Episode 1062 Scott Adams: Portland Fake Kidnappings, Fake News, Fake Studies, Fake Opinions, Fake Ellen, Real Coffee
My new book LOSERTHINK, available now on Amazon https://tinyurl.com/rqmjc2a
Find my "extra" content on Locals: https://ScottAdams.Locals.com
Content:
"Jobs Not Mobs" retweeted by President Trump
Jason Miller's interview on Smerconish
Violent riot at Chicago Columbus statue
RBG's battle with liver cancer
Meat packers high rate of COVID...but low death rate
Ellen DeGeneres and disgruntled ex-employees
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
If you would like to enjoy this same content plus bonus content from Scott Adams, including micro-lessons on lots of useful topics to build your talent stack, please see scottadams.locals.com for full access to that secret treasure.
---
Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/scott-adams00/support
Yeah, you found the best place in the entire world for right now.
And that means it must be time for the simultaneous sip, the thing that, well, you look forward to it all day, really.
Until the next day.
And all you need for the simultaneous sip, you probably know, but...
All you need is a cup or a mug or a glass, a stankard.
Stankard? No, you don't need a stankard.
Leave your stankard at home.
A tankard, chalice, or stein, a canteen jug, a flask, a vessel of any kind.
Fill it with your favorite liquid.
I like coffee. And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure of the dopamine of the day, the thing that makes everything better.
It's called the simultaneous sip.
Watch those statues start to be re-erected even as you sip.
Unless you don't like statues, in which case they're falling down.
Everything's better with coffee.
Alright, let's talk about all the things.
So, this morning I noticed that one of my tweets had picked up quite a few retweets.
I had over 10,000 retweets on a tweet, and I thought to myself, huh, what's going on with that?
And then I noticed that President Trump had retweeted me yet again.
Yet again. But the funny part about it, or the interesting part, if you will, is not that he retweeted me, because I think he's done that, I don't know, several times in the past year, but it's why he retweeted.
And this is why he retweeted of mine.
I tweeted that, I'm no political expert, but the Democrats' strategy of effectively legalizing violent crime before a national election seems suboptimal.
Hashtag, jobs not mobs.
So, here's what you need to know.
That my hashtag, jobs not mobs, got retweeted by the President.
So you know that he's at least friendly to that framing.
Doesn't mean that that will be Any kind of a feature.
But it does mean that he responded to it.
And I will go further and tell you the Trump campaign ad that will guarantee victory.
Are you ready? Visualize with me.
Close your eyes if you must.
And imagine that you're watching a Trump campaign ad.
It's a split screen.
On the left, Are a bunch of images of Democrat-run cities, mostly with protests and looting and crime in the streets.
It's all gray and dismal and dystopic.
It looks like the end of the world.
And each time there's a new picture, there's a new Democrat city.
So you'd have to say something like, you know, Chicago, and then the name of the mayor, Democrat.
You know, and then you do city after city after city.
Meanwhile, on the right of the screen, you would show, you know, nice things going right.
You know, the Republican-Trump view.
Maybe you'd show some Republican cities.
But you don't need to. You could just show gleaming capitalism going right and people being happy.
And you could just say, it's the two visions.
You know, two worlds.
Pick one. And that could actually be the closing screen as you just go to a solid black screen and you just say, two worlds.
Pick one. Because if you frame it as those two choices, it's It's extremely visual.
The split screen gives you contrast.
It's very simple.
You don't want to be explaining why your system that you want to implement is better and systemic racism and it's a concept and there's no picture that goes with it.
And it just doesn't grab your head.
But man, you show me a split screen where one of them just looks like the end of the world, and that's what the Democrats are actually promising you.
Because they're saying, we want to do more of this.
I mean, they're literally saying, give us more of this.
And we know what this looks like, visually.
So that's, you know, obviously just in terms of a campaign ad, that's what it looks like.
So I think that ad would be the end of it.
