dinner, obviously part of the reason is to see me.
So Willie was lazy, but he was also the best waiter in the place because he didn't bother the people.
Somebody says they love this story that worked in restaurants for 25 years.
You know. The best server you'll ever have in any kind of a restaurant situation is one where you can't remember them.
If you leave a restaurant, or let's say it's the end of the meal, and you pick up the check, and you say to yourself, I don't even remember who set the check down.
I can't remember who the server is.
I can't remember. I guess I never had to ask for anything.
I had a fork when I needed it.
My food came. I don't even remember the server.
30% tip.
Bam. If I can't remember you, you're getting a 30% tip because that's nailing it.
Anyway, that has nothing to do with why you're here.
That's just a little walking through the past.
All right. Number one.
For today, you have to see, because most of you are interested in the hearings today, before the hearings, make sure you read Breitbart and specifically, I tweeted it, Joel Pollack's Article in which he calls out what some of the important parts of the transcript are and here's the fun part He shows you what the Democrats don't tell you also from the transcript So it's here's what the Democrats said and it's in the transcript And here's the part they didn't tell you which kind of refutes the first part and or clarifies it So to see it in that format is somewhat brilliant and I think Joel is probably gonna have some more of these and And it's one of the most useful pieces of journalistic reporting you'll ever see.
I have to tell you, when I read it, as I was reading through it, I could feel my opinion of the whole situation changing in real time.
Because it was stuff I'd never heard.
And it's right from the transcript.
Right from the transcript.
And I hadn't heard it.
And it was important. So I feel as though we're not being served by the media in general, but Joel has stepped up and done some incredible work for us all.
Joel's also the first person who told me that PG&E apparently had donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to Governor Newsom in California and for his wife's, I guess, some charity she was working on.
And what's the biggest problem in California?
The biggest problem in California is PG&E. Well, that and the homeless, I suppose.
And we've got this enormous financial disincentive for the governor to get tough with PG&E if he needs to.
So that's something also I didn't hear from any other source.
So kudos to Joel.
All right. Let's see.
One of the things you keep hearing about Trump is that he's tweeting and he's tweeting policies instead of working through the normal thing.
And now you're hearing that he sends Rudy Giuliani to do some stuff.
That maybe we have official diplomats to do.
And if you've never worked in a big company, you're saying to yourself, whoa, this is suspicious.
How could a leader send one group out to do something, the official people, who it's their job to do it, and simultaneously send out a completely different person or team to do the same job at the same time?
Who does that?
What kind of disorganized?
Oh, that's right.
All of them. If you've ever worked in a big company, and I've done comics on this very thing, it's actually fairly typical for the CEO to assign the same job to two different groups or people.
For different reasons.
Sometimes it's miscommunication.
Sometimes he figures one can't do it.
Sometimes he thinks there's something that one team can do a little differently.
Whatever reason, it's the most common thing in the world to assign two completely different people.
One of the things we learned from the transcript, and I think Joel Pollack's writing told me this, is that even the diplomats did not think that was unusual or wrong.
So I think it was Bill Taylor.
I may have the names wrong, but I think he was the one who said, yeah, that's not even unusual to have a civilian go out and do a little work also for the president, even if it's in their domain.
It wasn't that unusual. So, put these two things together.
Three things, if you count all the deep state Russia collusion stuff.
There is something like a deep state.
We know from Nikki Haley that members of the president's staff tried to thwart his orders.
We know that...
We know that he's had to tweet and send Rudy Giuliani to do things that apparently he just can't get regular deep state career people to do.
And so if Trump didn't have Twitter, I don't think he could do anything because he has this ability to simply tell the public what's going to happen and just go completely past all of his diplomats and all of his deep state and everything.
He could go right to the people.
And then it makes the deep state and the diplomats and those guys, then they have to cooperate because the order is out and how do they explain not doing their job to the public?
I mean, you can game the system and say, well, I'm going to get around to it and maybe we should have a meeting first and just not do stuff.
But once the public knows you're not doing stuff, it's a little bit more pressure.
So it seems to me that Trump sending out Rudy Giuliani to do stuff and Trump tweeting are two of the ways he works around the fact that a normal president, and especially an abnormal president, can't get people to do stuff.
Or at least they can't get them to do stuff his way.
Now, you may remember that I created what I called the Hoax Funnel.
For the old fine people hoax.
And the idea was that when you start debating people, you can debunk every point, but they just keep going down to smaller and smaller points until there are none left.
And then they reach the bottom and you've debunked everything they've said.
What do they do? Start at the top again, like it never happened.
And you're seeing this with the Ukraine hoax.
