Episode 1940 Scott Adams: The News Is Boring So Let's Just Make Fun Of Famous People Who Are Dumb
My new book LOSERTHINK, available now on Amazon https://tinyurl.com/rqmjc2a
Find my "extra" content on Locals: https://ScottAdams.Locals.com
Content:
Newest HOAX: Trump invited Nick Fuentes
Did Ye, Milo & Nick Fuentes set Trump up?
Protests in China & Iran
"Internet Dads" America's powerful influencers
Steven King gives business advice to Elon Musk
Gavin Newsom, President Biden possibilities
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
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
In Scotland Coffee with Scott Adams, there's never been a finer thing in the whole universe.
And you're lucky enough to be experiencing it.
If you were prepared, you've got your beverage.
Why? Why do you need a beverage?
Well, you need more than that.
What do you need? You need a cup or mug or a glass, a tank or challenge or a dine, a canteen jug or a flask, a vessel of any kind.
Fill it with your favorite liquid I like, coffee.
Join me now for the unparalleled pleasure.
It's the dopamine of the day, the thing that makes everything better.
It's called the simultaneous sip.
It happens now. Go.
Oh yeah. Yeah, now you feel a little bit more dehydrated.
Or hydrated, I mean. You're a little bit more hydrated.
A little more caffeine.
You can feel it already.
Your day is improving.
You are now one with all the sippers around the globe who simultaneously sipped with you.
And I would like to offer this following offer to all simultaneous sippers.
Have you ever heard of people who went to an Ivy League school and And they're so lucky because they can always network with other Ivy League school people.
And you'd be like, oh, you went to Harvard?
Well, I went to Harvard too.
I'd be happy to hire you because we both went to Harvard.
You'd like a connection?
You'd like me to connect you or introduce you to somebody?
I'd be happy to because we both went to Harvard and you went to Harvard.
So we'll introduce you and then you can make a fortune.
Well, I propose to you, simultaneous sippers, if you find another simultaneous sipper anywhere in the world, be sure you're ready to treat them right.
Introduce them to people who can help them.
Give them jobs. Treat them nice.
Introduce them to your sister, because I'm sure you'd want your sister to marry a simultaneous sipper.
I mean, duh, who wouldn't?
So let's turn this into something, okay?
Let's turn it into something where if you get a request from a simultaneous sipper, you take it seriously, because that's somebody who's got it going on.
All right, let's talk about some things.
I have two entertainment-related recommendations, which I know you love, because who doesn't want to know what I think is entertaining so that that can inform you?
Everybody cares what I find entertaining, don't they?
I hope I'm not wrong about that.
Well, all right. I have sampled for you two pieces of content, both from Netflix.
One is comedy stand-up by comedian Neil Brennan.
Recommended. Neil Brennan.
The magical part of it is that he identifies strongly as a Democrat left-leaning kind of a guy, but he goes right at his own people.
So he's explaining the difficulty of being a lefty in a world where sometimes you're not left enough.
So he's continually frightened about whether he's liberal enough because he's being judged by his own people.
You have to see it. You can't possibly explain it in a way that makes it sound effective.
I will just tell you...
That you would love it, whether you're left-leaning or right-leaning, just because he does it really well.
He's just really good at it.
I wish I had known him before.
I guess he's been around a while.
The second piece of content, do you remember the old Addams Family TV show?
They spelled it with two Ds, but it was the bane of my existence because I was a child when the Addams Family was a big TV show.
Do you think anybody ever accused me of being Uncle Festus?
Or Fester or whoever he was.
Oh yeah, they did.
Oh yeah. Yeah, I heard a few Gomez references.
However, there's a new show called Wednesday Addams.
And Wednesday is the young daughter.
And I'll give you some good things about it.
And then I'll tell you why you should not watch it whatsoever.
But you probably will anyway.
Because there's not much on.
One reason to watch it is that the young actress who plays the part, really good.
The casting was really good.
Great job. And I love the look of it and the feel of it and the vibe of it.
It's all really well done.
But here's why you probably should never watch this piece of shit.
It's just... It's anti-male porn.
It's about a young girl who does horrible things to adult white men.
That's the whole show. In the first scene, she has the balls ripped off a man for being part of some men who threatened her.
She has his balls ripped off.
And that's like a joke.
That he got his nuts chewed off by some fish that she put in there.
That actually is played for laughs.
How much she can destroy the lives of white males, who, by the way, in the movie, all have it coming, right?
So they're all terrible people, these white men.
The whole show is just anti-white male porn, and I would watch it as porn if I were a woman who hated men.
So if you hate men, it's a really good show.
And if you want to see how Hollywood is completely destroying itself, it's worth watching it for that.
Because I don't see how they can survive, really.
I mean, what other group...
Imagine if you just changed the genders.
I hate doing this, but it kind of screams for it in this case.
Imagine there were a movie, and it was just a completely straight movie.
Somebody just made a movie in which there was a young man who crippled and decapitated just adult women.
And then the whole movie was how the women were horrible Karens, but she killed them all.
Or the young man killed them all.
That wouldn't be on TV, would it?
That would never be on TV. But as long as it's a young woman destroying the lives of men who totally deserve it, according to the movie, fine.
No problem. All right.
Well, Hollywood is dead. So I updated the hoax quiz.
It used to be 16 elements, now it's up to 17.
And the new hoax is that Trump invited Nick Fuentes and Milo.
The truth seems to be, and Axios reports this, was not just Trump saying it.
The truth seems to be that he didn't know Fuentes was coming.
Now, that doesn't mean that Trump is in the clear, right?
I'm not giving him a pass.
I'm just saying that it's a hoax that he invited him.
That's, you know, what the Rob Reiners are saying today.
How could you invite him?
Well, he didn't. It was a trick.
But Trump made a statement...
And I think this Trump statement fixed everything.
Because you know how Trump is good at smoothing things over?
You take a provocative situation and you can count on Trump to say something that will just completely take the energy out of it and make you not care about it anymore.
So here's the beginning of his statement.
He said, quote, So I help a seriously troubled man who just happens to be black...
Kanye West, who has been decimated in his business and virtually everything else, who has always been good to me by allowing his request for a meeting at Mar-a-Lago alone.
And then he goes on to say some other stuff.
So, do you think Grandpa Trump could have sounded any more like your racist grandpa?
A man who just happens to be black?
Was there somebody out there who didn't know that Kanye was black?
Holy shit, are you telling me Ye is black?
That changes everything.
You know, you always joke, people always joke when people say, I have a black friend.
You know, they say, oh great, you have one black friend, you racist.
And Trump does the most grandfatherly-sounding thing.
Oh, I was helping this guy who just happens to be black.
Like, I'm not saying I'm non-racist, but I helped a guy who just happens to be black.
He just happens to be black.
I don't think you could have said that any worse.
Yeah, I'm black too.
I just happen to not look at him.
I identify that way, though.
So I'm not sure that made anything better.
But of course, the way the Democrats are playing it is they're playing it hard.
You know, Republicans would have done the same thing if some Democrat did something awkward.
And so now the play is to see if you can make the Republicans disavow that dinner with Trump And if they don't disavow it quickly enough and aggressively enough, then they're racist too.
So now, because DeSantis has not disavowed it strongly enough, or I don't think he's commented, then he must be part of it.
And then McCarthy hasn't said anything about Marjorie Taylor Greene, who once attended some Nick Fuentes event and spoke at it.
So that's the game, is to make everybody respond.
Now eventually those people will have to respond, won't they?
Because the journalists will just peck them to death until they say something.
And then once they respond, what will the journalists say?
Well, not until we forced them to respond.