I was just watching Jason Miller from the Trump campaign just moments before I came on talking to Smirkanish on CNN. Now, Smirkanish is one of the most interesting media characters because I feel as though it's a little bit like Harry Potter where the wizards have to pretend they're not wizards.
They have to sort of fit in with the muggles.
And I often look for the wizards hiding among the muggles.
And the way that you can tell the wizards from the muggles is that the wizards are capable of independent thought.
They're capable of having an opinion that maybe doesn't agree with their own team.
And Smirkanish is one of those.
So Smirkanish, this is just my take, my personal opinion, I think Smirkanish Is a wizard hiding among muggles as CNN, meaning that he's an actually open-minded person who would legitimately listen to arguments on both sides, and we've seen him do it.
He's had me on his show several times.
But he does it orderfully, so that he's really just presenting the opinions, and I guess that's good enough to keep him employed as CNN. So McConish had Jason Miller on, and Jason was saying how all the polls showing that Trump is way behind are the types of polls where, once again, they overweight Democrats.
And they don't ask likely voters.
They just ask voters.
So Jason Miller was saying that their internal polls, and any poll that does it correctly, shows that it's a toss-up.
It's already neck and neck.
So, hold this in your mind.
According to Jason Miller, their internal polls, and also looking at, I don't know, Rasmussen or some other poll, they're saying that if you do it right, which the other polls have not done right, it's actually kind of a toss-up, or the president is ahead in the key states that he needs to win.
Is that true? Now, first of all, do you think that's true?
Do you think that their internal polling is, first of all, done more appropriately than the public ones?
You'd have to accept that as true.
Then secondly, that he's correctly and accurately telling you that it looks like a toss-up.
Now suppose that's true.
That doesn't even count the shy Trump supporters who are just literally hiding.
So it looks like a toss-up, According to Jason Miller.
So you have to put your own credibility on it, right?
Anything that comes out of a campaign, whether it's your team or the other team, if it comes out of the campaign, you're going to have to put that credibility filter on it a little bit.
But if it's true, it looks like a landslide.
It looks like a landslide to me.
Now there are lots of... There are lots of things that could, you know, change and will change between now and Election Day.
And one of the factors is whether people are frightened and will stay home.
And I would say at this point, I can't even imagine this situation.
Help me along on this with the comments.
I want to see if I'm way off base.
I want to see if you agree with me overwhelmingly or I'm just lost in my own mind.
In my opinion...
There will never have ever been and may never be again a presidential election that is more motivating for conservatives.
More motivating for conservatives.
Because remember, conservatives are looking at the alternatives now.
It's not a concept anymore.
We're actually looking at these cities just being destroyed and And in the conservative mind, that's now the option.
It's like, okay, the way we were, you know, a little more order, or that stuff, a lot more of that stuff.
It's not even close.
It no longer looks like a political decision of like, well, I'd like lower taxes, they want higher taxes.
It's nothing like that.
At this point, it looks like an existential threat.
The Republicans will be wiped off the face of the political earth, if not the real one.
Now, I don't think that the risk of actual death is very high, but it will feel like it.
It's going to feel like it.
So if you count the fact that there's at least one, certainly one, Supreme Court position in play, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, And you add everything else that's at risk, I don't think there will ever be a bigger turnout from conservatives.
It's going to be records.
But will Joe Biden get the same record turnout?
Well, I don't know. Keep in mind that even his own side is a little questionable on him.
Now, the other thing that Jason Miller said is that depending on whether you're looking at Zogby or Rasmussen, That African American support for the President is at a record high.
Now, do you believe that?
Do you believe that African American support for President Trump is at a record high?
I do believe it.
I do believe that.
Now, record high for a Republican is still 14 to 20 percent.
So, lots of room to improve there.
But, yeah, I completely believe that.
Because it just looks that way to me.
Meaning that if I were to look at what he's offering, and I were to look at what I know about the world, I would say, yeah, that feels about right.
He should get about that ratio.
That kind of passes the sniff test.
