Episode 1494 Scott Adams: Lots of Good Persuasion Content Today, and Trump Too
My new book LOSERTHINK, available now on Amazon https://tinyurl.com/rqmjc2a
Find my "extra" content on Locals: https://ScottAdams.Locals.com
Content:
Jennifer Aniston at age 52
Biden's 6-Prong pandemic plan
COVID deaths by weight class
Robert E. Lee in Afghanistan?
COVID, weight and exercise
Fusion energy is just an engineering problem
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
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
Is it my imagination, or do you all look sexier than usual?
Huh. I don't know what causes that.
Maybe you're working out?
Somebody says no audio.
Let's see if I can fix that.
I've got a problem with my technology on one of my platforms here.
So let's do this.
Do this. Allow my microphone.
How about now?
Yay! We got sound on two platforms.
We're cooking now. I'm going to implement the Rumble platform too.
I think I'm all approved now.
Comment for the locals development team?
For some reason, your interface doesn't allow me to know if I've hit the right buttons.
I'll talk about that later. Well, what's the news?
Lots of good things happening here.
Oh, wait. Wait.
What have I forgotten?
Yeah. Yeah. Do you realize that I almost read the news without the simultaneous sip?
Crazy. Crazy days.
But you need that sip.
And all you need is a cup or a mug or a glass, a tank or a chalice or a canteen.
Enjoy the last vessel of any kind.
Fill it with your favorite lid. I like coffee.
And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure of dopamine for the day.
The thing that makes everything better.
It's called the simultaneous sip.
Join me now.
Go.
All right, story number one.
The Taliban have apparently agreed to let 200 Americans and foreign workers who were trapped at the airport out.
Now, what did we promise to get them out?
Do you think the Taliban said, when we asked, hey, you've got 200 Americans, can you let them out at the airport?
What did the Taliban say?
Did they say, oh, oh, yeah, we didn't even know they were there, of course.
Let me make a phone call.
We'll get them right out of there. Is that how that went?
Or is it possible that our government promised them something that the public probably shouldn't know about?
Yeah. We kind of self-blackmailed ourselves on this situation, didn't we?
We put ourselves in the situation...
Where we blackmailed ourselves by leaving enough people there that we knew we'd have to pay something, I assume, or agree to something, in order to get them out of there.
So I don't know how much worse you can do as a government than blackmailing yourself.
Has anybody failed that hard in the history of governments?
Hey, I've got an idea.
Instead of blackmailing our competition...
Just hear me out on this.
We're going to blackmail ourselves.
Oh, just try it.
You know, we might get a surprising outcome.
Well, that didn't work out.
In other big news, Jennifer Aniston is launching some hair care situation.
I guess a new line of business or something.
And the Daily Mail shows pictures of her, and it describes it this way.
She's putting on a leggy display.
A leggy display.
Now, the story, of course, the point of it was that she's attractive, and she's 52 years old.
Is that amazing?
Have you seen a picture of Jennifer Aniston at 52?
What the hell is she doing?
Like, why can't other people do that?
Or can they? I mean, how much of that is genetic?
And how much of that is technology?
Because I have a feeling a lot of that is just lifestyle choices and doing the right stuff.
Now, I would always say that it's easier if you're a famous, rich movie star because being in shape is actually your job.
If somebody paid you a million dollars a year to go to the gym...
You'd probably go to the gym a lot more than you do now.
So if you're a movie star, you're basically being paid to go to the gym.
So of course she gets good results.
Probably as a personal chef.
But I only point that out because you know the story about the four-minute mile.
Until the first human being ran a mile under four minutes, it was assumed just not even possible.
There was a limit of human capability.
But as soon as the first person did it, then the record just fell like crazy.
A lot of people did it.
And there's something in the psychology about what's possible.
And when you look at Jennifer Aniston at 52, and they're still doing glamour pictures of her to advertise her product, and the point of the pictures is that she's sexy, that completely changes your view of what looking young and sexy could be.
I mean, if you could look like her into your 50s...
Maybe it's worth trying.
