Episode 1944 Scott Adams: The Gaslighting Around Politics, Nutrition And Everything Else
My new book LOSERTHINK, available now on Amazon https://tinyurl.com/rqmjc2a
Find my "extra" content on Locals: https://ScottAdams.Locals.com
Content:
Baal is king? Balenciaga?
White potatoes, are they good for you?
The definition of gaslighting
Karine Jean-Pierre
Lee Zeldin understands leadership and politics
Neuralink's amazing potential
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
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
Good morning, everybody, and welcome to another Highlight of Civilization.
Coffee with Scott Adams.
For a moment there, I did forget my own name.
That's probably not good foreshadowing, is it?
But I think we're going to take it up a level, even though maybe you were not expecting such excellence this morning.
But, you know, we're going to start fast.
And all you need to take it up another level is, do you know?
Do you know? Do you know?
Yes, you do. All you need is a cup or a mug or a glass, a tank or a chalice or a stein, a canteen jug or a flask, a vessel of any kind.
Fill it with your favorite liquid.
I like coffee. And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure, the dopamine, the day, the thing that makes everything better.
It's called the Simultaneous Sip.
And it happens just about now.
Ah.
The gloriousness of this moment cannot be understated.
Absolutely.
Or overstated.
Choose one. All right.
I have a recommendation for you.
You know how social media is all evil and it's killing us all?
Well, there's an account on Instagram that I'm going to recommend.
It goes by mystepdad55.com.
55 might be his age or when he was born.
I don't know. But my stepdad, 55, is literally this friendly guy who just does a video, looks like every day, in which he teaches you things your father didn't teach you.
It's frickin' amazing.
It's like one of the best things on the whole internet.
And all he does is he's this super, super, like, pleasant guy.
You immediately wish this were your dad.
He is the most dad, dad of all dads.
Like, he takes dadness to levels of excellence that you've never seen before.
And all he does is teach you stuff like...
I think he's teaching you how to wash the dishes, how to make some meals, how to change your wiper blades.
I actually didn't know how to change my wiper blades.
But he teaches you how.
I just have the dealer do it.
Let's see what else. How to sew by hand.
How to sew. How many of you learned how to sew to fix a sock or something when you were a kid?
How many of the men?
Talk about the men.
How many of the men learned to sew?
I did. My mother taught me all those skills.
Or my grandmother. Eagle Scout.
I learned all those things.
I don't know if anybody learns them now.
But it made me think that Instagram and social media, as damaging as they can be, and how they've changed our brains and our attention span, but it made me think this.
Maybe instead of condemning and complaining about social media, we should take a tip from MyStepDad55 and use it for information.
Because if that's how people want to consume things, here he's made it interesting.
The reason I recommend it is not just because the information is good, but he figured out how to make it enjoyable and short.
Think about how much you could teach young people and adults too if you created content that was meant to be useful and was interesting and short.
Think about it. There's almost nothing I wouldn't want to learn If it were interesting and short.
One of the things that YouTube does so well is I will watch a YouTube history lesson on almost anything because it's short and entertaining and well made.
But if you said, hey, you learned this from your history book, I'd be like, you've got other things to do.
So I think the potential for...
For Instagram in particular, maybe Twitter later, is some serious useful information.
You've seen all the relationship advice that tends to be terrible.
Apparently there was some guy selling some kind of, I don't know, the liver king that turned out to be a fake.
So there's tons of bad advice on the internet, but what if it were good?
So right now you can't tell the good advice from the bad advice, and free speech means you're not going to change that.
But what if you got good advice on social media?
It's possible. There might be some way that that could actually happen.
Here's the funniest thing about social media.
I talk about the same characters practically every day, because they're the interesting ones.
If somebody's interesting, I can't help it.
They're just out there being interesting.
And while I don't personally like Andrew Tate, I am so fascinated by the, let's say, the phenomenon of him.
Number one, he does a great job of getting attention and building an audience.
Great job. But this is how good a job he does.
I just want you to hold this in your head, and I don't need to add any commentary to it.
I'm just going to describe it accurately, and it goes like this.