So, slaughter meters at 100%, but of course that will change a lot.
Did you all watch the major wall-to-wall news coverage?
Of the violence and, I call it a riot, around the Columbus statue at Grand Park in Chicago.
Did you all watch that?
It was all over the TV news last night.
And then you turn on, you open up to your major news sources, and there it is again.
It's just videos and pictures.
What? You didn't see it?
Oh, you didn't see it?
Oh, you had to go to social media to see it, didn't you?
You probably did. You may have seen a clip on the regular news, but if you wanted to see the real action, you probably had to see somebody's Periscope or livestream or video that got posted on social media.
And it looked pretty brutal, actually.
But it does look like the police have made a stand And that Columbus statue is not going to come down anytime hard because the police actually held the territory.
So you would agree, would you not, that the news, both the left and the right, are intentionally not showing the news, right?
Do you back me on this?
I'm not sure if you do, but it seems like It's just obvious that they're intentionally not showing the protests to reduce them, I guess.
Right? Just to reduce them by not showing them, I would think.
So the big news, of course, is that John Lewis, a congressman and civil rights legend, has died at age 80.
So that will be a big headline today.
I noticed I was comparing CNN to Fox News coverage because, you know, Fox News has to try harder to not look racist because they're always being accused of it.
So Fox News, if you go to their front page, it's like John Lewis, John Lewis, John Lewis.
I mean, they went hard at the John Lewis story.
Now, it's also featured on the CNN page, but it's interesting to watch it.
Fox go at it even harder as sort of a branding defensive play, I would think.
Successfully. So it was actually a smart play.
Business-wise, it was a smart play.
Now, here's the other thing that's funny about that Portland situation.
Portland being another city that's got the Antifa.
By the way, I want to try out a name for Antifa.
Alright, I want to give them a new name.
How about this?
The Flu Klux Klan.
What do you think?
Because the only reason that Antifa is getting as much traction as it is right now is because of the coincidence of Black Lives Matter and the coincidence of the coronavirus, the flu.
So it feels like they're the Flu Klux Klan now, Antifas.
Anyway, just trying that out.
Here's an interesting tidbit.
Did you know that Anderson Cooper's family, meaning his ancestors, once owned Michelle Obama's great-great-grandfather as a slave?
Now, there's nothing funny about slavery, but there's something a little bit funny about the fact that Anderson Cooper could not possibly be more of a poster child for white supremacy.
I mean, that's sort of like a perfect candidate, right?
Now, keep in mind that white supremacy and white supremacists have changed in meaning.
It no longer means, and when I say no longer, I mean just in the last few weeks.
Within the last 30 days, the definition of this race changed.
So it used to be people who thought other races were inferior.
Doesn't mean anymore, because frankly, nobody thinks that way quite the way people did in the old days.
Of course, there are lots of people in the world, so there are people with bad feelings and opinions, but generally speaking, there are not people thinking in that way.
There's still plenty of racists, but they're not thinking, everybody in my group is better than everybody in those other groups.
That just doesn't exist in 2020.
But white supremacy certainly exists in the way that it has newly been defined as simply the situation that there are white people in charge who maybe would not be so in charge except for the history of everything from slavery on, which sort of keeps them in power.
And what would be a better example Then the Vanderbilt family, who owned, among other things, they owned a lot of stuff, but apparently at least one of the things they owned was a plantation, including Michelle Obama's great-great-grandfather.
And now Anderson Cooper got a great education, lots of contacts, probably helped him too, and now he's on a major news channel.
Is Anderson Cooper not the most perfect example of white supremacy?
According to The new definition.
It doesn't mean the way he's thinking.
It just means by his position, he's advantaged by his past, which directly was benefited by slavery.
Although his ancestors have lots of money from lots of different places, too.
Just an interesting fact that doesn't have any importance.
Here's the other Portland thing that was interesting.
Do you know that the...
I think he's the acting...
Head of the Department of Homeland Security.