So I just slapped together a little bit of an order of how people surrender to me when I debate them on this topic on Twitter.
So it starts like this.
President Trump committed a crime with that phone call and that quid pro quo.
It's extortion.
So when they say they committed a crime, I usually say something like, well, Alan Dershowitz, arguably the best lawyer working, says there's no crime.
And by the way, and then of course people say, yeah, but he's in Trump's pocket.
To which I say, but you know that even the top Democrats have stopped saying it's a crime.
Because it isn't. You don't see Pelosi and Schiff saying it's a crime, do you?
Fact check me on that.
But it seems to me that they've moved off it's technically a crime, and they moved on to it's inappropriate in an impeachable way.
So fact check me on that, but I think that's true.
Once you move people off the idea that there's some crime on the books that was violated...
They don't go away and say, oh, I didn't know that.
There's no crime? Okay, I guess there's no reason to impeach.
They never do that. Somebody's saying that Dershowitz lost credibility because of the Epstein connection.
No, he didn't. If you want a good lawyer, you want Dershowitz.
Dershowitz will never tell you that his job is to only be a lawyer for innocent people.
It's nobody's lawyer job to be a lawyer only for the innocent.
You need a system in which there are qualified people who take every case.
So Dershowitz actually just did good work on that.
That's not reducing his effectiveness.
Anyway, but when people get off of the there's a crime, what do they go down to?
They go down to, well, it's not a crime per se, but it's a quid pro quo.
And then I point out that Ukraine didn't know the aid was withheld, which I wasn't sure about until just recently, having seen enough of the notes, largely through Joel, etc.
And so you say, well, Ukraine didn't even know.
Ukraine wasn't even aware.
Plus, there's a report that Trump was asked directly, is this a quid pro quo?
And he said directly, no quid pro quo.
So, suppose you say, alright, I looked at the transcript, it's not there directly.
But indirectly, he doesn't really need to say it.
Okay, sure, he didn't say it's quid pro quo.
He didn't say it, but it was implied.
And then I say, well, you know where else quid pro quo is implied?
Every conversation between leaders.
You can't turn off quid pro quo, because that's why leaders talk in the first place.
I got something you want, you got something I want.
And again, you don't have to say specifically what it is.
If Netanyahu and Trump have a good meeting, Do they have to say, I'm being nice to you, so you'll give us foreign aid, I'm being nice to you?
They don't have to say it.
Because it's quid pro quo from the moment they set the meeting to the time they fly away.
There's nothing but quid pro quo.
So let's say I get somebody to understand that.
They go, okay, every interaction is quid pro quo, sure.
So it's not a crime, and it's not really relevant if it's quid pro quo, because that just would be every interaction.
So they usually back down to, well, if he knew it was okay, why didn't he have Bill Barr do it?
The president should never get involved, especially if it involves a competitor.
The president should never get involved.
That's the problem. The problem is the president got involved.
If you just let Bill Barr do it, that would be okay, but the president got involved.
That makes it inappropriate.
To which I say, if Bill Barr could have done this on his own, why would the president even need the phone call?
If that was going to work, if Ukraine was going to do everything that Bill Barr asked him to do, Trump didn't need to make the phone call.
Obviously, that wasn't going to work.
What happens in any big company when you can't get some other organization to do what you need?
You go to your mutual bosses and you say, can you talk to them boss to boss?
And then that will let the employees, the people who are lower ranked, do their job.
Because now they both know that their bosses want this.
So that's all that happened.
The most normal thing in any big company is for the bosses to have to agree in order for the lower ranked people to do anything.
So, And when I explain that away, then my opponent will go down the hoax funnel and they'll say, yeah, but if everything was okay, why did they try to hide it by putting it on that secure server?
To which I say, according to the transcripts, and again, I just learned this from reading Breitbart, according to the transcripts, that was normal, completely normal.
There was nothing about that that was unusual.
So it's been reported that it's unusual, but when an actual diplomat was interviewed, whoever it was, I forget, the diplomat said, no, it's normal, ordinary business.
So, and then I say, if he had been trying to hide it, would there not have been fewer people in the room Because that's how you hide things.
Do you think Trump doesn't know how to minimize the number of people who hear something that they shouldn't hear?
He probably didn't even know who was listening.
He probably assumed foreign powers were bugging him because that's probably pretty common.
And then apparently they were asking for a public statement from Ukraine, which clearly would have tied back to the administration.
So there's actually nothing that the president did that suggests it was supposed to be hidden.
In fact, everything suggests it should have been public.
That's why he wanted more than anything.
He wanted it to be public. Which would have, of course, implied that the U.S. was behind the Ukraine.