So Andrew Tate is, at the moment, one of the most, you know, let's say he's getting a lot of heat on social media, good and bad, but he's getting tons of attention, and his audience is growing and stuff.
And he basically is a cigar-smoking, whiskey-drinking guy who doesn't have a stable relationship with Who gives young men advice on health and relationships.
Do I have to add anything to that to make it funny?
That's actually a real thing.
And just think about the world you live in where I don't have to add any punchlines to anything.
I can literally just describe it.
He's someone who's held up as a role model for health, fitness, and relationship information, who smokes cigars and drinks whiskey on video, you know, as part of his brand, and then he clearly doesn't have any kind of successful relationship in his life.
And he's becoming Muslim, and he puts his money in depreciating assets.
She has 17 expensive cars.
Those are depreciating assets.
Worst investment you could possibly make.
Do you think you can't get laid with one Lamborghini?
Seriously? Do you need 17 sports cars to get laid?
They're depreciating assets.
It's not going to help you in your relationship to have 17.
It's not going to help you financially.
It's the worst financial decision anybody ever made.
So the other thing he does is give financial advice while he invests in depreciable assets.
Okay. But, so I have nothing but compliments for his skill set.
His skill set is really through the roof.
I mean, he definitely has the skill.
There's no question about that.
But it's just, it's insanely educational to know that he can build a brand around telling people the opposite of what they're observing with their own eyes.
I don't know how he does it.
But he's doing it well.
So it's working for him.
Here's a story I saw just before I went live.
Somebody has developed insects that can eat plastic, and he's modified their gut biome somehow, so they actually digest plastic and turn it back into its organic precursors, I guess, if that's the right word.
Now, isn't that great?
Imagine if we could solve all of our plastic waste problems with insects that can eat our plastic.
That's all good, right?
Unless they get out of their little cage.
What happens if one gets out?
Has anybody noticed that our whole planet is made of plastic?
They would basically destroy civilization.
They would just eat all your car parts and your computer would be destroyed.
It's the best and worst idea I've ever heard in my life.
Okay, but that's happening.
All right, this is the dog not barking theme for today.
The dog not barking.
Most of you know it comes from a Shakespeare, not Shakespeare, all British things look alike to me.
Sherlock Holmes, not Shakespeare.
Sherlock, not Shakespeare.
See, it was an obvious mistake.
Both British, both smart, both have a sh in their name.
It was an understandable mistake.
Anyway, yes, Arthur Conan Doyle was the author.
So in the Sherlock Holmes, one of the cases was solved by noting that the dogs were not barking.
And instead of noticing something happening, Sherlock Holmes was smart enough to notice something that should have been happening that wasn't.
And so this is a lesson to all of you.
Don't just look at what's happening.
Ask yourself what should be happening that isn't.
And this screams out for this Balenciaga story.
So as you know, there was one of the photographs in a Balenciaga photo shoot, it's a fashion house, in which some police tape showed Balenciaga or the B-A-A-L part misspelled with two A's, B-A-A-L. And now B-A-A-L, coincidentally, or not, It happens to be a Canaanite demon god.
Pagans ritualistically sacrifice children to this demon.
So it's the demon of child sacrifice.
Now Balenciaga, being accused, rightly or wrongly, we do not know, of putting what appears to be pedophile positive images in their photoshoots.
Now that's the accusation.
But part of the accusation is that there's no way in the world it could be an accident that this BAAL thing was part of the shoot.
And then it turns out that the name Balenciaga, if you break out the parts, if you make the first part the BAAL, if you turn it into BAAL, Then the second part of it, the Enciaga part, means something like, you know, praising that.
So it means like praising the god of child sacrifice.
Now, is that a coincidence?
Could be. That could be it.
Oh, Baal is king, right.
The Balenciaga apparently means in whatever language that that Baal guy is king.
Now, could that be a coincidence?
Absolutely. Oh, it's Latin?
Is it Latin? So could it be a coincidence that the name Balenciaga sounds so terrible in this context?
That could be a coincidence.
To me, that would not be a super big coincidence.
It would be a funny one, but I would still call it a coincidence.
We see these all the time.
But where's the dog that's not barking?