This is his actual name.
If you haven't caught this, you don't know how hard the simulation is winking at you.
All these coincidental names are just too much.
So the guy who is the head of the Department of Homeland Security...
Which at the moment are being demonized for being, you know, too Gestapo-like, the left is saying.
His name is Chad Wolf.
Wolf. His last name is Wolf.
And he's the head of the organization which is being demonized as being, you know, too aggressive.
Yeah, his name is Wolf.
He's the head of a...
And his first name is Chad.
Come on! Come on!
Can that be real?
Somebody says I should use the flu flux flan instead of flu flux flan.
Flu flux flan? I don't know that that makes sense, but I like it.
Here is a, let me add a little conspiracy theory on top of your breakfast this morning.
This one I like.
When I say I like it, it means it's a total, it just screws with your brain.
And I think it's more likely true than not.
I wouldn't say that about every conspiracy theory, but this one feels a little more true than not.
Now, of course, conspiracy theory is not exactly what this is, but let's call it fake news.
So you may have all seen by now the video of the Department of Homeland Security guys who were in heavy camo.
They looked very military, fully tricked out with the military gear.
You saw them get out of an unmarked regular sedan, or actually on a minivan or something, and go over and arrest some Antifa-looking guy who was not doing anything wrong.
He was just sort of there with a few friends.
And they grab this guy without much conversation, and they take him back, and they put him in the car, and they leave.
And that's on video. And the people that were left behind were like, what's your name?
What's your name? So they could help him out later.
Now, do you think that actually happened?
You saw it on video, right?
Would you ever doubt your eyes?
You saw it right on video.
You saw it on video. Obviously it happened.
You didn't see anybody say that that was a fake video.
Right? So, if you watched it with your own eyes, what happened was these military-looking people grabbed a peaceful protester, put him in an unmarked car, and it disappeared.
It's pretty bad.
Is that like a death squad?
Maybe a death squad?
Gestapo, possibly?
Are they taking them to secret torture facilities?
Maybe. Or...
Let me give you another hypothesis.
Now, when you hear the other hypothesis, you have to go back and watch the video, and you will be slapping yourself on the side of the head.
Here is the other interpretation of the same video, and see which one you like better.
They were extracting their own source.
In other words, the guy they arrested...
Was actually just one of their guys.
He was just dressed as Antifa, fully made up so you could only see his eyes.
He had his black block outfit on.
Because there was no resisting whatsoever.
He just sort of backed up with his hands up.
Like he wasn't trying to run away and he wasn't resisting.
But other people were watching so he couldn't just run into their arms.
And these two guys walk up to him.
They gently take him by each arm.
He turns and willingly walks as fast as they do.
Completely cooperative.
No handcuffs.
The smallest amount of force.
They're literally just holding him by the arm on both sides.
And they walk him directly to the car and they put him in.
Now, he didn't seem to be resisting too much.
I think he might have been yelling, I didn't do anything or something, which would be part of the show.
Now, if you were going to remove one of your sources, isn't that the way you do it?
The way you do it is to look like you're arresting him.
It's because you get a twofer.
It makes you look tough.
It makes you look scary.
And you get your asset off the street.
So... Now, I can't tell you that it was an extraction.
So I don't know that.
But go watch the video.
Watch it again and just hold the two hypotheses in your head and see which one it looks exactly like.
Because there's one it looks exactly not like and there's one it looks exactly like.
You decide. We can't know because video lies.
This would just be another example of video lying.
But it's fun to think about it.
All right, so Ruth Bader Ginsburg has had this liver cancer, which apparently she says she's battling somewhat successfully.
But here's the real question.
If the worst were to happen, and let's say she did not survive to Election Day, what would Mitch McConnell do?
If there were an opening on the Supreme Court, and the Republicans knew that if they rushed it, and they could get Democrats to go along with it, that they could push through another Supreme Court person before the election even happens.
