Episode 1524 Scott Adams: Don't Miss My Impression of Kamala Harris as the Harry Potter Golem, But More Optimistic
My new book LOSERTHINK, available now on Amazon https://tinyurl.com/rqmjc2a
Find my "extra" content on Locals: https://ScottAdams.Locals.com
Content:
NYC George Floyd statue defaced
BLM, Antifa, police shootings, all quiet now
Nobel prizes, Pulitzer, Reuben awards
No criticism of President Trump's policies
4 Options for a vaccine passport
Kamala Harris cringey video with young girls
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
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
But being a reasonable critic of your own team makes you national news.
And he's sort of the only person doing it.
It's like he's single-handedly trying to save the Democrats and they're not listening.
It's like, you know there are some elections coming up, right?
Just checking. Anybody?
Democrats? Left? This is my Bill Maher impression without doing an impression.
You're all aware that there will be maybe consequences for the way things are working out so far.
How about that border?
Do you think you're going to win an election just the way things are?
Now, he didn't say those words.
I'm making that up.
But he's pointing out the obvious.
How the hell do you expect to win an election when you're doing all of this stuff?
We'll see. Dave Rubin calls him the airlock with the Democratic Party.
That's funny. All right, so you're sounding the alarm about the border crisis, and obviously that's going to be a big problem for the Democrats.
Well, in the least surprising news category, this should be my news, my new category, least surprising news.
Now, this is different from perpetual news.
Perpetual news would be like, Pope denounces violence.
Perpetual news. Or, it looks like you'll be wearing your masks longer than we hoped.
Perpetual news. Or, it looks like they're not going to make a deal on the $3.5 trillion infrastructure bill.
Again. Perpetual news.
But the other category is predictable news.
Things that you knew were going to happen, you're just waiting for it.
Turns out that the new George Floyd statue in New York City got defaced.
The George Floyd statue was defaced.
Did anybody see that coming?
Anybody? Yeah, everybody.
They basically created an object that will almost certainly cause more racial division.
Won't it? You know, obviously there's no similarity between a Civil War statue and a George Floyd statue, right?
Completely different. So I'm not comparing a George Floyd statue to a Civil War statue.
I would never do that.
But they do have one thing in common, just one thing, which they make racial division worse.
Am I wrong?
Because that thing's going to get defaced a lot by, you know, not nice people.
And I feel like it was a step in the wrong direction.
But we'll find out.
Did you know that the fentanyl coming into this country comes not just from China providing the precursors to the Mexican cartels, but specifically from Wuhan?
Wuhan. Yeah, Wuhan, the...
Home of potentially the source of the coronavirus, we think, but also the main source of the fentanyl that's coming into the United States, killing, oh, I don't know, 75,000, 80,000 people a year.
That might be the total, not the fentanyl portion, but it's a big number.
I don't know. When I hear news like this, am I wrong?
I'm starting to get a bad feeling about Wuhan.
I don't know. Just a feeling.
Marusha says, just sent you a video on Twitter about China developing race-based biological weapons using precision medicine.
Uh-oh. Well, I'm not sure I want to say that out loud because I haven't seen the article, so I don't know the credibility of it yet.
But I'll be taking a look at that.
So, check your Twitter feed.
So, do you remember the case of Jacob Blake?
He was a black man, shot by police, and reportedly unarmed.
And I remember during the Trump administration, it seemed like there were way, way too many.
You know, one would be too many.
But way too many black people being shot by police who were unarmed.
And so it was reported by Jake Tapper on CNN and Washington Post.
It was an unarmed black man.
And today we find out that the police officer who shot him won't be charged.
What? How could you possibly not charge the police officer who shot an unarmed black man?
Answer? He was armed.
He was armed. That's the answer.
He was never unarmed.
He was armed with a knife, and he turned threateningly toward the police after having had previous scuffles just within minutes.
And so the police officer is not charged because it was self-defense.
Now, as others will point out, The news got out far before the correction.
How many people will see the correction versus how many people saw the fake news?
It's not even close, right?
The correction never gets attention relative to the original story.