Does anybody see the dog not barking?
Or do you hear the book Dog Not Barking?
What's missing in the story so far?
What's the most obvious thing that you would expect to know by now that you do not know?
Are you really all missing this?
Where the name came from is interesting, but I think that's going to be a dry hole.
Thank you, Erica the Excellent.
Yeah. Here's what's missing.
Erica said, who ordered it?
Like, who bought that tape?
And who put it there?
Yes. But I would generalize that a little bit more, and I would say, how did we get to today...
Without Balenciaga issuing a statement that says, oh, about that tape, there's an innocent explanation, and here it is.
Where is it? Isn't that the most obvious thing that should have happened by now?
I mean, it's been days. You don't think Balenciaga knows internally where that tape came from and why it's there?
Of course they do. Why are they not telling you?
Well, it can't be a good reason, right?
Do you think that the heads of Balenciaga know that the tape is a complete coincidence, accidental thing, and they've just decided not to mention it in public?
They have a perfectly innocent explanation.
They just decided not to tell you.
Does that sound right?
Now, how many of you didn't notice that dog that wasn't barking?
Raise your hand in the comments if you didn't notice that the most obvious thing is missing.
Which one of your news sources told you that's missing?
None of them.
None of them. Nobody said that's missing.
Nobody said we asked for a comment and we didn't get one.
Did you? Have you heard anybody say we asked Balenciaga to comment on the BAAL tape and they decided not to or they gave us this response?
Right? What the hell is going on?
What the hell is going on that nobody asked the most obvious question?
Well, and weirdly, most of you didn't even notice it wasn't asked.
You think Kim Kardashian asked?
She may have asked, but we didn't hear any answer.
Sticks did? Of course.
Right. Yeah, Sticks and Hammer did, because it's an obvious question for anybody who's an informed consumer in news.
Give us some news.
All right, well, there's going to be another one of those coming up that'll be just as shocking.
How did we get to 2022?
And I actually had an exchange on Twitter this morning with an actual doctor about whether white potatoes are good in your diet or not.
How in the world could that still be a question that's up in the air?
Now you might say to me, Scott, the doctor told you they're good.
I'm talking about russet white potatoes.
If the doctor says they're...
And the reason is, apparently they rate high, according to one study at least, in satiety.
Satiety. In other words, it satiates you or makes you feel like you've eaten enough.
And apparently it's way high on that list on at least one study that somebody showed me.
And therefore, eating white potatoes, it's a good, solid element of your diet.
How many of you would believe that?
Satiety? Satiety.
Thank you. It's pronounced satiety?
Okay, thank you.
All right, something like that. But just hold this in your head for a second.
Imagine that it's 2022 and we can't agree whether a potato is good for you or bad for you.
Now, here's what I've been taught.
That potatoes spike your glycemic index.
White ones do. The sweet potatoes, not so much.
But the white ones spike your glycemic index.
And if you spike your glycemic index, it will make you hungrier later.
Right? Now...
Do you think there was anything wrong with the study that says that white potatoes are great for satiety?
In other words, they satiate you.
Do you think there was anything wrong with the study?
Well, do you think it looked at potatoes the way we really eat them?
Or did it look like a baked potato or a boiled potato?
Baked or... Baked or boiled, I think.
And it did not include French fries.
Did not include French fries.
Did not include any fried potatoes, you know, like hash browns or anything like that.
Did not include, or at least I didn't see mentioned, what kind of toppings the potato had.
If somebody gave you some French fries...
And they checked with you an hour later and said, would you like some more french fries?
You'd probably say yes. I wouldn't mind another french fry, no matter how full I was, because I really, really like them.
But suppose somebody said to you, this is a trial.
We'd like you to eat this baked potato.
And then you say, hey, excellent, I like potatoes.
And what am I putting on it for topping?
Sour cream and butter and all that?
And they go, no, no, no. We're only testing the potato.
You say, what? Yeah, just the potato.
So just eat the potato, and then we're going to check with you an hour later to see if you want some more potato.
So you eat the potato with nothing on it.
Okay. I'm glad they're paying me to be in this trial.