But, given that Mitch McConnell held the last seat open until Trump was elected, how could he not do the same thing now, so close to the election?
To me, I think that if the worst happened, let's say Ruth Bader Ginsburg did not survive until Election Day, I think what McConnell should do is keep the seat open.
I think he should keep the seat open because then he's consistent, but also, my God, what an election it would be.
I say keep it open.
Let the voters decide.
Because that's what McConnell said in the last election, and nothing's changed.
I mean, the dynamic of that decision is the same.
So I would suggest that he leave it open, should that become a possibility.
But I would say she's going to survive at this point, given the last update.
It looks like she'll be with us through the election.
I was reading that The meatpackers in the United States have a very high rate of infection, which you would expect because they're sort of working indoors and close quarters and stuff, but that they have a low death rate.
So this was given as sort of a mystery.
Why is it that there's a low death rate among these meatpackers when there are so many who are infected?
And I don't know the answer to that, but I would suggest...
There's a story that says we don't know why a certain group of people is surviving better.
I would suggest that that story should always include are they taking hydroxychloroquine or not?
Now, I'm not saying that it works.
Again, I've upped my estimate of hydroxychloroquine being important and working from about 30%.
To about 50% based on unscientific things that I'm hearing lately.
But if you're just silent on that question, it just sort of leaves it out there hanging.
If you were, let's say you were the government of the United States, and you knew that keeping the meat packing industry working was essential to the food industry, The food security of the United States.
So we're talking about something that's equally as important, maybe more, than even health care.
You know, as important as health care is in a pandemic, you've still got to have food.
So you've got to keep the food supply going.
I mean, you know, a Band-Aid isn't going to help you if you starve to death.
So given the importance of meat packers, To the food security of the United States, would you assume that they are on hydroxychloroquine prophylactically?
Because I would.
I would assume that that group is the, you know, after healthcare workers and first responders, I would think that they would be the number one group that the doctors, even if it wasn't a rule, I would think that the doctors would say, you know, you know, Healthcare workers are taking this prophylactically.
You might think it's the same.
Now again, we wouldn't see any difference if hydroxychloroquine doesn't work, but the fact that there could be a story about a group with low infections and not mention whether or not their own hydroxychloroquine is missing.
Here's one of my fun stories of the day.
Put this in the category of everything you think you know is wrong, just all the time.
So you know Ellen of The Ellen Show.
Apparently there's some stories now about ex-staffers talking about what a hellscape it was to work for Ellen.
Now Ellen appears to be one of the nicest human beings in the world, and I would like to continue believing that is true.
And I'd like to use this one example from what the staff were bitching about to make my case.
Number one, how typical is it that somebody who is used to work someplace and then left talks trash about their boss?
It's kind of universal, right?
You see that the ex-employees of President Trump write books about how terrible he is, blah blah blah.
And one of the things I always say is, you realize that's just every boss.
Every boss who's had lots of employees churn through, every boss could have one of those employees write a book about what a monster that boss was.
Every boss. So you can always find disgruntled ex-employees, and if you treat them like they've told you something useful, you're doing it wrong because you're not learning something useful there.
So now we know even Ellen, the probably most open-minded, seemingly from our point of view, I don't know her personally, but from the outside, looks like the nicest person in the world.
And the staff says it's like a hellscape.
But here's one of the anecdotes for why it was an unpleasant place to work.
So people had been told that if they see Ellen walking around before the show, or after I guess, If they see her just walking around the set somewhere, they are not to engage her and talk to her.
They are not to talk to her.
So that's a pretty unpleasant place, right?
So as soon as you hear that, you go, oh, Ellen...
She's actually, she's just not very friendly.
She doesn't even want the common people to even talk to her if she walks by.
Are they supposed to look away and not make eye contact?
What a monster! Alright, now let me put this in context for you because it's all fake news.
All fake news.
That same story can be and has been told about me.
So, when you see it from the other side, you know what's happening.
Here's how it works.
Here's how this works.