So everybody would have figured that out.
Duh. All right.
So then, if you keep going down the funnel, we've gotten rid of it's a crime.
Turns out there's no crime.
Quid pro quo. Turns out that's normal business.
Well, he didn't actually say quid pro quo, but even if you imagine it was implied, that's every interaction among leaders.
He tried to hide it.
No, he didn't. He tried to make it public.
He tried to do the opposite of hiding it.
And then, of course, he released the transcript and was begging people to read it.
So then, there's the question of whether this little shadow government with Rudy Giuliani was good or appropriate, and it turns out it's normal.
Now, what Rudy did specifically, I'm not judging.
I'm just saying that having a second entity that's not part of the normal process do this stuff, kind of normal.
And then I find that my debaters have gone all the way down the hoax from the really Bad stuff, like it's illegal, blah, blah.
And they get down to abuse of power, to which the answer is, isn't it abuse of power to get what the citizens want?
In other words, I wanted to know if the Bidens have any problems in Ukraine.
I'm sure you wanted to know.
If the voters want to know, and then your president goes out and gets it for you, and he uses his power to do it, is that an abuse of power?
Or is that why we elected him?
Didn't we elect him to use his power to get us things that we want?
So he went out and he used his power to at least try to get us information that we the voters would like to know.
I mean, Biden is at the top of the polls.
Don't you want to know if Ukraine's got some leverage on him?
Of course you do. Even the people who support him are probably kind of thinking in the back of their mind, It'd be awfully nice if we knew he was clean.
And probably is.
And by the way, let me say this for the record.
I don't have any information that would say that Joe Biden is dirty.
We have plenty of information to note that his son was swampy with Burisma, but not illegal.
So then I was debating with somebody and got him all the way to the bottom of the hoax funnel.
And the last thing he started to say was that Trump was violating a norm.
A norm. To which I said, that's why he was elected.
Violating norms.
That's not a bug.
That's a feature.
That's a feature. He was elected to violate norms.
He wasn't elected to violate laws.
If that happens, people got a problem.
Even his supporters are going to have a problem.
But if he violates a norm in the service of getting voters information that they want as much as he does, I'll violate those norms all day long.
And then, of course, you also have to ask, who are the victims?
And sometimes you'll get this argument.
You'll get that the president compromised foreign relations, to which I say, what?
What would be an example of something that went wrong or will go wrong or should go wrong or could go wrong?
What exactly goes wrong when he's violated, I don't know, he's compromised or foreign?
Can you give me an example?
Can you tell me what it cost?
Can you tell me what new risk?
I can't see anything.
I don't see anything that happened.
In fact, the country that was supposed to be the victim of all this, they didn't know it was happening.
The victim, the Ukraine, didn't know that their aid was being withheld.
And by the way, we also learned That the Javelin rockets, which were the important things, because they're the ones that killed the Russian tanks.
And if you don't have tanks, it's kind of hard to hold territory.
I'm no military mind, but it seems to me that if you can stop Russian tanks, you pretty much have stopped the invasion.
If you don't have a tank, you're not going to hold territory so well, and you're not going to be able to take territory so well.
So the Javelin is pretty much...
Take the Russian tank force out of the game, which probably ends their ability to take over Ukraine, at least in any way that we know about.
So that had already happened and that wasn't even being withheld.
So, here's where you get to the bottom of the hoax.
Well, once I've debunked, it's, you know, it's against the law, quid pro quo, it's normal, everything's normal, he wasn't trying to hide it, he was trying to make it public, etc.
And you get to the bottom, and then I try to turn it around.
And I turn it around like this, and I say this.
If the president had not asked for that information, in other words, if he had not asked for What's the deal with Biden and Hunter Biden?
What's their deal?
And do they have any problems over there in Ukraine that would cause any influence should he become elected?
If President Trump had not asked for that investigation, he should be impeached.
Because that's not even doing your job.
If you think that the guy who is polling to be the next president of the United States has an obvious public connection to Ukraine and one that the entire public would like to know about, you better look into it.
If you don't, I would say you're not protecting the country.
Maybe you should be impeached for that.
All right.
So that's the bottom of the hoax thing.
I just tweeted out a 60 Minutes interview from I don't know how many years ago in which they actually talked to.
They hunted down the guy in China who's the top fentanyl dealer in China.
No, not one of the nine who just got arrested and sentenced to life.
But there's some guy and his son.
We have their pictures.
We know where they are.
And 60 Minutes found him on the street.
Actually found him at a supermarket and interviewed him.
The top fentanyl dealer in China.
So, obviously, China, the government, can find this guy.