Okay, and then they check with you an hour later and they say, hey Scott, would you like some more potato?
You know what I'm going to say?
I'm good. I am so satiated with potato, I could not possibly eat another potato.
Man, those potatoes hit the spot.
Don't get me near another potato.
No, no, no.
I've had all the potatoes I need for a week.
Oh, I'm good on potato.
In the real world, nobody eats a plain potato.
Ever. Ever.
Ever. Now, here's my bullshit detector rule, which I wrote about in LoserThink, I think.
Here's the rule, and it goes like this.
One of the red flags that doesn't tell you for sure if something's bullshit, but it tells you to look deeper, Is if your observation, your common lived experience, is at odds with the science.
Whenever that's true, that should raise a flag and say, wait a minute, is my observation wrong or is the science wrong?
Now, my observation about eating white potatoes is if I put them in my diet, I gain weight immediately.
And if I take them out of my diet, I immediately lose weight.
I've been doing it for years.
For years!
All I have to do is put potatoes in my diet, weight creeps up, take them out of my diet, weight goes down, and it's just one-to-one.
Now, if you're telling me that 50 years of experimenting have all been wrong, And if I told you that would you be surprised that the studies that show that potatoes are great at sauteating you, would you be surprised to know that even in that study it says that other studies say the opposite?
No, of course you would not be.
That wouldn't surprise you at all.
Because science on food is complete bullshit.
Now, who was it who funded the study on sauteate of potatoes?
Who do you think funded the study?
I don't know. I didn't look.
Do you think it was Big Potato?
Do you think there was anybody else in the whole fucking world who cared about the potato study?
No. No, it wasn't Big Carrot.
It wasn't the carrot people who said, you know, I'd really like to fund a big study to find out if potatoes that we do not sell are good for people.
No. It was probably Big Potato.
Right? Like, who else would even care?
Do you think anybody else cared?
Do you think the scientists were sitting around saying, all right, let's come up with an idea.
I'm really concerned about potatoes.
I've looked at all the problems in the world, all the many things we could concentrate on, and I'm thinking a little bit more information about white potatoes would be where I'd like to put all of my scientific expertise.
No. Somebody was willing to pay somebody to study a white potato.
Who? Who would be willing to pay you to study a white potato?
There's literally nothing you can depend on on food science.
Many of you know my story.
Years ago, I tried to start a healthy food product company to make a burrito that had all of your daily vitamins and minerals.
And so, of course, I wanted to be as well-informed as I could to know what was the right recommendation of those things.
And do you know what I found out?
Very quickly, that food science...
It's not science at all.
It's not even close to science.
Pretty much everything you know about food is a guess or bullshit or somebody paid for a fucked up study.
None of it's true. As far as I can tell, the only stuff that's true is the stuff you can immediately test on your own body.
Right? You know that if you eat a bunch of sugar, you feel different.
You know that. You know if you drink a lot of alcohol, you feel different.
And you look different.
Right? You know if you eat clean, you feel different and you look different.
You can see it.
You can see it with your own eyes.
And when the stuff you can see with your own eyes differs from the science, which one are you going to believe?
If it were a different topic, I might say believe the science.
Because science is the way that you make sure that your personal observations are not biased.
But the personal observations are so consistent.
And the science is so bullshit and not credible that I would actually believe my personal observation when it comes to food.
I would actually believe that over science.
Because I don't think there's any reliable science on food right now.
All right. Let me tell you something that happened years ago.
I dated a woman who was just crazy.
I'll put that in quotes, crazy, about eating clean.
Eating food that was organic and had no additives and no preservatives.
And I gotta tell you, she was the healthiest looking human being I've ever seen in my life.
Like she screamed healthy and her diet was just perfect.
You want to make a billion dollars in the food business?
I'm going to give you an idea for making a billion dollars.
And this will be a persuasion tip.
Start a company that's organic food with no preservatives.
And mostly it's just fresh stuff.
It's like a farmer's market, but it's there every day.
So you're getting, like, direct from the farm.
Just like a farmer's market, but it's just there all the time.
And here's how you totally put every other company out of business.
You name it, clean food.
Clean food. And you mean it two different ways.