I often get speaking requests, and I used to do a lot of them in the past.
And I would go to an event, and I'd be backstage, and maybe I'd be backstage for an hour or more in whatever their little green room situation is.
So I'd have an hour before I was supposed to be on.
Now, the secret of being a good presenter, which would be true on television as it would for live, is energy.
You want to have your highest energy.
You want to make sure that your best is in that moment when everybody's watching.
And if your energy gets siphoned off before you go live...
You can tell. It's actually a pretty big difference.
You can feel it yourself.
The audience can feel it too.
And so I have often told the people who book me that if they didn't mind, I'd sort of like to stay to myself for the hour before the show.
I mean, of course, I talk to the promoters and the organizers, and I talk to the people who are micing me up and everything.
So it's not like I'm not talking to people.
But I have directly said to the people who were sort of managing it, if it'd be alright, I'd like to just sort of be to myself to get my energy together.
Now what happens when the person I tell tells somebody on the staff?
Does it come out the same?
When the person I told, and I told them politely and they completely understood, but when they tell it to somebody else, what's it sound like?
It sounds like don't talk to this guy.
You know, don't talk to Scott.
He doesn't like it.
Oh, then it turns into he hates it when you talk to him.
Right? And it turns into I'm a jerk because I don't want to talk to the little people.
And then somebody maybe has a book they want to sign and somebody else will stop them.
Say, no, no, no. He doesn't want to be bothered.
And then it turns into I'm a big jerk.
Turns into I'm a big jerk, and all I wanted to do was do the best job I could for the people who hired me.
That's all. I wanted to do a good job so that all those people who were mad at me would have a good experience too, and their business would do well.
I have no bad intentions.
All I want to do is protect my energy for when I need it.
So my guess is that Ellen has that times 10.
Imagine if you're Ellen...
You're trying to keep your thoughts together.
You're thinking about what jokes you might say, how you're going to talk to your guests.
You've got five different guests.
You've got 15 different topics.
You've got to put them all in your head for this show.
And then you're walking from place to place, and the lighting person stops you.
It says, Ellen, Ellen, I just got to tell you this story about my cousin who loves you.
My cousin loves you.
So my cousin, all right, so my cousin, she went to the store, and she saw her friend, Betty, and, you know, hold on, Ellen, and she And then Benny, and then she was talking, and then she said to Benny, and then, well, you know, it's a long story, and by the way, you know, can I get your autograph?
Okay. What would you like me to sign?
Well, I don't have anything.
I don't have anything. Could you wait, and I'll go get something?
I'll go find something to sign.
So, now imagine that encounter multiplied by everybody on the staff who all want to talk to Ellen.
They'd all want to talk to her.
So I guarantee you that at some point somebody said, don't talk to Ellen if you see her, but they didn't give the full explanation, so that's the point.
Anyway, here's another great story from the simulation.
I like these coincidences, except it's a terrible story.
So there was some shooting at a cemetery, I forget where, Yesterday, I guess.
And somebody with a gun was chasing two other people, shot one of them, tried, I think maybe shot two of them.
And I don't know what the situation was that caused somebody to be running after people and shooting them.
But one of the stray bullets hit a car that was waiting at a stoplight, I think.
The car happened to be owned by somebody who was a firearms trainer.
So the crazy guy with the gun who was trying to shoot people, accidentally, one of his bullets hits a car, and by all coincidence, it's a person who has a gun with him, and he's a firearms expert.
Grabs his gun, gets out of the car, and takes that guy out.
What are the odds that your one stray bullet that hits a car hits a firearms expert who is sitting there next to his loaded gun?
Come on! All right.
There was a...
I think it was on Fox News.
They've got a story about what they call a black professor...
I don't want to live in a world where you ever have to say somebody's racial identity before you tell the story.
Like, that's how you know. Someday you'll know you live in a better world when you don't have to say a black professor.
Like, just the fact that you even have to specify anybody's race before you tell a frickin' story just tells you where we're at.