China, the government, could arrest him.
China, the government, could stop him tomorrow.
He's the top dealer over there.
But they haven't. Because we hear about it.
If they ever stop that guy, that would be headline news.
So they haven't.
So we can conclude that China has no interest in stopping the fentanyl business coming this way.
And therefore, there is no chance that we, the United States, should make any kind of a trade deal with them That could help them in any way.
So, you know, it's weird that somebody said, somebody was jokingly, and I have to throw in the jokingly, this is not serious, said I should take out a contract on them.
And are you wondering why that's not already a thing?
Are you surprised that nobody's using cryptocurrency to order hits on people in other countries?
I don't want to suggest it because I'll probably be the first one to get hit, but it makes you wonder why it's not a thing.
So news out of Iran is that their economy is crumbling.
And they got real problems because they're not being able to sell their oil.
Apparently their oil exports are 1 20th, 5% of what they used to be.
5%. Which means Iran is pretty much in trouble.
I don't know how It feels as though it's sort of a race, sort of a time race.
I think we have to keep the pressure on until the Ayatollah dies of natural causes, because he's in his 80s, right?
And that might be five years, could be eight years, whatever.
But I think you just need a different leader.
Oh, somebody's saying that ordering a hit by crypto is what took down the Silk Road.
I don't know about that. I don't know anything about that story.
Let me...
All right, so Iran is heading in a direction that looks like something's got to give.
So we don't know what that will be, but we'll see.
Now... So, on other news, so one of my followers, Terry Kinder, I don't know if I'm pronouncing it right, Kinder or Kinder, at T. Kinder, had this great thought that I haven't seen anywhere.
So I retweeted it, and it was that essentially that the Democrats have locked themselves into a trap.
And it goes like this. I hope I'm saying it right, because it was so clever and so right in front of you that I missed it.
It goes like this.
If Joe Biden suddenly gets much less support and drops in the polls, it's going to look like it was because of Ukraine.
Right? So if Joe Biden drops in the polls, people will say, oh, the Ukraine thing got him.
And if that's true, it will also be a validation of Trump looking into it.
So if Biden goes down, it looks like Trump was right all along that the Ukraine thing was important and it needed to be looked into because you would see that the public would be responding to it as important.
Now, it could be that the public is just changing their mind for other reasons, but the way it would be interpreted, not truth, but the way it would be interpreted, is that Ukraine took Biden down.
Now, if they let Biden go down, it makes the president a lock for re-election, because the impeachment thing just falls apart, and there's nothing left, and he would have taken out Biden.
But what if Biden stays in?
If he stays in, then President Trump gets to run against the weakest candidate ever fielded for the presidency.
And he wins re-election in a stroll.
So the Democrats have created two situations with Ukraine.
I think, you know, I'd love to tell you it's 4D chess and the president had this all figured out.
It's nothing like that. It was just chance that we got here.
But they only have two ways to lose and no way to win.
Either Biden goes away, which makes the president right, takes impeachment off the table, and everybody says, yeah, it looks like we should have looked into this Biden thing.
Everybody cared. Or he stays in the race, and he doesn't have a chance.
I don't think there's anybody in the race who thinks he has a chance.
I said this on Dave Rubin's show yesterday.
I did Dave Rubin's show.
The Dave Rubin Report show.
And so you'll see that pretty soon.
I'll tweet it around when it plays.
But I was saying that I'd never met a Biden supporter.
And Dave laughed because it's one of those things, the first time you hear it, it makes you laugh because you hadn't realized it yet.
And what you haven't realized is, how can he be the top polling candidate In the whole country, and I live in California, and I've never met one person who supports him.
How about this?
Have you ever seen anybody support Biden, a pundit on television, who wasn't working for the campaign?
Have you ever seen it?
No! You haven't even seen anybody on CNN supporting Biden, unless they work for the campaign.
Now, there are people who have not said bad things about him, But the only people you've ever seen support him are his campaign and his wife.
That's it. Nobody else.
And when you realize that, you have to ask yourself, are the polls completely fake?
What's happening? Is it only the people who are not paying attention?
My theory is that his support comes entirely from people who haven't seen him lately.
Because if you see them lately, you know there's something wrong.
So I think people have a memory of him that's all positive because the Obama year.
I'm seeing the super arts just going crazy right now, so I must have said something you like.
But just think about it.
Start asking this question around.
Ask if you can find any Obama support, or I'm sorry, any Biden support.
What are the odds I would never find one?
I think I know supporters of every type.
Speaking of that, by the way, I did make contact with the Tulsi Gabbard campaign.
And I told you I'd made contact before, but they followed up and were talking about an actual date to bring her on as a guest.