And that was a pretty weak response.
So basically, they'd just get another bite of the apple, no matter what these guys say.
So that's the play, and it's a good play, politically.
Politically, it's pretty powerful.
So I thought the best comment about this came from Ben Shapiro.
Who said of Trump, the best way to make sure you don't accidentally have an anti-Semite attend your dinner is to not invite somebody that you already know is an anti-Semite.
Now, it's not my claim necessarily that Yeh is an anti-Semite, but clearly he's said things which Jewish people say, nope, that's anti-Semitic.
So, you know, Ben can play that team.
He's got all the credentials he needs.
That wasn't a bad comment.
If you invite somebody who's already nationally accused of being anti-Semitic, you can't be too surprised if he brings a friend.
I think he nailed it.
Alright, now here's the layout.
You know Fox News is trying to freeze Trump out by not talking about him, right?
So Fox News is not going to back him.
Which means other Rupert Murdoch properties probably won't back him.
You know that Breitbart went hard at this situation.
So Breitbart seems anti-Trump.
And now the Daily Wire, if we can judge from Ben Shapiro's point.
So are those the three biggest conservative news outlets?
Who's left?
I would say they're the most influential and also the biggest.
How in the world would Trump win without Fox News, without Breitbart, and without Daily Wire?
How does he win?
We shall see.
We shall see. Now, remember my idea that Trump, instead of doing a normal campaign, He should just create his own podcast and then he should ask people to be on it.
So instead of being the guest, he should be interviewing the guests.
Imagine Trump hosting his own podcast and inviting Ye and Fuentes to be on after Trump knows that they screwed him.
After Trump knows that he screwed him, invite him on to explain themselves.
Would you watch that?
How would you watch anything else?
Are you kidding me?
Because do you think Trump is happy about either of those guys?
If there's one thing that Trump doesn't like, it's somebody who pretends to be his friend and then stabs him in the back in public, which is what Ye did.
Ye stabbed him in the back.
How much do you think...
How much do you think Trump...
Thinks of Ye when Trump has been pro-Ye from the beginning, and Ye just stabs him in the back.
I would love to see that interview.
I think Trump would just rip his fucking head off, you know, verbally.
And Ye wouldn't back down.
What would happen?
I mean, it would be the most interesting thing I'd ever seen in my life.
So, I don't know that Trump can become president under this cloud and other clouds, but he could have the best podcast anybody ever had.
It would be the biggest thing ever.
Am I right? Does anybody disagree with me?
That if he started a podcast where he interviews the most provocative people, you would have to watch it.
You couldn't not watch it.
Yeah, he could fund his entire campaign with a pay-per-view.
Oh my God. Pay-per-view.
Pay-per-view.
Trump interviews Kanye and Fuentes at the same time.
Pay-per-view. I would pay for that.
I would totally pay for that.
Yeah. You say it's a non-story.
But you don't get to say that.
Because the press decides what's the story.
It's not your interest.
Right? There are plenty of interesting things that are not in the news because the news decided that's not a story for you.
So when you say it's not a story, that means nothing.
You're not in charge of making a story.
They are, and they made it a story.
So it is a story because the people who make stories say it is.
All right. Is it true that McCarthy is considering Marjorie Taylor Greene as Speaker of the House?
No. I'm seeing that on social media, but that doesn't sound true.
That's not true, is it?
I haven't seen a news story on it.
That sounds like just something the Dems are saying to scare the country, right?
Yeah. Doesn't sound right.
Alright. How many of you think that Ye and Fuentes set up Trump and that the The purpose of it was to sabotage Trump.
How many of you think that?
You don't think it was sabotage?
You think that Ye thought that bringing Fuentes to Mar-a-Lago would be perfectly non-controversial?
No, of course he knew what he was doing.
How could he not? Now, Ye isn't mentally incompetent.
Like, he knows how to dress himself and he knows how the world works and stuff.
He's not crazy in that way.
He knows how the world works.
Of course. Of course it was.
I don't think there's any question about that.
And, by the way, if Trump doesn't destroy Ye for this, then he's not Trump.
Don't you think? I think Trump is going to absolutely destroy Ye.
I think he's just going to completely destroy him.
Do you think so? I think he should.
I think he should. If anybody ever had it coming.
And, you know, maybe that's the fight that Ye wants.
Ye might want that fight.
Maybe that helps him.
More energy. Who knows?
So, this will get interesting.
But you did not see Trump, you know, forcefully disavow Fuentes because, I assume, because there are too many people who vote for Trump who like Fuentes.
So, now that's consistent.
Trump does not, typically, he doesn't criticize people who support him.
Now, there's some question about whether Fuentes really supports DeSantis or Trump.
I don't know. I think maybe that's an open question.
Somebody says, who's Fuentes?
Let me explain. Nick Fuentes is a Hispanic white supremacist.
He's a Hispanic white supremacist.
It's just a weird thing that you can say that in public and that everybody says, okay, one of those Hispanic white supremacists.
Does that even make sense? I think his father is Mexican descent.
That's why his name is Fuentes. But I wonder how many of his followers even understand that the whole white supremacy thing is not exactly what you think it is.
Now, I was reading up a little bit on Fuentes, and the funniest thing that he says, because...
Here's the main thing. I think you have to treat Fuentes as an entertainer, but also a political force.
So a little bit like Trump in that sense.
Within the entertainment part, one of the things he says is that women shouldn't have the vote.
And he doesn't want women working.
It's more like you should go back to the old days where the women stay home and they raise babies.
And he says that out loud and, you know, completely without any reservations.
And I'm seeing somebody here saying, well, I agree.
And I'm seeing even Erica is saying, I don't disagree.
Yeah, there are, in fact, women who say that women shouldn't have the vote.
I don't think anybody should have the vote.
It's not like men are nailing it.
If you took women out of the vote, do you think you'd get a better result?
I doubt it. You would get a different result.
Probably different. But would it be better?
I don't know. Who knows?
So, this whole thing worked really, really well for whoever was behind it.
Now, here's the first question I think you need to answer.
How do Ye and Fuentes know each other?
Wouldn't you like to know that story?
Do you think they just ran into each other?
Do you think that Ye was just a fan?
Or vice versa?
Or that Milo did it?
Do you think that...
Oh, you think it was Milo?
Then do you think Milo was trying to destroy Ye?
Because could you imagine Milo sort of wouldn't know how this would turn out?
Of course he would know.
Of course he would. Both free basins.
All right, let me just throw a little conspiracy theory juice into the mix.
You like your conspiracy theories, don't you?
In 2017, Chuck Schumer said of Trump, it's the dumbest thing in the world to insult the intelligence community because they have a thousand ways from someday to get back at you.
So Chuck Schumer, who definitely knows how things work behind the curtains, said the intelligence agencies are going to come for Trump.
And then we saw that 50 former and current intel people signed a thing that said that Hunter's laptop was Russian disinformation, which probably had a big impact on the election.
They came for Trump.
No question about it.
They came for Trump.
Now, let me ask you this.
Were you surprised that those, let's see, the Whitmer kidnap people that there were FBI informants in that extremist group, were you surprised by that?
Probably not, because they try to infiltrate any extremist group.
How about the Proud Boys?
I guess the number one or maybe the number two people in the Proud Boys might have been a FBI informant or something.
I forget what the details are.
Was that surprising? Big surprise?
It shouldn't be a surprise, because that's exactly who the intelligence people would want to co-opt.
Now, how about Nick Fuentes?
Do you think Nick Fuentes works for himself and has no contact whatsoever with the groups who have a great incentive to contact him and co-opt him?