All right. But he's a Columbia associate professor.
His name is Mick Worker.
And he was complaining that that book, White Fragility, which tells white people how to be better people, I guess, in terms of racism.
And he said this, quote, In my life, racism has affected me now and then at the margins, in very occasional social ways, but has no effect on my access to societal resources.
If anything, it has made them more available to me Then they would have been otherwise.
So it's a black professor saying that being black helped him more than it hurt him, except for annoying social things that were not of great consequence.
Now, here's my question.
Let's say you buy into the entire Black Lives Matter narrative.
How do they explain the existence of this guy?
Because if it's clear and obvious to all people that the racism is holding people back, why is there a black professor in the United States who hasn't seen it?
How could there be such a gigantic problem And this guy's lived his whole life, and he says, well, I see, like, trivial stuff, like, annoying stuff, but it's actually helped me more than it's hurt me.
How can he be alive?
How can he exist in the same world and not see what the other people are seeing?
So that's just a question.
They can't all be right.
How can he exist?
All right. And his argument is that the Black Lives Matter movement is infantilizing black people because it's sort of, in the White Fragility book especially, training white people how to be, let's see, more gentle with black people is infantilizing.
It's like, oh, well, you don't have to worry about the Filipino Americans.
You don't have to worry about the Asian Americans.
The Hispanic Americans, they're looking fine.
There are no special problems there.
But when you talk to black people, you've got to talk a whole different way so that you're not a racist.
And so McWhorter makes the point that he feels it's infantilizing black people.
That's exactly how I feel.
I feel like it's infantilizing.
I'm surprised. I'm honestly surprised that it's popular.
But I don't know.
But I would agree with him that it's infantilizing and you can't get to equality that way.
So you need some better something.
I always feel like the cancel culture has scouts.
Did you ever feel that?
It's the mob that comes after you online or otherwise if you're about to get cancelled.
But before the mob comes, there are scouts that just probe your defenses.
So I've got a few scouts who are probing my defenses today on Twitter.
And I had asked the question, how many people who had at least a B average in school have ever been killed by cops?
Now, How are you supposed to interpret that?
So forget about, it has nothing to do with race, just how many people who had at least a B average were ever killed by cops.
And the implication, which I was hoping people would see, is that the way you act is probably a big determinant of the outcome.
In other words, what I implied, but I guess people didn't get it, Is that the kids who would do well in school are likely the same kids who would know to stay out of trouble with a cop and not push back too hard and then therefore not get killed.
But how was that interpreted?
That was interpreted by one of the cancel culture scouts as me being in favor of genocide based on IQ. So, that's kind of close to what I said.
Not. So, the cancel culture is trying to ding me for promoting genocide, which is pretty close to the opposite of what I'm promoting.
All right. There's somebody saying that those Portland kidnappings where the The DHS people are taking people off the streets.
They're probably not all extractions.
Some of them might be just people they need to question, which is what they say.
But somebody tweeted that how can people, libertarians especially, watch this happen and watch their rights be taken away?
They're watching their rights be taken away by these armed people.
To which I said, I'm glad I don't live in this subjective reality in which law enforcement is stripping away rights instead of reclaiming them for the residents.
It's not just one set of rights that are on the line here.
The people who live in those areas...
They had a right to peacefully coexist in the United States without violence and threats.
They have rights too.
So I don't see that world in which rights are being taken away.
I do see a world in which they're being given back.
That's what I see. All right.
Yes, where did the violent mobs get the rights to destroy everything?
Well, I guess it's the right of free speech.
And as the proponents of free speech often say, sometimes it gets a little out of control.
I'm not sure that I have a big problem with freedom of speech getting out of control now and then.
Mobs do that. You can't approve it, obviously, but you know it does come with some of that.
You've been watching my scopes since the very beginning.
Thank you. All right.
Those are peaceful protesters, not mobs.
Well, the ones I see look like the bad people are mixing in with the good people.