So why is it that during the Biden administration...
We're now seeing this huge uptick in police officers shooting black people who are unarmed.
Did it just stop?
Did it stop happening?
Now that Trump isn't president, police just said, hey, we'll just stop shooting unarmed people now?
Well, there are fewer police, but not that much fewer.
Yeah, I've got a feeling that everything from the Black Lives Matter protests to Antifa to the police shootings were always based on real things in many cases.
But I think the media did quite the job on the public there, didn't they?
Quite the job, propaganda-wise.
You know, I'm fascinated by the Nobel Prize stories about the winners.
I was reading an article about how some people found out they won.
And people have all kinds of different reactions to winning the Nobel Prize.
But I'll tell you, if I were the winner of the Nobel Prize for Literature...
The one that you think maybe has the most subjectivity?
I suppose all the science ones in chemistry and science have a lot of subjectivity, too.
But if you win the literature prize, what does that really mean?
If you win one of the scientific-oriented ones or the economics-oriented prizes, or even the peace prize, you've done something that's probably pretty important.
Pretty important. But what if you get the Nobel Prize in Literature?
Do you think that the Nobel Committee read all the books that year?
Or, you know, previous years, because it's not just for that year.
Did the Nobel Committee read all the books?
All the books that were produced?
How do they know even what things to look at to give it a Nobel Prize?
I would argue that the Nobel Prize in literature is just worthless.
Just completely worthless.
Like the Pulitzer Prize.
Do you know how the Pulitzer Prize is decided?
There's a committee of people, and people, authors and publishers, submit work.
So it's only the work that's submitted.
So it's not all books.
You have to submit it, so that narrows it down to a small set.
And then the... The people on the committee read some of those books, and then they say, well, here's the best one.
Here's the best one.
How valuable is that?
If you're the winner of that prize, I mean, certainly if I won the Nobel Prize for Literature, I'd be bragging quite a bit.
But really? Is it really that much of an honor?
No. Not really.
Not really. The chemistry one?
Yeah. Economics?
Absolutely. Quite an honor.
But literature? I don't know.
So I'm not too impressed with that.
And then here's the really insulting one.
Can somebody do a fact check on this?
Am I wrong...
That there was big complaints about diversity because there were too many white men winning too many of these prizes.
But the prize for the Nobel Prize in Literature, did that not go to an African man, a black man from Africa?
I think it did, right?
How would you feel about that?
How would you feel if you were the...
Tanzanian. I think he was from Tanzania.
How would you feel if you won the Nobel Prize in the context of everybody saying, you know, we need to spread these around a little bit better.
We need to make sure we've got some diversity in here.
So how can we add a little diversity?
How about the Nobel Prize in literature?
How about that one?
Because it's subjective.
We'll just find an African man and give him that prize.
Now, I'm not saying that he didn't write a terrific book.
Don't get me wrong.
So nothing here should be interpreted as, you know, the gentleman who won that prize is anything but a brilliant writer who probably deserves all kinds of recognition.
But the point is, you kind of could have given that to a lot of different people.
There probably were some decent books that got written in the last ten years, right?
Right. So I feel like I'd be, I don't know, almost a little bit insulted.
A little bit. Privately.
You know, publicly, I'd be bragging my brains out.
But privately, a little bit insulted.
Let me give you an example.
Oh, hold here. Can you wait for a second?
I'm going to take off my microphones and be right back.
I want to make a little point, and I need a visual aid.
Hold on.
This will take me 10 seconds.
Hold on.
Hold on.
Sorry about the terrible audio.
This is the Rubin Award.
So I won this in 1997.
The National Cartoonist Society is the Outstanding Cartoonist of the Year.
This award goes to the top cartoonist of the whole year.
And in 1997, I won it.
And I thought to myself, my dream had come true.
As soon as I became a cartoonist, I said to myself, there is no higher honor.
This is like the Nobel Prize for cartoonists.
And finally, I won it.
Do you know how honored I am to have this prize?
Not. It's completely worthless.
For years, it's all I wanted.
Well, it's not all I wanted.
I wanted other things. But here's why it's worthless.