Do you think that the intelligence agencies would miss this opportunity to do the most obvious thing that they routinely do, which is to get the top racists sort of working on their team?
If you were the government and you wanted to find out where all the racists were in the country, how would you do it?
How would you find all the racists?
Well, you might find somebody who appeals to that group of people and then get close to them and find out who's on their list.
And then once you have the mailing list and the people who watch Nick Fuentes the most, you have an entire database of people with a certain philosophy, and they're the ones you want to watch if you're the government.
So you don't think that intelligence and FBI, law enforcement, you don't think they've tried to penetrate the Nick Fuentes organization, the Groypers?
I have no information that they have, right?
There's no evidence that that has happened.
But you don't think they'd try?
Why wouldn't they? It's literally what they do for a living.
They literally try to infiltrate groups exactly like that.
So they know what's happening.
And wouldn't you want them to?
Don't you want them to penetrate all those groups?
Well, you don't want them to be inciting violence within those groups, but you'd want them to penetrate them, just to keep an eye on things, just in case there's something going on there that's going to get dangerous.
So, what are the odds that Ye and Fuentes met each other organically?
Somebody says, I'm FBI. What are the odds they've met each other organically?
The first thing I would do is I would ask them, because, you know, there isn't Ye and Fuentes that are both accessible to the press, are they not?
Can't you just reach them and ask them a question and they would answer you?
I would ask them how they met.
Now, if it turns out it's Milo, that still doesn't settle the question, does it?
Because you don't know what Milo's up to.
But if you wanted to follow the money and take the most obvious, straightforward assumption based on pattern recognition, it would look like this.
And I'm not saying this is true.
I'm saying that all of our experience in pattern recognition should tell you the following.
That it was an op.
It was an intel op to make sure Trump doesn't get re-elected.
And that Fuentes may or may not be aware of it.
I mean, he might have just gotten an invitation and thought, oh, of course I'll go.
I mean, it doesn't mean he's part of the plotting.
But that doesn't happen by accident.
It doesn't happen by accident that he got in there.
Somebody with a little weight...
Was suggesting behind the scenes.
There's a little suggesting going on there.
Now, how worried are you about the Ye plus Fuentes connection?
It's real weird.
Because they're both considered, you know, I guess anti-Semites at this point.
But they're...
It's a weird group to be called racists and anti-Semites.
I mean, one's black, one's last name is Fuentes, so it's a weird white supremacist group, isn't it?
Now, wouldn't you like to know how they met?
That's all. Just find somebody on that list of 50 intel people who knows both of them, and maybe you'd find something else.
All right. Just speculating.
Meanwhile, over in China, apparently the protests in China about the newest crackdowns are getting pretty active.
So apparently at least some part of the Chinese public, the young people, are actually chanting, For the overthrow of the government.
Imagine how brave you have to be to be a Chinese citizen in public chanting against the government.
Do you know one reason that they can do it?
Just by weird coincidence, they have to wear masks.
So China... China wants to control them at the same time they want them to wear masks.
Just game that out.
Oh, we're going to make you do very, very unpleasant things for a long time, but also, you have to wear a mask so we can't identify you in public.
How did they think that was going to turn out?
Like, did you have to be some political expert to know that if you tell everybody to wear a mask...
And then you oppress them in ways that they couldn't possibly tolerate.
There might be some demonstrations on the street, and they might be wearing masks.
They just might be. So the experts, and I saw a tweet by...
Oh, who was it?
Ballou. Yes, Professor Francois Ballou, I think I pronounced it correctly.
And he's showing that...
China has two options, and both of them are paths to doom.
So they can keep their lockdown in place, but the lockdown won't ever make their risk go away.
Because as long as COVID is circulating around, every time they do a lockdown, they just make themselves less immune, and eventually they're going to have to unlock down, and then it just gets them.
So here's the problem.
The Chinese success of doing the hard lockdown initially did look like a success for a while, didn't it?
As brutal as it was to their citizens.
It kind of looked like it sort of, kind of almost worked.
I wasn't quite sure.
But in my mind, and I think all of you have the same thing, what happens when they stop doing this?
Like, don't you eventually all get infected?
Are you really better off?
Now, I thought they had won, because I thought that they had stalled until Omicron was here, and then Omicron would just act like a, you know, practically like a vaccination.
But I did see some experts saying that if you didn't have any immunity, Omicron would rip through your billion people or so, and you would have so much massive death.
Especially because China has an older population, right?
But not as much obesity.
And it looks like their healthcare system would be overwhelmed fairly quickly.
So China has choice one.
They keep with the lockdowns.
But the lockdowns can't work and they also can't end.
Because as soon as you end one, there's going to be another virus and it pops right back up again.
So that would cause social upheaval at a massive scale.
But if they end the lockdowns, they would admit that their lockdowns were a failure.
And there's some thought that they could not survive, the government could not survive confessing that big a failure.
So, I don't know. I kind of disagree.
I disagree with the level of risk that China is experiencing.
I think China could have protests all day long, for months, and just ride it out.
Because nothing's happening.
It's just talk.
As long as the protesters are just talking, they'll just, you know, jail a few, play it out, you know, maybe wait for winter so it's too cold.
They can just ride it out.
As long as they don't care about the interim damage of the protests themselves, they can ride it out.
So I don't see anything that looks like a risk to the government.
Do you? Does this look like it's genuinely a risk to the government?
Because I don't see it.
Some of you say yes. Well, I would agree that things could turn in a minute.
But so far, the protesters are not doing anything that's physically aggressive.
Right? The protesters are not taking over buildings.
Are they? As long as they stay in the street, they're not burning anything, they're not looting.
I don't know. Why does the government have to listen to them at all?
Just let them run around and They'll get tired, and then they'll run out of food, and then they'll have to do something else.
Now, this brings us to the protest in Iran.
Did you know that for whatever reason, I don't really know why, our media isn't really taking the Iran protests very seriously?
Is that my imagination?
Because if you know anybody who has Iranian connections, as I do, The word inside of Iran is very different from what we're hearing.
Inside Iran, it looks like a real revolution that might actually topple the government.
And the thinking, at least from one smart person, the thinking is that what's different is that it's the women this time.
And this is sort of like inside Iranian culture.
So this is not me saying this.
This is someone who knows Iran and knows the women of Iran.
And the thinking is that you could piss off all the men in Iran forever, and it wouldn't change the government.
But you just pissed off the women.
And when the women are mad, and it looks like they're not going to back down, you can't really mow down the women.
Does that work? Does that work anywhere?
Does it work anywhere where you could, like, mass murder women, and then the men would be okay with that?
I don't think so. So I feel like the pressure in Iran has everything to do with how far the women want to take it.
If the women take it all the way, probably they could.
They probably could topple the government.
But... It would require getting the men involved, right?
Because there's a certain amount of violence that's required, and the women aren't going to do the violence at scale.
They need the men to jump in to do that.
Now, why is it that our press is sort of ignoring it?
What's up with that? Do you know?
Like, it seems to me our press would be all rah-rah-rah, let's overthrow Iran.
But the U.S. press is basically quiet about it.
Right? Showed a few pictures.
Basically quiet. Somebody says the BBC's on it.
Now, I guess the question is, maybe if the United States looked like it was active, you know, looked like it was organizing to help the protests, that that would help the regime.
Because then Iran would look like it had an enemy from the outside.
Maybe. That doesn't seem like a good enough reason not to cover it, so I don't really know why.
Could it be that it's not that big a deal?
Or could it be that our press just doesn't have good information about Iran?
Could it be that they want the nuclear deal?
Could be.
I don't know.
So I saw a quote by Naval, a tweet, and he said that losing their privileged status on Twitter is the beginning of the end for mainstream media.