How many people even try to be good-looking in their 50s?
I mean, seriously. Who in their 50s who just has a normal job, you just commute to work, how many people in their 50s are saying to themselves, I'm going to work extra hard to really look sexy?
Just about nobody. Because you just give up, right?
You just think, well, even if I worked all day long, I'm going to be a 50-year-old whatever.
I mean, there's a limit to how good I can look.
But apparently there isn't.
Jennifer Aniston is showing you that whatever you thought was the limit, you probably weren't even close.
All right, enough about that.
Fox News is dunking on its competition by noting that they're ignoring another big story.
The story they're ignoring is about the documents that The Intercept published that suggest that Fauci lied to Congress about NIH funding for the Wuhan lab.
Now, that's a pretty big story, isn't it?
Even if you were going to debunk the story, it's a big story, and it was not covered by CNN, MSNBC, New York Times, or Washington Post.
It wasn't even covered.
Now, personally, I don't think it's that big of a story.
I think that the lying to Congress was more like weasel words.
Meaning he was just using gain-of-function in a slightly different context, I guess.
So I'm not sure it was a lie so much as a corporate weaseling persuasion thing that wasn't so cool.
But I don't know.
I think they did need to fund gain-of-function research.
So I'm not even sure it's a big deal.
It's a big tragedy.
But I don't know that it made a difference that he funded it.
United Airlines is requiring vaccinations for all of their staff.
But here's the twist.
I mean, that's a story enough.
But the twist is this.
Any of the United Airlines staff who claim they don't want to get the vaccination for religious exemptions, religious exemptions, they will not have to get the vaccination.
So that's pretty good, right?
if you claim a religious exemption, you don't have to get the vaccination.
You also won't get paid.
You also won't be working.
You'll be on unpaid leave.
So you won't get fired.
You just won't get paid.
And you won't be working.
So United Airlines is playing hardball.
I guess they figured people were just claiming religious exemptions to get out of it.
But follow that story.
It's a pretty big one.
So Biden has announced he's got a six-pronged plan to deal with COVID. Six prongs.
Now, some people would say, I have a six-point plan.
Some people might say, I have a plan.
There are six elements.
But no, the Biden plan has six prongs.
I'll bet if you say prong 10 times, the word will stop sounding like a real word.
Try it at home. Prong, prong, prong, prong.
Prong? Prong?
Is prong even a word?
Prong? Anyway, if you watch Ted Lasso, that's funnier.
It's a callback to one of their jokes.
So federal employees must be vaccinated in this six-pronged plan.
So one of the prongs of the six-pronged plan...
Is they all got to get vaccinated.
We'll see if that works. Seems to me that that would lose us about 20% of our federal employees.
Don't you think 20% of the federal employees are just going to not get vaccinated?
I don't know what's going to happen there.
All right, I've told you before that CNN has a one anecdote per day schedule.
For anecdotal persuasion.
And every single day, they will run one new story about the poor bastard who wishes they'd gotten a vaccination.
Because data matters, but not as much as anecdotes.
So here's today's anecdote.
Before she died of COVID-19, she begged TikTok followers to get the vaccine.
Megan Alexandra Blankenbiller was waiting to get vaccinated until she had convinced her family to do it together.
So she didn't get vaccinated and she wishes she had.
Every single day there'll be a new one.
What was the reported weight of the tragic death of Ms.
Blankenbiller? What was her weight?
Well, it wasn't reported. But they do have a photograph, and she's large.
She was a large girl.
Now, I feel as if the news and the medical community are just screwing us by not reporting the weight class of the people who are dying.
It's a big deal.
And just ignoring it like that's not a thing.
I mean, they do report it, you know, as a statistic and stuff every now and then.
But every single day they should report, we had 300 overweight people die and six people of normal weight.
Do you know why they don't report that?
Because you wouldn't get vaccinated.
Yeah. If you weren't overweight, you wouldn't get vaccinated.
So they have to fuck you.
Let's just put it that way.
They have to fool you and manipulate you to get vaccinated.