For a few years in a row, Bill Watterson, who did Calvin and Hobbes, often considered the best comic ever created, he would win this award.
And then the next year, he'd win it again because he was still better than everybody.
Well, what about the year after that?
Well, he's still the best.
So how do you have an award, an award event, if all you're going to do is give the same award to the same top cartoonist?
It would be the same people every year, right?
And so the organization that gives that changed the rules and said that you can only win it once.
You can only win it once in your career, the top award.
So we all get one.
Because you can only win it once.
And there are only... I'm going to pick a number.
There are only, I don't know, 20 top cartoonists, right?
You have 20 that are in that upper realm, the ones you've heard of.
How many of the top 20 are going to win the top award in cartooning?
All of them. Every one of them.
We're all going to get one because now it's just a participation award.
So, likewise, I once met somebody whose wife was on the Pulitzer Prize Committee, and until I talked to this gentleman...
I wanted a Pulitzer Prize.
I mean, who wouldn't want that on their permanent record?
You want a Pulitzer Prize.
Until I found out how they give away the Pulitzer Prize.
It's just some people who read some books that were submitted to say, I like this one.
That's it. That's it.
A random group of people who have no special qualifications, except that they read books, decided that on this little group, this one was a good one.
It means nothing. It means absolutely nothing.
I suppose it's good to be nominated because that means you're at least in the running for something.
But no, it doesn't mean much.
So as soon as you win one of these awards, it becomes amazingly not important to you personally.
Other people are still impressed.
But once you win one of these types of things, all the...
All the prestige and the feeling of accomplishment and stuff, it just sort of dissolves pretty quickly.
All right, here's something funny.
Apparently there's an unprecedented or semi-unprecedented cold snap in the...
Where is it? It's happening, I think, somewhere in the northern clime.
Anyway, so CNN is covering this record kind of cold snap.
And how do they talk about a cold snap in the context of climate change?
It's a little tricky now, because CNN and a lot of the media have been using this trick.
Antarctica, thank you.
It wasn't, yeah, Antarctica.
I think I was saying north.
But Antarctica, is that right?
It was Antarctica that had the record low?
I think that's right. But here's the thing.
You know how the media has been covering the hurricanes and the other heat waves and the droughts?
They always cover every event as though it's a clear sign of climate change.
Oh, yeah, that hurricane, that's climate change.
Heat wave? Well, there's your climate change.
It's just going to get worse.
Twisters, floods, climate change.
Damn climate change. Drought, climate change.
Damn climate change.
How about the cold snap? How do they describe the cold snap?
Do they say, oh, here's some evidence against climate change?
No, they do not. Here's how they describe it.
They put it in context. They say, it is important to understand, this is on CNN, it is important to understand weather is different from climate.
Oh, oh, now we hear that weather is different from climate.
I guess it applies in this case.
They go on.
Weather is what happens over shorter periods of time, days to months, such as the seven-day forecast.
Well, thank you. I'm starting to understand this now.
Climate is what happens over much longer periods of time, such as several years or even entire generations.
Thank you for this context, CNN. One such example, they say, is a cold snap.
A cold snap.
Snap. Which can happen due to sudden changes in atmospheric circulation.
Not climate change.
No, it's just...
This is just like an exception thing, a cold snap.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't it be true that either all of these things are influenced by climate change or you're not sure about any of them?
I don't feel like you can pick and choose these weather events, you know, these anecdotal things.
Now, I get, I do get, that at this point, it does seem like we're starting to see the signal, as they like to say, the signal for climate change.
It seems to be showing up a little bit in the storm activity and stuff, maybe not completely clear yet.
Not too long ago, it just wasn't there.
But now, at least some people are saying they're starting to see it.
I'm not quite convinced.
I'm not saying it's not there.
I'm just saying I'm not sure the date is there yet.
I see Tony Heller's name come up.
Anybody who doesn't know that Tony Heller is completely debunked, you probably need to Google that.
Because if you're still following the Tony Heller stuff, he was a lot of fun.
I followed him closely and dug down as much as I could.
But in the end, his criticisms don't hold up.