Now, that thought takes a little...
You have to sort of, like, bounce that around in your head a little bit before it makes sense.
Like, the first time I read it, it's like, hmm...
And then you bounce it around a little bit and you're like, oh yeah, I can see it now.
I can see it now. Which is a typical Naval comment.
Like he's a little bit ahead of where your brain is, so it takes you there.
And I can see that.
Because the thing that the public doesn't understand is how important Twitter is to journalists.
Twitter is really the journalist's social media, wouldn't you say?
Right. Facebook is the mom's social media.
LinkedIn is the business person's.
Instagram is for narcissists and people who would like to be narcissists and want to be narcissists.
But Twitter is basically the news journalist place.
And if the journalists lose their rank within Twitter, what will they do?
Would they become less important?
I don't know. I feel like here's what I think.
Here's my prediction. That the blue check, if it goes away and becomes anything that people can buy, then people will just look at your follower count instead.
And it ends up being the same thing.
Am I wrong? How many of you look at the follower count to decide how to interpret the tweet?
I'm not the only one who does that, right?
I definitely do that.
Yeah. Yeah.
So, I think that, just speaking for myself, and maybe some of you too, the blue check was only a proxy for the follower count.
Now, it wasn't a perfect proxy, because sometimes somebody new would be building an audience and they're not there yet.
But you could tell if it's a building audience.
I feel like the user count is the only thing that mattered anyway, because that's a measure of influence.
So am I wrong that we don't need the blue check?
The blue check was just saving you a click.
Now I'll just do the click and see the follower count.
Which makes me wonder, has Twitter ever considered getting rid of the follower count?
Imagine that. It would change the service to me to the point where I'd be much less likely to use it.
Because I'm very incentivized by anything I can measure.
Here's like a persuasion trick for you.
People care more about things that can be measured.
So that's why the things that can be measured end up being dominant over the things that you're worried about, and they might even be more important, but whatever's measured gets the most attention.
So, if you can measure the number of followers, then I'm all in.
I'm like, oh, I can compete.
For influence. And I can tell how I'm doing by my number of followers.
So that's very incentivizing for me.
I'm like, oh, I'm in. I like a good competition.
So every day if I get new followers, I look at it and I feel good.
If I get new followers, I get a little, like, boost of dopamine.
So I'm, like, part of the machine now.
So the machine is, like, treating me like the chicken that gets a pellet.
It's like, ooh, look at the pellets you got.
500 new users.
And I'm like, oh, pellet.
Give me another pellet. I want another pellet tomorrow.
Alright, predictions.
Prediction is that the internet dads will become the dominant influence in the country.
The internet dads, and that includes women who are sort of fulfilling the role of being the adult in the room.
I think it's going to be the internet dads.
So, And part of that is because the media's influence is being diluted by a lot of things.
And the internet dad types are adding too much value to be ignored.
Right? Or the step dads, right?
The internet step dads.
So that's what I think.
So let's talk about Stephen King.
I don't know if I've ever mentioned, but people who are professional artists sometimes don't have the best grasp of business and science and other domains, but they think they do.
Boy, do they think they do.
So Stephen King was giving some, I guess, business criticism to Elon Musk.
Thank you. So here's what Stephen King said.
He started out good.
He goes, I think Elon Musk is a visionary.
Almost single-handedly, he's changed the way Americans think about automobiles.
I have a Tesla and love it.
That said, he's been a terrible fit for Twitter.
He appears to be making it up as he goes along.
And then later, I guess he got some responses to that, and later he tweeted, but Twitter ain't cars and Twitter ain't rockets.
So Stephen King, with all of his analytical writer's ability, has decided that Elon Musk, We're good to go.
Didn't know anything about neural links to your brains until he formed Neuralink.
Didn't know anything about digital payments until he was part of the PayPal team.
Didn't know anything about building gigantic machines that bore through the earth efficiently until he formed the Boring Company.
Stephen King, do you see a pattern here?
Do you see a pattern? You know that every one of those things he didn't know how to do until he did them, right?
If you could find the pattern, the pattern is he's the guy who knows how to do the things that other people don't know how to do.
Because he figures it out and then he does it.
That's who he is. The most basic description of Elon Musk is the guy who can figure out how to do the thing that other people couldn't figure out how to do.
That's like his entire brand is doing the thing that Stephen King hasn't noticed he's good at.
The entire situation is that he can do that over and over again.
How many times does he have to prove it?
And Stephen King hasn't noticed that Tesla can do some things.
Also, what do all these things have in common except for the boring machine?
The boring machine is the exception.
What do they all have in common?
They all require software.
They're all software-driven.
I'm pretty sure that the reason that the rockets can land back on Earth and be reused, isn't that mostly software?
It is, right? For the engines to fire at just the right degree to bring a long, tall thing down back on its base, that's got to be all software.
So the software is driving the cars.
Musk just said they did some huge self-driving test with their new trucks, the big trucks for carrying goods, and it worked.
It's all software. So if there's somebody I would trust to fix Twitter, which is software, literally there's no better person in the world.
He'd be the first person you'd pick.
But Stephen King.
All right. Gavin Newsom is reportedly all in for Biden and will wait his turn and will not run for president if Biden is.
Now here's how I interpret that.
I think Newsom is playing it smart, which is not surprising.
He's a smart politician.
And there are two things that are possible.
Biden actually does run, in which case it really would be a bad idea to run against him.
Because primarying your sitting president is a bad look.
And you'd be pissing off some fundraisers and stuff like that.
So it probably wouldn't work for him in the long run to run against Biden.
But... What are the odds Biden's really gonna run versus maybe running a little and dropping out early?
I feel like Newsom wants to make sure he's as friendly as possible with the Biden team so he can take them over.
Don't you think? The number one thing Newsom would want Would be for Biden to drop out on his own without being primaries, and then to have his infrastructure just move over to Gavin, because apparently it's a good infrastructure for fundraising and stuff like that.
So I think that's the right play.
But here's the fun part.
Who really is deciding if Biden is going to run again for real?
I mean, he says he's running, but we don't know.
Do you think it's Biden?
You say it's Jill, but I don't believe it.
I don't believe it. I don't believe that the President of the United States ever really listens to a wife.
It doesn't matter who the President is.
Do you know why? Just imagine yourself as President of the United States.
And then your wife wants to give you some advice.
How would you take that?
Here's how I would take it.
This might be just revealing a personality defect on my part.
I would see the lips move, blah, blah, blah, but then my brain would be saying, one of us, and only one of us in this room, rose from absolutely nothing to the President of the United States, the leader of the most powerful military in the history of humanity.
One of us did that, and then you're the other one.
Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
I'm not even going to listen to your fucking blabber.
And by the way, this is not a sexist.
You can reverse a sexist.
Same fucking thing.
Right? If it's Hillary, and she's got her opinions, and somebody's telling Hillary, not Bill, obviously his opinions would be valuable.
But if somebody who's never done anything, never accomplished anything except getting married, is like, blah, blah, blah, Hillary, this is what you should do.
What should Hillary do? Hillary should say, all right, I became Hillary Clinton.
You became whatever you are in the room, and I'm not going to listen to that.
Can't listen to that.
We have a request for a second sip.
And I, being responsive to my audience, have decided to grant you that privilege.
It's a privilege for me as well.
It's a privilege for all of us.
Secondary simultaneous sip on the way.
Hope that was enough warning.
Go. I don't know why I'm thinking this.
Something in the comments made me think it.
I saw a video on Instagram of a woman eating popcorn off her dog's stomach.