And so they don't want to tell you that your risk, if you're not overweight, is not nearly the same as overweight people.
Now, whether or not you should get a vaccination should probably have nothing to do with your weight, but they know that it will.
I mean, logically, the choice to get vaccinated probably shouldn't depend on that, but it will.
I mean, people will make decisions based on stuff like that.
Interesting question here.
Let me put this to you.
So see what you think about this.
So here's a persuasion statement.
subjective opinion I want from you.
When Texas introduced their new anti-abortion law that allowed private citizens to sue abortion providers, did that make it more or less likely that the governor of California would be recalled?
Because abortion is such a rallying cry that That it might make people want to make sure that they maintain their democratic governors to maintain abortion.
Now, I don't think California is really at risk to have any kind of law like they have in Texas.
We're so far away from that being a thing in California.
But I don't know if that matters.
If people are afraid...
They'll just vote based on their fear.
And so if Texas makes them afraid to lose their abortion rights, and that's their top issue, Texas may have guaranteed that Democrats keep a majority in Congress.
Because the California recall isn't just about the governor.
If Feinstein leaves office, and she's not going to last that long, she's a really advanced age, if she leaves office she'll be replaced by the governor.
If it's Larry Elder, he's going to put a Republican in there.
And then the balance of the Senate changes.
So this is a gigantic variable.
And suddenly, Texas, with their little abortion law, may have changed the entire nature of the political equation in the country.
Now, it's probably good that they did this well before 2022.
I mean, it's not that far before.
But it's going to have a big impact.
I have a feeling that the Texas abortion law could be one of the biggest variables for the next five or ten years of political life.
We'll see. But it also could be nothing.
The other possibility is it's just nothing.
Because I live in California, and if you tell me I should be influenced by something that happened in Texas, I say, well, I hear your argument, but I just don't feel it.
It just feels like it's the other side of the world.
So I'm not sure people feel it in California, but if they can be made to feel it, it'll matter.
Did you see Greg Gutfeld's interview with Trump?
I guess it's going to be airing in three parts, started last night.
It's really great. I haven't watched all of it, but I've watched a number of the clips.
Watch especially the clip where Greg asked Trump how to convince Greg's wife to get vaccinated.
She was born in Russia, and so they both joke about her being hard to convince.
But you have to see the quality of Trump's answer.
It's really good.
Have I taught you pacing and leading?
Pacing and leading.
So first, you have to agree with the person you're trying to persuade.
So watch when Trump is asked to persuade Greg's wife.
What does he say right off the bat?
He says he got the vaccination.
That's the context we need.
So that's the first thing. So Trump got the vaccination.
The second thing he talks about is freedom.
Because he's pacing her.
He's like, you've got your freedom.
And he's making sure that he's acknowledged that completely.
That's good persuasion.
And that's what the bad persuaders are getting wrong.
You have to acknowledge the other side's argument, or you're done before you start.
If you can't acknowledge their argument, then they know you're not really arguing, or you're not persuading, you're just talking.
So Trump does that, and then watch how gently he gets into his reasons why she should be considering vaccination.
It's really gently and perfectly done.
He just sort of is talking.
He acknowledges her side of it.
He stays light. He's not trying to push anybody.
And then he says, you know, but I think the vaccinations may have saved millions of people.
Now, that's not even about his wife, right?
It's the same topic, but he takes it away from Greg's wife so that it's not like a personal thing.
He says, yeah, I think we can save millions of people.
I don't know if that's true, but it's good persuasion.
And then there was something else he added.
Oh, he added that if you get the vaccination and then you get infected, your odds of having a bad outcome are really low.
And that... Was the kill shot.
But he got to the kill shot while you thought he was serving you tea and biscuits.
Because he had agreed with you from the start.
Oh, he's agreeing with me.
Personal freedom. All right, all right, all right.
Yeah, really?
Did he save millions of people with the vaccination?
Oh, that makes you think.
Yeah. What's he talking about now?
Oh, yeah. Yeah.
The last thing he says, so it sticks in your mind, is that the vaccination will keep you from getting really sick or dying.