Which is weird, because let me say this about him.
I suspect that some of his criticisms, Tony Heller this is, probably true.
But in the totality of things, he sort of would see what he wanted to see everywhere, and then credibility kind of fell away.
So that was awkward for CNN, but I will agree with their point.
I completely agree with their point that weather events are different from climate.
Keep that straight.
Well, in exciting news, Lockheed Martin has delivered...
A flying laser weapon.
Now, I think it's still sort of a prototype that got proven on a test here.
But it's an airborne, high-energy laser.
And they flight tested it on an AC-130J. Now, apparently, we're just within a few years of putting it into the field.
So it's sort of like, you know, five years, we're going to have flying lasers.
What can you do with a laser in a military setting?
Yeah. I mean, Star Wars is here.
We've got our flying lasers.
What could go wrong?
I imagine we'll be shooting down a lot of drones with these flying lasers.
A lot of other stuff, too.
Give it to the Taliban.
Five years to develop it, and one more year to give it to the Taliban.
That's probably on the actual plan from Lockheed Martin.
Five years to develop, one year to give it to the Taliban.
I've said this before, but the more we watch it, the more interesting it is that you're seeing lots of criticisms of Trump in the news.
No surprise, because he's looking at a run for 2024, and he's still influencing politics, so of course we're talking about him.
But what's interesting is...
That nearly all of the criticisms now are about what?
What are nearly all of the Trump criticisms about?
Not policies.
They've given up on criticizing him on policies.
Why? Because Biden's not doing so hot on policy.
So they have to find things that are sort of outside his job description.
So it's going to be all about his taxes and whatever financial things he may or may not have done and whether or not his business acumen and his private life is what he says it is.
And January 6th, which didn't have anything to do with his job description, per se, or his policies.
So I'm seeing something that borders on desperation.
Because just imagine that the entire media is not attacking him on the stuff of his job.
I mean, just try to hold that in your head.
All of the criticism that Trump got about his job while he was on the office, and the moment he's out and you have a real thing to compare him to, Biden...
No more criticism of Trump on his job.
Right? Now, I'm not saying that he did everything free that you couldn't criticize him.
Even I've criticized him on his job.
Everybody's criticized him for one thing or another.
That's the job of a president.
But watching the focus be completely outside the realm of politics...
Well, it's in politics, but outside the realm of his job description is really telling.
It's almost... Capitulation.
It looks like media capitulation.
They've kind of agreed that he had good policies.
It just was stuff about him they don't like.
All right. Here is just a sort of, I guess, a mental experiment.
So I'm not recommending this.
I'm going to talk about an idea, but hear me clearly.
Hear me clearly?
No. Hear me clearly.
Not queerly, you people.
Stop making jokes about that kind of stuff.
Hear me clearly when I say I'm not recommending this.
It's interesting to talk about.
Suppose the government said to you, we'll give you three options, and if you satisfy any one of these three, you'll have something like a vaccine passport, even without the vaccine, and you'll have access to everything in society.
What's your first choice?
Now, your first choice is that you have access to everything in society and the government stays out of your business, right?
Right? We don't have to disagree on that.
First choice, get rid of the mandates.
All on the same page.
You don't need to tell me that.
Okay? All on the same page.
But just to throw out an alternative, suppose you can't get where you want and you have to settle for something in between.
Okay? Suppose the government said you can have full access to everything if you're vaccinated or if you have natural immunity and you can prove it.
Or I'll throw in that you did a rapid test within an hour or something.
So three things.
But I'm going to throw in a fourth thing.
You can pass a written test on COVID risks.
So you'd have four ways to have full access to society.
Testing often.
Some version of rapid testing, which isn't as good as PCR, but would get you pretty close.
Natural immunity, vaccinations, or to pass a written test.
Now... Here's what most of you are thinking right now and putting in the comments.
Scott, who's evaluating that test?
Scott, who comes up with the questions on that test?
Scott, your plan is totally impractical because of who makes up the test, right?
Everybody thinks that, right?
All agree? It can never work because you would never trust the people who come up with the test.