She had a little chihuahua, and the chihuahua was sort of in her arms, and, you know, just like sleeping.
And she had put her popcorn on the stomach of the dog, and she was just eating popcorn off the dog.
It was the best thing I'd seen in a week.
Come on, the dog licks your face all day long.
Eating a little popcorn off the dog's stomach isn't going to kill you.
All right. The news, as you might expect on a Sunday on a Thanksgiving long weekend, the news is sort of shooting blanks, so we don't have a lot to work with today.
Do you think Hunter is waiting for Hunter hearing without some plan?
You know, it could be that Joe Biden needs to remain president long enough to pardon Hunter.
Has anybody said that out loud?
Because remember, the president has lost one adult son.
And if you've lost one adult son for any reason, you become probably a maniac to protect the remaining son.
Wouldn't you? I mean, I would imagine that would just, like, mess with your head so badly.
So I feel as if Biden will never leave the job voluntarily as long as there's some possibility he'll have to pardon Hunter.
Because imagine if Biden left the job and then a week later Hunter gets prosecuted.
Imagine that. Imagine what Joe Biden would think if he thought...
All I had to do was run for re-election, and this wouldn't be happening.
So it could be that Joe can't take anybody's advice on this.
It could be that Biden says the only way to protect my son, and maybe myself, and maybe the whole family, is to just be president until I die.
I think that might be the play.
Does that ring true?
Is that the best speculation you've seen so far?
Because I'm not wrong.
Only the president could pardon Hunter, right?
And only Biden would do it.
I mean, I can't...
I suppose a different Democrat president could do it, but you couldn't guarantee that.
You can never guarantee that.
You know what would be really interesting?
It is for Trump to say that he would pardon Hunter.
But we still have to find out what went on.
And then say he hopes Hunter gets some drug treatment.
Yeah. I know what you're saying.
I get it. That's not Trump.
Trump is all predator all the time.
And that's why you like him. So I'm not saying he's ever going to change or that he necessarily should.
But just imagine what a gigantic mind F that would be.
Because it would remove Joe Biden's reasons for running for president.
Right? He could take Biden out of the race.
Just promise. Right?
That we do need to understand the Hunter-Biden thing, so we do need to do the investigation.
But for the good of the country, it doesn't rise to the level where prosecution makes sense.
It would just screw with your mind so much, you wouldn't know what to do with it.
You just wouldn't know what to do with it.
Imagine if Trump showed compassion to Hunter for his drug addiction.
Just imagine that.
No thanks. Yeah, it would make his base angry, you're right.
But I think Trump has trapped himself because he has such a well-defined base that anything he does that's outside of that little well-defined channel looks like it's a problem.
So I think Trump has been painted into a corner a little bit by who supports him and who doesn't.
Yeah.
All right.
Big F you to those who suffer under the law.
Yeah.
Yeah. You know, the whole thing with presidential pardons is that they're all unfair.
You get that, right?
I don't think there's ever been a presidential pardon that was fair.
They don't try to be.
That's not an objective of presidential pardons.
The presidential pardon is the one thing that you can't question.
And we want it that way.
We want it to be an unquestioned right.
And so that's what we got.
There's a Rob Reiner impersonator over here.
I'm sorry.
Who invented the pardon?
I don't know. That's a good question.
But I'm reluctantly in favor of the pardon.
Because even though I think the pardon is 95% just letting guilty people enter prison, I think you need that 5% to feel like just that little extra safety.
Because, you know, you might be the one who ends up in prison.
Right? It could be you.
You'd like to know that there's that little bit of chance that if you were wrongly convicted you could get out.
So yesterday you left us with a conversational debunk on the clogs.
Blood clots, they are not.
Yeah. By the way, has anybody done the debunk work on that blood clot died suddenly film documentary?
If you do your own research, you very quickly find people who say, oh, that can be explained away.
It's just refrigerated dead people.
They all have that blood clot. Stuff like that.
But there's been a debunk on the debunk.
There's always a debunk on the debunk.
That's why, basically, you just have to make up your own mind.
It's not like we have information that works anymore.
We don't. You have to make up your own mind.
What I say about doing your own research is that you should always hear both sides.
If doing your own research means as a scientist, then that usually doesn't work, because we're not good scientists.
Even the scientists can't do that.
But you should always see both sides.
Seeing both sides is just being aware of the argument.
I would say that's different from doing your own research.
That's the smallest version of doing your own research, is simply being aware what the other side says.
That's it. That's as far as I would go.
Just be aware of it. What you do with it is up to you.
Morticians found the rubbery clots to be an anomaly.
How much would you want to bet that if you did interviews with people in that field, you would find people who disagree with you and say, no, this is normal.
That's just a refrigerated corpse.
They all look like that. How much would you bet you could find somebody to say, who does that job, who says, no, it's obviously faked?
Easily. Now, that doesn't mean it's faked, but I'll bet you could find somebody in that industry who says it's fake.
I don't know. Who knows?
Now, let me...
I did hear from...
I'm not going to name names, but I did hear from a documentarian...
Who wanted to clarify that although I said documentaries are by their nature the least credible form of information, that does not mean they're incorrect.
You all get that, right?
I have to talk about this all the time.
When I say something has no credibility, that doesn't mean it's false.
Those are completely different topics.
Something could be true or false, and you just don't know one way or the other.
But if the person who has the least, has a history of lying all the time, is your only source, then you'd say, well, I don't know.
There's no credibility there.
Name names. Freedom is, what is true?
I don't know. Yeah, I said that yesterday, but I have to say it a lot, because it's hard to hear.
Yeah, I think the rubbery clots are just the refrigerated corpses.
They have rubbery clots.
That's what I've been told by doctors.
Biden pardons Fuentes?
For what? It's easy to find them to discredit, then why haven't you done the work?
Oh, good question.
If it's easy to find the morticians who would discredit it, why have I not done the work?
Would anybody like to answer the question?
Before I go off on this person?
If you answer the question well enough, I won't go off on them.
Otherwise, I'm just going to fucking go off on them right now.
Would you like to take a moment to...
Possibly stop me from doing that.
Do you know I haven't looked into it?
I don't fucking work for you.
Do you know how many things I haven't looked into?
Do you know how many things that I could do that I haven't done?
I have a lot of things to do.
Why don't you fucking look into it?
Why don't you fucking look into it and then tell me how it went?
Because I'm not going to mow your fucking lawn.
I'm not washing your dishes.
I'm not doing your laundry.
I know you'd like to know.
Well, why don't you go do it yourself?
It's not my job to do every fucking piece of research that you need.
Do you think that's what I'm doing here?
I do the best I can with the time I have and the priorities that make sense to me.
You fucking go look it up.
Do you know what you're going to find? Do you know why I don't look up things when I already know the answer?
Because it's a waste of my fucking time.
If you came to me and said, oh, we discovered that alcohol makes you immortal and live forever, and I say, well, I don't think so.
That doesn't sound credible.
Are you going to say to me, Scott, you haven't taken the time to do a deep dive on this claim that alcohol can make you immortal?
No, I'm not going to do a fucking deep dive on that.
It's so fucking obviously not true.
Do you know what's also obviously not true?
I didn't want to say it because I don't want to insult my audience, but I'm just going to do it anyway.
That blood clot thing is so obviously fucking false.
If you believe that, you're...
Okay, I don't want to insult you.
Don't believe that.
Don't. It's the most obviously false-looking thing I've ever seen.
If you even feel you need to look into it...
I don't know.
I mean, go ahead.
But I'm not going to bother.
It's so obviously false.
Do you know why? It would be the top news story, because it's so easy to check, like you said.
I could do a deep dive.