So, it looks like Tulsi Gabbard will be the first sort of presidential candidate to have on my little periscope here.
My influential little periscope.
I'll let you know when that's going to happen.
Alright. Those were the topics I was playing.
So I don't have a date for when I'll talk to Tulsi Gabbard, but we're working that out.
So I gave them some possibilities.
If you're not reading the comments, you're missing some funny, horrible comments.
I'm sorry.
That was too funny.
So, I think Whoever said something that made me laugh, you know who you are.
That was pretty funny.
It was totally inappropriate, which is what made it funny.
Wow, that's funny. Schiff is still claiming he doesn't know who the whistleblower is.
That can't be true. He can't be claiming that.
So today is my last day in LA. I'm going to talk to Dennis Prager.
I talked to Adam Carolla yesterday.
Dr. Ju came in right after I was done with Adam Carolla, so I got to talk to him.
Let me run something past you.
So you saw the idea.
I guess Texas is already doing it.
Maybe California is considering it, which is using some federal or state land to move the homeless to so that at least they're not, you know, pooping on sidewalks and interacting with people who would find some danger in that.
And when I heard that, I thought, that is borderline great idea.
Because these are people who don't want to live indoors, for whatever reason.
They're already in tents.
Wouldn't they rather be in a tent in a forest, or in a place that's meant for it, versus a tent on a sidewalk where you don't have facilities and stuff?
So to me it sounded like, well, brilliant idea.
Brilliant idea. We'll just move those homeless people to a place where it's basically camping, And the weather is good all the time, or at least good enough.
And their lives will be much better and everybody wins, right?
And I ran that by Dr.
Drew, and he brought me back to reality.
Now, do you know what's wrong with the plan?
Is it obvious to you?
Because I thought it was a good plan.
And then exactly 30 seconds of hearing Dr.
Drew tell me why it wasn't changed my mind.
Here's the problem. The problem is mental illness and drug use and the overlap.
Mentally ill people don't take logical offers.
So what I was thinking is, hey, guy in the street, wouldn't you rather be in this nice wooded area?
You could have the same amount of drugs.
Everything's the same. You just have a nicer tent and a nicer place.
Wouldn't you like that? But that assumes that you're talking to rational people who can make rational decisions and there's nothing like that.
So unless you could force them to move, and you can't, apparently in California you just can't do that, there's no way to make that work.
It wouldn't matter how much better their life was camping, they just wouldn't want to do it because they have mental illness and drug addiction.
So, every time I think I've got an answer, Dr.
Drew reminds me that I'm forgetting the primary thing, which is it's not a homeless problem.
That should be your mantra.
It's not a homeless problem.
Just run that loop every time you hear the story.
It's not a homeless problem. It's a drug and mental illness problem.
And if we don't treat that first, which probably requires force, I can't imagine any other way it would work.
We probably need laws that would allow law enforcement or the medical community to institutionalize people who can't make decisions for themselves.
So I don't see it happening because I don't see the law allowing that anytime soon.
Maybe. I'm seeing more and more the word zombie.
It's like in a zombie apocalypse and Having seen my own stepson when he was alive, under the influence of whatever the opioids were that were in his body, I can confirm that it's like a zombie apocalypse.
That somebody with a certain amount of opioids in them, there's a body there, and the body is moving, and it's doing things, but there's nobody home.
Whatever's happening in their heads is not even remotely like It's not like a drunk person.
It's not like being stoned.
It's not like being stupid.
It's not like being crazy.
It's like there's just nobody there.
But the body works.
And there was one point I thought I was going to have to beat the shit out of my own stepson, which would have been not the easiest thing to do because he was bigger than me.
But I could have gotten it done if I needed to.
Because one day he was under the influence, and his body was big, and he was threatening some people who were not intentionally, but in his lack of control, he was in a threatening situation, and it was up to me to stop it.
Now, fortunately, I guess I'm really good at threatening, because it didn't come to It didn't come to a physical altercation, but it was right on the edge.
It was right on the edge where I had to take him down, but I didn't have to in the end.
And so that's what you're dealing with.
You're dealing with a zombie apocalypse.
in which people who used to be normal and human are combined with some kind of a drug and the combination of the drug plus the person creates another creature sort of a zombie creature now we hope that some of them can be recovered and become once again fully human but at the moment it is very much like a zombie apocalypse and it's growing so it's sort of scary all right Kind of looks like an open coffin behind me.
It sort of does. I didn't want to tell you I'm a vampire.
All right, I got stuff to do today.
I'm going to go do that stuff.
Let's all watch the...
▲
Export Selection