Okay, you're all wrong.
You're all wrong.
Watch me change your mind in ten seconds.
You're all worried that the subjectivity of who creates the test is just going to make it garbage.
Ten seconds, I'm going to change your mind.
The test only has to ask, what does the CDC claim is true?
You're not asking the person what they think is true.
You're asking them, are they aware what the CDC says is true?
Now, I'm not talking about exact numbers, but a test that gives you the general idea.
For example, if it gave you a multiple choice and said, your risk of hospitalization according to the CDC. According to the CDC. What is your risk of hospitalization if you get the coronavirus?
That's it. We would not be asking people to be correct.
We would not ask their opinion.
We would simply ask if they're aware of what the government is telling them.
If they say, I am totally aware of what the government is telling me, and I don't believe it, or it might be true, but I don't care.
I still don't want to get it.
Then you're fine. Then you're fine.
You just have to be informed.
I've often said that one of the best purposes of the government, when they do it right, is to inform the public, as opposed to forcing the public to do stuff.
Don't force us.
Just make sure we're informed.
And if a simple little test, it could be ten questions.
It's not like it's going to take you all day.
Just ten questions.
You pass the ten questions.
You don't need to get vaccinated.
That's it. Now what do you think?
Now that I took away your objection to who makes the test, you're only being tested on what the government says is true, not what's true.
Not what's true.
Just what they say is true.
Another possible test...
All right. Took me 50 seconds.
Well, I got to the main part in 10 minutes.
CD says a lot of things.
Right, you don't need to believe them.
I'm seeing some people liking the idea.
I don't know if it's possible, because who would administer it and all that.
But remember you found out that there were so many people who thought the risk of the vaccination was completely out of whack for the actual risk?
I think you would have a lot of Republicans answer the quiz and get the right answers and say, I don't want to give vaccine.
Now, I told you I have a very smart friend who is completely aware of all the risks and chooses to just be natural, basically, and just not let science touch him as much as possible.
It should be a free person's choice.
I'm not saying I agree with it, but it should be a free person's choice.
All right. Let me throw in another one.
Another idea. And again, we all agree.
I think most of the people watching these live streams, probably you're drawn to them because you have some agreement with me on some stuff.
We don't like mandates.
But if you can't get rid of them, there might be some negotiation you could do.
Maybe. Maybe. Here's another one.
Drop the mandates, but also drop the restriction on people like me trying to convince you.
How about that one? So I restrain myself because I don't think it would be ethical for me to try to persuade you to do a medical process.
Would you say, we'll drop all of the mandates, nobody has to get vaccinated, but here's the deal.
People like me would be unleashed.
Now, I don't think I would necessarily use that power, because, again, unethical.
But I would imagine that there are other people who might want to just unleash their persuasion power, and then you could do with it what you want.
You could see it, you could avoid it, but you wouldn't have any restrictions.
Is that fair? Would that be fair to increase the persuasion but get rid of the mandate?
Somebody says they're already unleashed.
I'm not so sure. I'm not so sure that the professionals have been.
Maybe. But I haven't seen anything that would look like professional work.
You know, nothing persuading you that looks like You know, real consultants on persuasion were involved.
It doesn't look like that. It looks like just information.
Take the DeSantis approach and focus on people in the high risk and let everybody else do what they want.
Yeah. I mean, if you could get there, that'd be great.
All right. Or how about...
How about another one?
Here's another version of the same idea.
How about... Imagine this.
This won't happen, so just imagine.
Imagine Trump runs for president, and maybe the vaccination question will be dead by then.
Let's imagine just some politician, Republican, saying the following.
That when the public, 90% of the public, can pass the CDC test, we'll drop the mandates.
So it would be a random poll.
You wouldn't have to take a test.
So you personally would never have to take a test.
But every once in a while they would randomly sample and give people the test and say, if 90% of the people we randomly sample pass the test, you're all free.
If 90% can pass the test.
And again, it's not a test of what's right or wrong.
It's a test of just what the CDC thinks is right.
Do you know it? If you know it and you still choose to be unvaccinated...
The country has spoken. How about that one?