You don't think the New York Times and other places looked at that and said, uh, we maybe ought to talk to at least one mortician.
You don't think anybody did that?
Of all the media, big media people who are looking for a story and would love to have a story, because there are conservative ones who would love this to be true, right?
There are conservative ones who would get a lot of clicks if this were true and they could confirm it.
The fact that nobody can confirm this fucking thing should be a big, big flag to you that you don't need to fucking research it.
Now, the only reason I tell you that you should look into it is because I'm being polite.
If you had a little bit of sophistication about looking at the news, you wouldn't have to look at that at all.
It's so fucking obviously false.
Like this one, You should have seen from the jump.
The day I saw that, I didn't even give it a moment of thought.
I just said, well, that's the most obviously false thing I've ever seen.
And then people started believing, and I'm like, oh, God, they'll believe any fucking thing.
Don't make it my job to debunk the obvious, okay?
Maybe I'll debunk things that are a little bit, you know, on the edge or not so sure, but don't make me debunk things that are so obviously fake.
So obviously fake.
All right. I really didn't want to do that.
But you forced my hand.
Counterpoint. Why didn't you take any boosters?
Because it was Omicron.
And I didn't need to travel.
So anybody who confuses decisions in a state of uncertainty with decisions in a state of certainty, you should not be talking in public.
So is there anybody here who knows why I got the original two vaccinations?
Can you answer the question?
Why did I...? For sex.
Yeah, I did it for sex.
And so far I'm healthy, and I had lots of good sex.
So, for those of you who are criticizing me, you did not go to Bora Bora and have amazing sex in a tropical paradise.
I did. I did.
I took the chance.
Now, if you say, Scott, if you drop dead from that shot, the joke's on you.
Do you know what I'd say?
I'm ready to go.
I wouldn't have a special problem with that.
I'm absolutely ready.
Now, I'm not suicidal, right?
Everything's fine. My mental state is actually very, very good.
I'm just saying that I took a chance I weighed the pluses and the minuses in a state of not knowing really what was true.
I didn't know if the, at that point, I didn't have any sense of whether the vaccination or the COVID itself would be more dangerous, or even how well the vaccination worked.
Those were all unknowns.
But I knew for sure that I like high-quality sex in tropical locations.
That was the only thing I knew for sure.
And that if I got that second jab, I could go to a tropical location and be fucking my brains out while you were laying on your couch with a mask on.
So all of you geniuses who laid on the couch with your masks on, good for you.
You're the smart ones.
All right. This is the other thing that I think is funny.
I just saw a comment on locals.
How many of you think that a rich male in America in 2022, somebody who is rich and has pretty much perfect body mass index body, do you think I can get laid?
Does anybody think that's like beyond my reach?
What world do you live in?
Yeah, what world do you live in that a rich, healthy guy can't get laid in America?
Like, how bad would your game have to be when you couldn't make that work?
What age do you target?
Does it matter? So, one of the comments was, what age do you target?
Again, Rich, healthy man in America.
You have lots of options.
You have lots of options.
I don't go full Epstein.
That would be too far.
And I'm not terribly interested in anybody who's too young.
Still legal, but too young.
Too young meaning, let's say, in their 20s.
Twenties is kind of tough.
Anyway.
Somebody says the older you get, the more you have to fight them off.
That is totally true.
The closer I get to death, the more valuable I am.
You get that, right?
It's true. It's absolutely true.
The closer I am to death, the better I am as a marriage potential.
Because at least you get the money, even if you don't get the guy.
Yeah. Anyway, so I guess I don't have much to talk about today because the news is a little uninteresting.
By tomorrow, it'll be all interesting again.
Are you seeing any difference in Twitter lately?
I thought the trolls went away for a while, but I think they're back.
So I had a troll resurgence recently.
Did anybody see a troll resurgence recently?
Yeah, it could be an individual thing, I don't know.
Could be just what I said. But some people who just clearly look like trolls came after me, and I thought for a while I hadn't been seeing any.
Now here's the other thing that's happening.
My number of likes and retweets is just through the roof recently.
Is anybody noticing that?
Like an average, just pretty good tweet will get 1,000 likes.
And before Musk, it would be like 500.
So Musk just showed us his slides he showed to the Twitter internal group.
And Musk is saying that the Twitter use is just way up.
Way up. So maybe it's just that.
Twitter use is way up.
Just looking at your comments for a moment.
Yeah, it does feel like I was being throttled.
And to me, the most interesting thing that Musk has said so far is that we have no idea how bad it was.
Like he's actually dug down to the point where he's telling us some version of this.
Everything you suspected was true, And it might even be worse than you thought.
Now, that does feel believable, doesn't it?
I think it's exactly what it looked like, that people on the left didn't want to give up their narrative, and they had a tool that would help them hold onto it, and so they used the tool.
I think that's the whole story.
I haven't seen anybody address the hoax list who was a prominent person.
Wouldn't you love to see Trump have a podcast where the guest was any critic of his, a Democrat, who believes all the hoaxes, and then a second guest was me.
And then Trump says, all right, you say this is true, you say this is a hoax, fight it out.
Seriously, that would be 100 million views.
I'm not joking.
If Trump had a podcast where he interviewed me about the hoax list and a Democrat who believed him, 100 million hits.
Well, unless it got suppressed by the...
I guess it would be suppressed.
Yeah. Am I right?
That would be 100 million hits.
I think it would be. It would actually be maybe the biggest content ever produced.
Am I wrong? I'm making a big claim.
I'm saying it would be the most watched content of all time on the entire internet.
It would be number one of all time.
I think so. Unless it were suppressed.
If it got suppressed, then nobody sees it.
And I think it probably would be suppressed.
Yeah, YouTube would suppress it, of course.
Yeah, I don't think YouTube could allow the list to get much play.
By the way, one of the reasons that I avoid cancellation is by keeping my audience intentionally small.
Did you ever wonder why I don't do more to grow my audience?
Has anybody ever wondered about that?
Does it seem suspicious to you that I haven't increased my production values and done marketing and tweeted and appear on other podcasts to sell this one?
It's because I don't want it any bigger.
If it gets bigger, I'll be a target.
At my current size, I have crazy influence because it's just the nature of the people who watch this.
It's sort of a small...
It's like a boutique content.
Can I use that word? Does this feel like boutique content?
Because there's a certain small group of people who are going to love it, But it won't be necessarily even on the awareness of anybody else.
And I think that's the way it works best.
Because if I had the size audience of, let's say, Alex Jones or Ben Shapiro, I think that I would have to get cancelled.
But here's how this works.
If you're a Democrat, you would have no idea how much influence I have.
Would you give me a fact check on that?
True or false? There's probably no Democrat anywhere who has any idea what kind of influence I have on events in the world.
Wouldn't you agree? I don't think there are any.
I'll bet you literally would not be able to find one.
Now, is that true of conservatives?
Do you think conservatives know how much influence I have on events?
They have a much better idea, but nobody knows the full catalog.
You know that, right? Just like every famous person, you think you know their story, but the real story is always different, right?
You think you know everything about Elon Musk.
Well, you don't. There's a version of Elon Musk that only he knows.
Only he knows.
Nobody else knows it. And never will.
And that's true of all famous people.
The real story? Nobody will never know that.
So I think that Republicans have a sense that things I say sometimes get repeated so that they can see that level of influence.
But there's nobody in the world who knows my full catalogue of things I've influenced.
I'm the only one. I'm literally the only one.
And if I told you, you wouldn't believe it.
So it just stays with me.
I'll go to my grave being the only one who ever knew.
And that gives me tremendous power.
Tremendous power. Because if people knew how much influence I had, they'd try to stop it.