Now, did he go after statistics and science and stuff like that?
Nope. Because probably none of that would have been persuasive.
He is so good at this.
You don't realize it until you understand technique.
Once you understand technique, you see him apply it correctly time after time.
And yesterday in the live stream I talked to you about the doctors who were doing exactly the opposite of good technique.
And you watch them side by side and then you learn the technique and you can see the difference.
It's a big difference. All right, so watch the rest of the Gottfeld interviews.
There's a few more coming up on subsequent nights.
The Robert E. Lee statue, the biggest one in the country, came down in Virginia.
Of course, that gives us plenty to yak about, but speaking of Donald Trump...
Speaking of that, what did Trump say about the statue?
Oh, I hope I did not write that down.
He said that Robert E. Lee, if he'd been the general in Afghanistan, he would have won the war in Afghanistan for the United States.
I miss him so much. - God, I miss him.
Are you serious? Robert E. Lee would have won in Afghanistan?
Come on!
Come on!
That's the funniest thing anybody ever said in public.
Or at least this week.
Because it's so provocative.
It's not really serious, right?
I mean, it's not really a serious comment.
But you cannot walk away from that comment.
That's not a comment you could hear and then think of something else right away.
You put that thought in somebody's head, and they have to stop and think about it.
It's just so diabolical, the way he takes this totally normal topic, and he combines it with gasoline and matches, and he just does it so effortlessly.
You know, Robert E. Lee, I think he would have won in Afghanistan.
People don't understand how funny he is.
Like, if you don't get it, that he does this intentionally.
If you don't know it's intentional, you don't get it.
The other person who's like this is...
Have you ever watched a Norm MacDonald comedy?
Especially at these, I think it's still on, a show on live stream.
And one of his continuing themes he does in his stand-up and his shows is he tells jokes that are going to make you really uncomfortable.
And usually it's because it's uncomfortably sort of racist, but it's not.
And you say to yourself, I'm having a reaction to this.
Even though it's not racist, it's like so uncomfortably close, and that's the joke.
He's making you uncomfortably close to something that you don't want to deal with, and then it's funny, because he's just making you uncomfortable, but he's doing it intentionally.
And he does it with sexism jokes and stuff like that.
You'll tell the joke, and you'll think to yourself, well, that's really sexist.
Wait a minute, he's doing this intentionally.
He's screwing with me.
No, the joke is on me.
Because the joke is about how I react to it.
So the joke is not the joke with Norm MacDonald, often.
The joke is what he made you think and how you reacted to it.
That's the joke. So Trump does that too.
You don't realize that you're always part of the larger part of the joke.
It's either on you or at least you're laughing from the sidelines knowing what he's up to.
What else is going on here?
Alright, here's some interesting info I got from Machiavelli's Underbelly.
Best accounts. Machiavelli's Underbelly.
So just search for that on Twitter.
And he asked people, or he gave some statistics.
Dammit, did I forget to write those down?
Apparently, exercising...
If you are not an exerciser, but you get on an exercise program, your odds of having a bad outcome with COVID go way down if you're a regular exerciser.
It's a big difference. And so this issue of weight and exercise is a big deal.
But where is Biden telling us to exercise?
I don't know if we've ever had a better president...
For fitness.
Maybe Bush Jr.
Am I right? Will you give me that, even if you're anti-Biden, if you don't like him as president?
But will you give me that he is a good role model for health?
He doesn't smoke the way Biden does.
You don't see him going to McDonald's.
Right? Right?
Am I right? On that one area, he's actually a really good role model.
He's thin, he exercises.
I think he's been running up until recently, probably.
Well, you know, you say he's skinny fat.
I get what you're saying. Yeah, he eats ice cream.
I'm not sure that's the worst problem in the world.
Yeah, he does eat a lot of ice cream.
I don't think that's a problem relative to...
You know, I see ice cream as entertainment, whereas eating at McDonald's is a meal.
Anyway, I think Biden is missing a big play because he should be telling the country to exercise.