Who is doing the sampling?
Why would we trust them? Well, you could just release a number of different polling entities.
You could say, Quinnipiac, you do it.
Rasmussen, you do it.
Get a couple of other polls.
And if all three of them say we got a 92% to 95% correct rate, that would be close enough.
It doesn't have to be exact.
The left would purposely get it wrong?
I don't know. I wouldn't worry too much about that.
Is Dilbert made in China with forced labor?
Probably. All the gotcha people don't understand why that's not really a gotcha, but I'm too bored to explain it again.
But yes, I buy Chinese products, Chinese-made products, and there are some Dilbert products manufactured in China.
Yes, that's a fact. It's not a gotcha.
That is a public fact.
And do I like it?
Nope. Don't like it at all.
Is it practical to change it overnight?
Nope. But changing it gradually makes sense.
All right, did you see the Kamala Harris cringy video?
How many of you saw it? There's a Kamala Harris video going around in which she's talking to some, it looks like young girls, maybe high school, or I'm not sure what age is there, but...
They're involved in some kind of space camp or some space-related program to learn things, and she's talking to them.
And I would like to give you my impression, if you haven't seen it, my impression of Kamala Harris talking to young people in her totally natural way, which we all feel so comfortable with.
I have explained her style as a cross between the Harry Potter golem...
Oh, you know, the Gollum in Harry Potter.
But in this case, the Gollum is on MDMA, ecstasy, and is inexplicably happy.
Still the Gollum, but weirdly optimistic.
You know, the Gollum seems more like a pessimist, but he's taken some drugs, and now he's an optimist.
This is Kamala Harris, and I'll use some of her own words.
I just love the idea of exploring the unknown.
Oh, no.
To think about so much is out there.
That's why I'm so...
We're going to learn so much.
We're going to learn so much.
As we are curious and interested in the potential for discoveries, you guys are literally going to see craters, you guys are literally going to see craters, craters on the moon with your own eyes.
Yes.
All of you, with your own eyes, you can see craters on the moon!
And there are other things we haven't figured out and discovered and fascinating things.
And you'll find them all out.
And seen.
So Now, I don't know if that's my best work, but I spent a solid five minutes working on that impression, and I hope that my hard work...
It's appreciated. A lot of people will do a live stream.
Will they have a prepared act for you?
No! No, they'll just jump right into it.
Not me. I prepare. I like to give you the full experience.
All right. That explains why Kamala Harris, you're not seeing her so much in public.
How would you like to be the geniuses who were behind Biden with the understanding that maybe Kamala Harris would be that capable person who would take over if he failed?
I feel like the old spare tire's got a flat, if you know what I mean.
You know what I mean? Kamala Harris, the spare tire.
Spare tire is a little low on air.
You know what I mean? I think you know what I mean.
You've got a spare tire problem.
You might need a spare tire for the spare tire.
Oh, but at least, you know, if the spare tire doesn't work, you've got Nancy Pelosi.
You need a spare tire, and the spare tire, and the spare tire is what you need.
That's what you need. All right, is there anything else happening?
Oh, the most exciting story.
Turns out that there's a TikTok influencer, somebody who's got a pretty big following on TikTok, Whose name is Tally Dilbert.
That's right, her last name is Dilbert.
Do I feel sorry for her?
I'd like to apologize publicly to all the people.
I think the people in the...
Is it the Bahamas?
There's someplace where the last name Dilbert is fairly common.
I think it's the Bahamas.
Or somewhere in that general part of the world.
And I just feel bad for anybody who has that name.
I feel like I ruined it.
Do you ever worry that somebody will ruin your name?
I have a common name.
So, you know, I sent my Google alerts just to catch anything that somebody's saying about me in the media.
And I pick up a lot of Scott Adams news about people named Scott Adams who are not me.
It turns out a ton of us Us, me being people named Scott Adams, are police officers and lawyers.
There's just a ton of people with my name, police officers and lawyers.
I don't know what's going on with that.
Maybe that's the only people who are in the news, so the sample is skewed.
But I worry...
That there'll be somebody with my exact name, because there's so many of us.