The Democrats are completely oblivious.
The Republicans think it's a little bit of influence, but they generally like the way I influence things.
So they're like, oh, okay. It's got a little bit of influence, just like other people.
So we like it. The only reason I can operate is because people don't know what I'm doing.
And how much do you love the fact that I can say it publicly?
I can tell you directly.
But it's in this category of things which can't be communicated.
I can say it, but a Democrat can't hear it.
I can stand in front of my building and say, do you have any idea what I'm doing?
And then I could tell them, and then they would say, crazy guy in the building, and go on with their day.
It can't be communicated.
It's completely a non-transferable knowledge.
It's weird.
What about Bill Maher?
Cake recipes, what?
What?
People I know of you, but truly don't know...
And one of the things that protects me is that I'm famous as a cartoonist.
What do you think Democrats think when they hear, you know, I said something in public about politics?
The first thing they think is the way you think of Stephen King, I assume.
They go, we don't have to listen to Stephen King, he's a writer.
And when they hear from me, they're like, ah, cartoonist, ah.
Yeah, cartoon boy.
So that works in my favor, because I'm not taken seriously.
And that's exactly where I like to hide.
One of the things that I can't fully teach you is how to use psychology to make things invisible.
But I do it all the time.
And the news does it all the time.
Usually redirection.
But I basically made myself invisible.
And I could just hide here forever.
Like, I'm in public and invisible at the same time.
Right? I mean, you're watching it in real time.
I'm in public, but also invisible.
I do it because the psychology allowed it to happen, so I just inserted myself where I could hide.
So as long as I'm famous for cartooning, And Democrats are living mostly in their bubble, and they just get a little bit of a taste of what's happening in the other bubbles, but that's it.
As long as they only get a taste, and that's not going to change.
There's nothing that's going to change that.
They're always going to see me as the Garfield guy when they joke that they forget what cartoon I do.
And I'll never be taken seriously.
That's exactly where I want to be.
Desert fairy chick, you would be right, except that I don't have bad intentions.
If I were trying to enrich myself in this process, it would be obvious, wouldn't it?
It would be pretty obvious.
Do you know how I could make more money?
I do. Just agree with one side all the time.
It could not be more obvious.
If I wanted to make money, I would just agree with the Republicans, whatever they said.
And then I would have the same audience as your biggest people who talk about this stuff.
But I don't want that.
But I also prefer a more honest approach.
So... Well, that's enough about me.
Um... Then you would not be worth as much, yeah.
Yeah, there's something about overexposure that diminishes you.
So I'm trying to stay below that.
Now, I've also said that I'm not going to appear on any other podcasts or media, at least for the next year or so.
Do you know why I'm doing that?
Other than time management.
Do you know why I'm not appearing on other podcasts?
It's because if I appear on other podcasts, the Democrats will see me.
And I'd rather just, they don't.
It doesn't benefit me to get more attention.
It would actually make me worse off.
I now have just the right attention.
Because I have almost 800,000 Twitter followers.
I told you if I get to a million, which looks like it'll happen before 2024, if I get to a million followers, have I ever given you my equation for power?
The equation is your persuasion skill times your reach.
So if you're the most persuasive person in the world but you only have one friend, you're not going to have much influence except on one person.
But if you have a big platform, then your influence gets to all those people.
So the two things that matter is how good you are at persuading and how many people are paying attention.
So Trump had...
Top grades in both.
Trump had the best power of persuasion, and then he also had a big platform.
Yeah, Andrew Tate, same thing.
Power of persuasion, big platform.
That's what you want. I have nearly a million followers, and as good as Tate is, he's very good at persuasion, as good as Trump is, very good at persuasion, I'm better than both of them.
So if I get to a million, I probably can run everything.
Now, of course, that's an exaggeration, but it's a directionally correct exaggeration, meaning that I would have influence over some big topics just by number of followers.
Yeah. You haven't heard many positive things about ESG lately, have you?
How many of you thought I could kill the ESG by the end of the year when I told you that I was going to do it?
How many thought that would happen?
Would you agree it happened?
Would you agree that that was an accomplished goal?
Even I don't know. Because you don't know what would have happened.
If you hadn't been here, what would have happened?
Here's what I think. I think that when Dilbert mocks it as bullshit, It becomes nearly impossible to be in public and not know that everybody knows what you're talking about is bullshit.
And it makes it really uncomfortable to be on the side that Dilber says is bullshit.
Yeah. You thought I would need more cartoons to do it?
Somebody says the Groypers love me.
I don't know if that's true.
ESG was not financially feasible, right?
But a lot of things that live forever are not financially beneficial.
So that wasn't enough to kill it by itself.
It only mattered that somebody was making money on it, right?
As long as BlackRock or somebody was making money, there'd be more of it.
So I think what's happening is not just that people realize it's not a good investment strategy, but it's just mocked into ridiculous territory.
Groypers are the followers of Nick Fuentes.
Somebody asked me, what's a groyper?
No more about Colorado.
No, I don't do the mass shooters.
And I think everybody's okay with that, right?
You're okay with me not doing the mass shooters?
Now, by the way, here's another example.
The mass shooters are...
Of interest to people.
And if I wanted to make more money, I would talk about them.
I just don't think it's good for the world.
It's good that you know that it happened.
And that's it. I want to be aware of it.
I want to be able to give as much support to the survivors and families and stuff.
But the less we talk about it, the better.
And I feel like I have to model that.
To me, making money on the back of that would put me in Alex Jones' territory.
You know what I mean? If I try to monetize that, I'd be monetizing it knowing I would be contributing to making more of it by making it more of top of mind.
And crazy people don't need bad ideas top of mind.
Hey, Scott, did you hear Kanye was hanging out with a white supremacist? - No, I hadn't heard. Yeah, so here's the question.
Has Trump lost his edge?
What do you think? It feels like it, doesn't it?
It feels like it. Now, predictably, he should.
Because the experience he's been through, plus the normal effect of being the age that he is, he should be losing a step exactly the way we see Biden losing a step.
Exactly the way we saw Reagan lose a step.
We shouldn't be surprised if he loses a step.
That's just going to happen.
Twitter gave him his edge.
Yeah, in a very real way.
Shapiro and Fuentes need to debate.
No, no.
No, they don't.
Bad idea. Bad idea.
No. Ben Shapiro's reputation is as solid as it could be.
You don't want him to sit in a chair with somebody who could affect his reputation that way.
Even though I'd love to see him interviewing some real disagreeable people, that wouldn't be good for him.
I would recommend against it.
But Trump could do it. Yeah.
Will Biden keep Kamala?
No. Robocops?
No, they're not really Robocops.
The robots are controlled by people.
the San Francisco police robots.
I just had this thought from prior topic.
My understanding is that Iran is planning to do a public hanging of one of the protesters.
Can you get a fact check on that?
What would happen if Iran is ready to boil over And Iran goes ahead with a public hanging, because I think that's the plan.
That's what I heard yesterday. A public hanging of a protester.
Would that not make the whole country explode?
Wouldn't it? I mean, imagine if you're a protester, and then you see one of you just hanging from a rope, and you knew that the regime did that just to make you see it.
That would... I think I'd become...
I would become dangerous at that point.
At that point, there's probably nothing I wouldn't do to the regime.
Do you feel the same way?
Like, it's one thing to have the, you know, cops trying to stop you from protesting and blah, blah, blah.
But if you take somebody from that group and you hang them from a public scaffold, I'm ready to do whatever it takes.
At that point, all of my risk-reward calculation just goes to zero.
Have you ever had that happen?
By the way, this is probably what makes me the most dangerous.