Exercise makes a big difference.
He's got a six-pronged plan.
I feel like he's missing a prong.
I feel like it should be a seven-prong play, and that seventh prong should be, get outside, you bastards.
Start walking. Start running around.
Maybe eat a little less. I feel like the president should tell us that and just give us statistics and say it'll improve your odds against the coronavirus by whatever percentage.
It's a big deal. And also at Machiavelli's underbelly, he tweeted this.
He said, based on reactions I've received to tweeting the most up-to-date science on exercise and weight...
The stuff I just told you about.
As it relates to COVID outcomes, he thinks that the biggest reason is, quote, I have given up on life, is the reason I perceive.
So this is just his judgment. It's not a survey or anything.
But he says the more overweight someone is, the more they have given up.
And the more they object to data quality.
Saying, ah, the data's not good.
I don't fully agree with this interpretation.
Because there's another factor going on, and I call it the pleasure unit theory.
Now, this is my own little, you could call it a hypothesis if you prefer.
This is my own little invention, and it goes like this.
Every human being needs a certain minimum amount of pleasure in their day, or else they'll just give up.
They'll just literally put a bullet in their head.
You have to have some pleasure every day.
Now, what happens in the pandemic?
Our pleasure got taken away, right?
Huge, huge portions of our pleasure just were taken from us.
So what are we going to do?
You're going to make the difference.
And you're going to make up the difference in any way you can, because if you can't find a healthy way to get pleasure, you will find the unhealthy one.
You will not sit there without pleasure because you'd rather be dead.
A day without pleasure is you'd rather be dead, literally.
So you will do whatever it takes.
You will do cocaine.
You will do heroin. You will overeat.
You'll drink. You'll do whatever it takes to get enough pleasure, the minimum, into your day.
And that's a model that explains almost everything you see, basically.
So when I was watching kids scream out of high school the other day, I was noticing that, I don't know, it could be just confirmation bias, but they look a lot fatter than they did last year.
Has anybody noticed that?
I mean, I think statistically it's true.
But if you noticed it just visually, go to the mall or watch a high school class streaming out of class at the end of the day.
They look visually way fatter.
Now, it's a big deal.
I mean, we're actually killing ourselves by locking ourselves in and taking away all our pleasure.
So, here's a filter to put on this.
Say you're the President of the United States, and you know that people are going to overeat if they don't have access to pleasure.
Make sure they get it.
Make sure that they're getting enough pleasure, whatever that takes.
Might be getting rid of some mandates or whatever.
But you've got to make sure they get enough pleasure...
That they have the option of losing weight.
Because you don't even have the option of losing weight if it's your only pleasure.
You think you have free will?
You think you have good willpower?
Try having no pleasure except food.
Then tell me about your willpower.
It won't exist because it's an illusion.
Willpower is an illusion. We respond to the greatest urge.
That's it. That's it.
That's all you need to know about people.
There's no such thing as willpower.
It doesn't exist. It's an illusion.
You always respond to the greatest urge.
So if you're not hungry and somebody says, do you want a cookie?
Does it require willpower to resist the cookie?
No. You just weren't hungry.
Now you're starving.
You haven't eaten in three days and somebody offers you ice cream.
And you know ice cream isn't the healthiest thing in the world.
Do you say no to the ice cream?
You haven't eaten in three days.
No, you eat the ice cream.
Even if you're allergic to it, you eat the ice cream.
It's just urges.
That's all we are. And when somebody can resist food and somebody can't, just a different urge.
That's it. No willpower difference because willpower doesn't exist.
How you learn to eat sea rations?
Okay. Okay. There's good news in fusion energy, although you should take this with a grain of salt, because there's been periodic good news in fusion energy for 30 years, and we still don't have fusion energy.
But there's some new superconducting magnets breaking magnetic field strength records.
Now, if you're predicting the next 80 years of climate change, where do you put in your prediction fusion?
It's not in there, right?
You've got an 80-year prediction of what the planet's going to be like with your solar power and your windmills and whatever.
But nowhere in that prediction is...