The food is literally washed, and nobody can get near it until they're buying it.
How much do you not love the fact that when you go to the supermarket, everybody is standing next to the broccoli that you're going to pick up and eat?
I don't like it. I don't like everybody breathing on my broccoli before I buy it, even if I wash it.
I don't like that. So suppose you said all of our food is behind glass, but if you reach through with, I don't know, with your plastic gloved hand or something, you could put it in your basket.
So imagine that, first of all, nobody else can touch your food after it's been washed.
So the company washes it.
Company washes it, and then you can get it.
Now, hold on. I haven't made my whole case there, so don't get ahead of me.
Secondly, you say that your food is clean because it doesn't have preservatives or additives.
Now, here's why this would put every other food company out of business.
Because as soon as you create that frame...
That some food is clean and some is not.
You can never eat the other food again.
It would be the kill shot of all kill shots.
So do you want some clean food or, you know, the other kind?
Just think about it.
Everybody... We're all designed to prefer clean food, meaning it's as much food as it could be and there's less entertainment and less additives and stuff.
If you named your company Clean Food...
You would just put everybody out of business.
Think about it. Now, do I believe that you should avoid all of those germs?
No. Nope.
I've told you before that you should see a baseline level of germs in your life you should see as creating good health.
They make you healthier because they challenge your system on a regular basis.
So what's healthiest for you is that your food is a little bit imperfect, but that's hard to sell.
All right. Do you remember a long time ago, I've said this so many times, you're bored with it, but I told you the reason we can't get AI to sound exactly like a person is that we don't realize that AI is already smarter than us.
And in order for AI to act like a person, it would have to act like an asshole who didn't know too much.
And then you think, oh, that's a real person.
And you can't fool me, that sounds real to me.
That person's a jerk, very selfish, and seems to only care about they-self.
Yeah, that's a person. And I actually heard an AI expert finally agree with me.
An AI expert said, one of the ways that you could determine if you were talking to an AI is you could ask it a hard question.
And I thought, oh shit, that's true.
Because AI can answer hard questions.
So if you said to the AI, all right, what's the capital of Elbonia?
And the AI would know, but no human would.
So you could immediately detect an AI just by asking any hard question.
And unless they lied, you'd say, I know a person wouldn't have asked the answer to that.
Have you seen the Interview on the Street series where there's a guy who asks, usually young people, asks them questions about general knowledge questions about the country?
And then whatever they say, no matter how ridiculous, he goes, right.
And he agrees with them, and that's the punchline.
And then they feel like they got it right.
It's hilarious every time he does it.
He says right, right? No, he says yes.
He says yes. So he'll go up to somebody and say, can you name two states in the United States?
And they'll be like, oh, two states, wow.
States, there's a New York.
Is New York one? And he'll say, yes, name another.
And they'll be like...
Philadelphia? Philadelphia's a state?
And he'll look at them and go, yes.
It never gets less funny.
Every single time he looks at them and goes, yes.
Because you watch the person being so happy that they got the answer right, you know, on film.
It's diabolical.
Anyway. Mayor Eric Adams, no relationship to me, said that they need to remove the seriously mentally ill people from the streets.
So they're going to remove all the seriously mentally ill people from the streets.
Now, here's a question.
Did somebody just have that idea?
Is that an idea that nobody had until now?
Or is that an idea that Dr.
Drew has been screaming at the top of his lungs for, I don't know, five years, that I've noticed anyway, probably longer?
That you have to physically take them off the streets if they're mentally ill.
And maybe the drug addicts as well, because there are some people who just can't take care of it themselves.
So, when I was reading this story, I had the following thought.
If you were to collect up all of the street people, And then you were to poll them, how many would be Republicans?
Have you ever thought of that?
It might be zero.
25%. It might be zero.
Have you ever heard of a Republican street person?
I don't know. I don't think I have.
Why is that? Do you have any idea why that is?
David DePape. I don't know.
Maybe. Veterans, maybe.
Maybe. Well, it could be that the homeless are not very political, so it's hard to say.
But the other possibility is if you're a Republican, you probably come from a Republican family.
Maybe there's more support there or something.