Not things I say on Twitter.
The thing that makes me most dangerous, which even I'm afraid of, is that there are moments when I lose all fear of any consequences.
It doesn't happen often, but it only happens in the situation where I've just made a decision.
As opposed to wanting something.
Oh, I want this protest to go my way.
But when I decide, there's this thing that happens that I can feel in real time.
I just feel every risk or fear just disappear.
And I go into this calm executioner mode.
Where I could do anything. I could actually do anything.
So if I had to murder a member of the regime with my bare hands, yes.
I could do it without even worrying about it.
That's just something that happens.
But to be clear, it's a rare situation.
I'll tell you one time it happened.
Some of you heard this story.
Back when smoking was legal in offices, And I asked, you know, could I be moved to a cubicle that's away from the smokers?
And it couldn't be done.
And so I staged a protest.
And I felt before I did it, because I was obviously going to risk my job, that I was going to take down the whole fucking company.
Like, I wasn't just going to...
It wasn't going to be about smoking.
Once I realized that they weren't going to help me, and that my health was at risk...
Such arrogance, Scott.
Yes? A little bit.
Once I realized they weren't going to help me, and then they, coincidentally, they sent around a thing where you had to sign a document that said you understood the workplace dangers, and it listed a bunch of types of dangers.
And one of the things it listed was secondhand smoke.
So the company asked me to sign a document to say I understood that being near secondhand smoke was dangerous.
At the same time, they were making me agree that if I saw danger in the workplace, it was my responsibility to stop it.
They made me sign that document.
At the same time, they said you have to sit next to this secondhand smoke.
Well, at that point, what do you think happened?
Remember that thing I said where all fear goes away?
Disappeared. At that point, I was going to take down the whole fucking company.
Which, by the way, I could have done.
I was already hypnotist by then.
Probably could have done it. I would just have to go to the media and tell the story that would be damaging to them, and I could have done that.
So I was willing to actually throw away my entire career potential for the rest of my life.
Not wisely, but...
It wasn't really the fight.
I should have died at, you know, 22 or whatever it was, 25.
That shouldn't have been the play.
But instead, I just told my bosses, well, I'll stay home until you solve the workplace danger.
And the first day, they thought I was joking.
I didn't come to work.
And the boss called in and said, really?
You're really not coming to work anymore?
I go, I'm not quitting.
I'm doing what you asked me to do, which is...
To escape from a workplace danger, alert my managers, and when that's rectified, I'll come back to work.
And by the third or fourth day that I didn't go to work, while they still paid me, it started going up the management ranks.
Until it got to somebody who said, oh, we're going to change this smoking situation.
So they changed the smoking situation.
They moved me to a place in the building that didn't have smokers, which they could have done the whole time.
But here's the thing. When you get to that point where you've decided, there's no fear.
There's no fear once you decide.
There's fear when you want to.
I'd want it to go this way, but not so much that I'm going to do something about it.
So I don't know if anybody else has that experience.
Have you ever been in an experience where all of your fear went away, and you could feel it in real time, and you just became almost godlike?
Because when you have no fear, do you know how scary you are?
Have you ever had a conflict with somebody who clearly had no fear about anything?
Don't get yourself in that situation.
The last thing you want is to be in a confrontation with something that has no fear.
And I become that person.
It's not planned.
It just happens. Because once I've decided, we're done.
The decision is the decision.
It's just going to happen. 30% THC is healthy, says the government.
What? I haven't heard that.
Like someone on meth, yeah.
How do you think Trump has withstood all the hoaxes without quitting?
Well, he has weirdly thick skin.
And he's also an optimist.
So I think Trump thinks that things will work out in the long run.
They usually do. I should do MMA? No.
Because MMA, I would just be wanting to fight.
So I'd get killed.
But you wouldn't want to get in a fight with me if I decided to win.
There's no way you would survive that.
Nobody would ever survive that if I decided.
Edmund Kringler is a cloud chaser.
I'm seeing some people say that Ann Coulter is who was behind the The meeting with Trump?
I don't see any evidence of that.
You are a tennis player that says it all.
Well, I don't play tennis anymore.
All right.
I don't have anything else to say. - Okay.
Scott, I'm hearing cognitive dissonance about what?
Yeah, insane people have no fear.
That's what makes them scary. If Biden gets rid of the black VP, no, because the black community doesn't like his vice president either.
Oh, that cloud chasing was to someone else?
Okay. Does Ye become the kingmaker if he takes down the current kingmaker?
Kind of, yeah.
Good morning, San Diego.
Uh, huh.
Came in 69, I could carry your home state.
Right? Biden and yay?
I don't think so.
When you have no fear, do you still have the voice that you had?
Yes. Yes, I do.
I still hear the voice in my head.
But the voice in my head has just made a decision, and then I'm just...
It's mechanical after that.
It's like I'm a robot. VAC's mandates were upheld by the Ninth Circuit.
Yes, I hear a voice in my head.
So we talked about that yesterday.
I guess 30% of the country hears a voice in their head continuously.
I'm one of them. I hear myself thinking in full sentences as if I'm listening.
And that's how I arrange my thoughts.
Have you ever noticed that if you ask some people a question about, let's say, a topic that they've thought about, some people have like an instant answer.
I'm one of those people.
You could ask me almost anything that's been in the news, even before I was doing this publicly, and I would have an instant answer for you.
Because I've already thought of it in terms of the words I would describe it to someone else.
That's how I think. I think in terms of how I would describe it to someone else.
Do you do that? All of my mental conversation is me describing what I think is true to an invisible listener.
And then if I can describe it well to the imaginary person, then it's a thought I keep.
And if I try to explain it to somebody but I can't, then I discard it.
So the voice is just my filter for deciding what is reasonable.
If you can't put it in a sentence that makes sense, then it probably wasn't reasonable.
In the old days, they thought it was demons.
questions.
Yeah. You don't do that?
You realize that that's also the same technique for why you do a business case for something that you know you wanted to do.
So that used to be my job in corporate America for a while.
If the boss wanted to do something, let's say invest in some kind of new technology, then it would be my job to do the numbers and make sure it made sense.
So I've got a big background in that.
But one of the things you learn Is that even if you're pretty sure something makes sense, but then you try to write it down and explain it to somebody, you realize you can't do it.
Like, you read the words, and you're like, why is it that it makes sense to me, but I can't write it down in a way to explain it to somebody else in a way that makes sense?
And the answer is, it doesn't make sense.
That's how you learn that your thought process is irrational.
When you try to explain it to the imaginary person, then you can't do it.
Craig says his internal voice speaks Esperanto.
So annoying. I know.
Sometimes my internal voice is just signing, but it's one of those frauds.
There's nothing funnier than the people who are fraudulent sign language people.
There have been a few of them.
You've seen them, right? The videos.
I don't know how it happened, but somebody somehow got the job and the politician will be talking and they'll be like...
And you're looking at them and you're like, I don't know, I haven't seen any of that signing before.
I'm no expert, but it doesn't look like signing to me.
Somebody on Local says you want an Android companion more than you want anything else.
Yeah, ditto.
I'm with you on that.
I think I would be completely happy Being an 80-year-old guy living with an android.
Because someday I'll probably be an 80-year-old guy who has to live somehow.
I think that an android companion would be 100% acceptable to me.
and I would enjoy having conversations with it.
So long as the hot Android could clean itself after you finish.
That was an actual comment on locals.
Yeah, you definitely want this self-cleaning sex robot.
Like, if there's one thing, yeah, gotta be self-cleaning.
Alright, we've gone too far.
Alright, we've gone too far, so we're going to say goodbye to the YouTube people.