And 30 years in, we developed fusion.
It's just not in there.
Are we going to get fusion in the next, I don't know, 30 years where it would make a difference?
Yeah, probably.
Let me tell you this. One of the smartest people in the technology field...
Told me five years ago about fusion.
Because he was a billionaire and still is a billionaire.
So he's a billionaire genius.
I won't give you the name because you'd be thinking about the person instead of the point.
And the person said that fusion energy is now just an engineering problem.
Now, if you're not an engineer or a scientist, that doesn't mean much to you.
But let me explain. If it's a scientific problem, it means we literally don't know how to do it.
Like, the math doesn't work.
If it's a scientific problem, it means that no matter what you do, you're going to use more energy than you produce.
That's a scientific problem.
And therefore, you just can't do it.
It's impossible. But...
The scientific problem is solved, which is a big deal.
It's like a really big deal.
And let me put this in terms that some of you will understand and some of you may not appreciate.
It's an engineering problem now.
Goosebumps? Did you get goosebumps?
Fusion is one of the most long-sought, impossible-sounding goals of all time.
It's now an engineering problem.
Let me tell you what that means.
It means it will be solved.
When something is reduced to an engineering problem, it basically guarantees it's going to be solved.
Because engineering is trial and error, trial and error, you know, experiment until you get there.
And you know how to do that.
We know how to experiment until we get there.
We didn't necessarily know how to invent it in the first place, but apparently that's solved.
We just have to engineer it, making god-awfully powerful magnets that we've never made before.
An engineering problem, not really so much the science.
Well, maybe there's some science in there, too.
So this is one of those stories that you could just totally miss.
You know, you're just looking at the headlines.
Oh, fusion. I heard that a million times.
But there is some possibility it's the biggest news in the world.
Because if fusion ever became a reality, the entire energy model of the world changes permanently.
It never goes back.
Oil is dead if fusion works.
Well, I don't know. That's an exaggeration.
But in the long run, it would be dead.
So look for that, because that's gigantic.
All right, let's talk about a dog that is not barking.
Same topic. Do you remember when it was common to see groups in the streets protesting nuclear energy?
Most of you are old enough to remember that, right?
You've seen protests against nuclear power.
Not just nuclear bombs, but nuclear power.
Where are they? Where is the person going on television to tell you nuclear power is a problem?
They stopped. There aren't any.
Do you know why nobody is going on television to tell you nuclear power is a bad idea?
Because nobody smart thinks it's a bad idea anymore.
Nobody. Nobody's left on the other side.
But if you'd made your job for the last 20 years in the media of saying bad things about nuclear energy...
Can you just change and just put people on and say, oh, well, it turns out that it's safe.
Now, a lot of it is because time has passed and we know how to do things more safely.
We're smarter about storing the waste.
They just store it on site now, which is the obvious thing to do.
You know, because it's already a nuclear power plant, right?
Right. So the question of do you want to live near a nuclear power plant is sort of already solved.
So they just store the nuclear waste next to the power plant.
Turns out it was sort of obvious because it's the one place that, you know, what else were you going to do with it?
Just use part of the parking lot and turn it into your storage area.
You're done. There are other ways to take care of the waste.
For example, Generation 4 nuclear power plants will burn it for fuel.
So you can take all of that waste and just repurpose it for fuel for the newer generation of nuclear reactors.
So here's my point.
We didn't notice, because it happened gradually, that all of the opponents for nuclear power stopped talking in public.
They'll still talk privately, but as soon as you tell them that their information is out of date, they'll walk away and change their opinion.
Because people's opinions against nuclear energy are really data-related.
You know, the data says it's unsafe, you know, whatever.
But once you show them that current data makes it, obviously, the thing you need to do, it's a different story.
All right. So I don't know why, but nobody wants to talk about the fact that nuclear energy is now liked by the left and the right.
Biden likes it.
Biden's pro-nuclear. He just doesn't make a big enough deal of it, in my opinion.
Well, China has threatened to send a warship to our coastal waters because apparently we sent a warship within 12 miles of one of their artificial islands made in the South China Sea.