I think there are four of me in this town.
Right where I live, I think there are four or five Scott Adamses.
And I met a few.
One is black. He lives locally.
So there's just all kinds of Scott Adamses.
And... Oh, Honduras.
Thank you. Yes, Tali Dilbert.
I believe she's a Honduran.
You're correct. Yeah. So Honduran and...
But I also think the Bahamas have that last name.
Oh, there's some guy with your name who writes bad checks on a regular basis.
That sucks. So I'm worried that there'll be some Scott Adams who does, like, a horrible terrorist act or something.
And I'm going to have to deal with that for the rest of my life.
But I feel sorry also for the people who have my name who are not me.
At least if you have my name and you're me...
You get some of the benefits, you know, being the Dilbert guy.
But imagine having my name, but not getting any of the benefits.
That would suck. Is Dilbert made in China with forced child labor?
How would I know that?
Do you think I did a factory check?
So all the gotcha people, let me just classify you all as idiots.
You can gotcha all day long because I'm stipulating.
Gotcha doesn't work when the person you're gotching stipulates it.
Those are facts, they're true.
Okay? You don't need to tell everybody, because I told everybody.
You're not adding anything.
Add something. Add anything.
Be useful. You're being completely useless.
Because if you want more people to know about that some Dilbert products are made in China, I'll tell them.
You don't have to tell them.
I'll tell them. I've told you many times.
All right? So just take your gotcha and go home with it.
I want to rub it in.
You can rub it in, but it doesn't bother me.
I mean, I'm already bothered by the fact that there are products I'm associated with made in China.
You can't bother me more than that.
Do you think that your public shaming of me would bother me more than the fact that the products are made in China?
It's not even close. I'm immune to public shame, but I really hate the fact that the country that killed my stepkid I'm doing business with.
You can't make me like this less than I like it.
If you think any amount of shame can make me hate this situation more, you don't understand where I'm at on this situation.
All right.
Rubbing pain reliever in a wound.
Stop signing the contracts.
I don't sign the contracts.
I don't sign any contracts with Chinese companies, nor would I. You understand that, right?
Personally, my entity, which is a corporation, we don't sign any contracts with China.
Publishers do, and people who do third-party work do.
Now, I have a limited amount of power over them, but it's certainly something I brought up and will be bringing up again.
It's just the alternatives don't exist.
If they had alternatives, they'd be using them already.
All right.
I'm in control of everything, but I'm not in control of that.
Thank you.
The absolutists.
You know, most of the people who disagree with me fall into this category of being absolutists in the sense that people are still arguing that the vaccination doesn't work because it doesn't work all the time exactly the way we hoped it would.
What's wrong with you? We all know it doesn't do everything we wish it did.
That doesn't make it nothing.
It's still something.
Only Siths deal in absolutes, exactly.
Yeah, I saw the mansion face plant behind Schumer.
You know, I didn't hear Schumer's speech, but I heard it was not ideal.
Discuss Dave Chappelle.
I did discuss him yesterday.
I'd like to watch the special.
I saw a meme going around accusing him of saying something vile, not about the trans folks, but on another topic that looked like fake news, because there's no way that he said the things that the meme says he said.
There's just no way. So if you see that, I'm not even going to tell you what the topic is because it's so fake news.
Yeah, exactly.
Somebody in the comments has seen it.
There's no way that he said that in the same context as being reported anyway.
I'm going to have to see it myself and make that judgment.
All right.
Probably watch it tonight, I think.
Saying vaccines don't work is like saying they're safe and effective.
What do you think of?
No, it isn't.
Saying they're effective is just true.
They're just not 100% effective.
Well, according to the...
I will bow to the audience and say that according to the experts, they're effective-ish.
All right. That's all I got for now.
Slow news day. And I will talk to you tomorrow, and it will be amazing, won't it?
It'll be amazing. And...
Oh, Andrew Yang, starting the forward party.
You know, I don't know what Andrew Yang hopes to accomplish, but what he might accomplish is taking a lot of votes away from Democrats.
So, that's probably all that's going to end up happening.