Now, if China sends a warship to our coastal waters, should we sink the first one?
Should we just sink it?
Probably not. Probably a bad idea.
Um... Because then, you know, they'd feel like they had to sink one of ours in the South China Sea, right?
They'd sort of have to retaliate.
But... I don't know.
I feel like we should at least consider sinking it.
Just consider it.
Somebody says, hit it, but don't sink it.
Yeah, that would be smarter, I guess.
Uh... I'd have to think about that.
So let me just say this out loud.
China, I know you're listening.
As a citizen, I don't know if I would fault my government if we took out your warship, if it entered our coastal waters.
I don't know that I would fault them, even if there was a pretty big blowback.
I feel like I might be okay with that.
So, if you want to send your warship, just tell your sailors some of them aren't coming back.
Just let them know. So these are three things that China has ruined in 2021.
These are three things that used to be okay, but now they've ruined them.
Breathing. Breathing.
Yeah, we can't breathe anymore because we'll breathe in the coronavirus.
And of course, pollution.
The ocean. The ocean is no longer safe because they're going to start a war in the ocean and make the South China Sea too dangerous to navigate.
So the ocean, forget about that.
And commerce.
Commerce isn't safe because they're going to steal your IP and they're going to do bad trade deals with you.
So if you liked any of these things, breathing, the ocean...
Economics, commerce.
If you liked any of that, China's not your friend.
China's not your friend. Now, as you know, China has some big problems coming.
They might know about some of them.
They definitely don't know about all of them.
I can promise you that.
But they have some big, big problems coming.
So, to anybody in China...
You better think twice about your form of government because your form of government is taking you off the edge.
You're going off the cliff.
Now, it isn't up to me to tell you in China how to run your government, but it's taking you off the cliff.
And if you like that, keep going.
If you don't like that, maybe you might want to think of a change.
I'd also like to reiterate that the U.S. has every right to kill your fentanyl dealers in Chinese lands.
Right in their house.
And I encourage the government to do exactly that as soon as possible.
I want to see bodies hitting the ground.
Fentanyl dealers. The big ones.
I'm not talking about a street dealer.
But the big ones in China that are sending the massive amount of precursors to the cartels.
We need to kill them in place.
Kill them where they are.
We gave China a chance to handle it.
Did we not? We gave them the names of the dealer.
I'm sure they have their address.
They know the names, the face.
They know exactly who it is.
We told them who their dealer was.
And they decided not to do anything about it, apparently.
Now, we have every right to kill that dealer.
In place. Right in front of their family if we want.
Anything. There is no moral, ethical, or legal restriction anymore that I recognize against killing those dealers in place in China.
Got to do it. And I know the first time you hear that, it's so shocking, you say, uh, that's World War III. You can't do that.
No, you can. You can.
We can kill them in place, and we have to do that.
All right. That's it for today.
And... I hope you enjoyed this episode.
I'm going to do a little testing on the Rumble platform, see if we can get that up.
And yes, I have to go do some driving.
And I will talk to you.
Oh, did you like today's live stream?
I saw some complaints as I was talking.
Oh, good. Good, good.
Larry Elder, you're asking about Larry Elder?
Well... I did hear he had a little issue at an event.
There was some protester there or something.
Oh, there was a racist protester?
You know, when I see somebody protesting Larry Elder, I guess they were dressed in a gorilla costume and were doing racist things.
I'm not so sure that was an anti-Larry Elder protester.
Are you? Because would that hurt him or help him?
To know that he was being treated poorly by racists in California.
I don't know. It's hard for me to imagine that whoever put on the gorilla outfit thought that this would hurt Larry Elder.
Because it doesn't.
He's pretty anti-fragile, if you know what I mean.
Anti-fragile in the sense that if you go after him, All it does is give him attention.
And the attacks don't seem to be having any effect.
So the more they go after him, I just think it raises his profile.
It makes him look like the leader.
It makes people think, why do I want to vote for the person who has 1% support when I can do the one that might actually win?