Maybe there's more tough love.
I don't know. I just think it's The homeless are mostly Democrats, it feels like.
So I'm not sure that the homeless situation is a homeless situation as much as a homeless Democrat situation.
So suppose Republicans started framing it as homeless Democrats.
What would that do?
Number one, it would make it look like it wasn't the Republican problem to solve.
If the problem is homeless Democrats, is that for the Republicans to solve?
Because Republicans just move out of the city.
They do solve it. Republicans do have a solution for homelessness.
They move. Am I wrong?
Every Republican has a solution for a situation that isn't good.
They fix it or they move.
So it's not a Republican problem because Republicans have a solution.
It's called moving. Or carrying a gun.
Maybe carrying a gun.
But Republicans have solutions for their own problems.
They're taking care of it.
The government doesn't need to solve all their problems.
Do you know why I live where I live?
One of the biggest reasons?
Part of it is I live in the most survivable place in the world.
Because it's not so cold outside that I'll die from the elements most days.
And I'm not so close to the ocean that I'll get killed by a tidal wave.
I don't have hurricanes.
I don't have snowstorms.
I do have earthquakes, but I'm earthquake-proof, and I'm not on a fault.
So basically, I've picked a life that's the safest it could be.
But one of the main things I picked was I was far away from homeless people.
Far away from homeless people.
Intentionally. And so I just said, huh, if I don't want to live around homeless people, what can I do about that?
Can I change all the homeless people into non-homeless people?
Well, if I could, if I could, and that was good for them, I would.
But I can't. So I'm solving my problem.
Now, did I not solve my problem?
Did I not solve my homelessness problem?
Yeah, I moved away from it.
And when people say, Scott, how would you like to go to San Francisco for some fun?
I say, no, no.
How about we don't go to San Francisco and that's our fun?
How about instead of going to the pumpkin patch or some fucking thing that no male wants to do, how about we just don't do that?
How about that? Solve my problem.
Problem solved. I saw the funniest stand-up comedy about some guy who said that no guy wants to go to the pumpkin patch.
Is that true? That no husband wants to go to the pumpkin patch.
Oh, we'll go. We will go to the pumpkin patch.
We will. But no man wants to go to the pumpkin patch.
Because once you get to the pumpkin patch, it's just looking at pumpkins.
And it's not really interesting.
All right. I saw an article on CNN that correctly, to their credit, criticized the fact that Merriam-Webster has entered gaslighting into the dictionary, but they did it wrong, which I should have mentioned, but CNN's opinion piece did.
And here's what's wrong with the Merriam-Webster dictionary.
Gaslighting is not just lying.
Now, you probably remember I tried to tell you this and I just gave up.
Because common usage does change the word, right?
So gaslighting used to mean not just lying, but lying about something that's so obviously a lie that you question your own sanity that someone could say it with a straight face.
So it's the questioning your own sanity that makes it gaslighting.
Otherwise, we already had a word for lying.
The word for lying was lying.
We didn't need a new word.
So gaslighting was not a synonym for lying.
It was a whole different concept.
But because the Democrats used it for three years against Trump for just regular lying, Merriam-Webster, I think, finally just gave up and said, all right, well, I guess that's the definition now.
So now it's closer to regular lying.
So I'm going to, you know, as an author...
I accept that language changes, and I guess this is a change that happened.
It wasn't my first choice.
But it looks like it happened.
However, we should not lose sight of the fact that the original gaslighting is still a thing, even if it lost its word.
It no longer has its own word, but it's still a thing.
And here are some examples of it in the news.
So... What is her name?
The spokesperson, Biden's spokesperson.
What's her name? Karine Jean-Pierre.
Now, the reason I cannot remember her name, if you haven't noticed, she has a three-name name, which, first of all, is abusive.
That's abusive. You know, I can remember one name, sometimes two.
You tell me I have to remember three names, and I'm probably out.
And I'm never...
Let me say two things.
If you have a name that could be pronounced, plausibly pronounced two different ways, that's not my fault.
That's not my fault.
And likewise, if you have a name where all three of your names are really a first name, right?
Because Karine is a first name, Jean is a first name, and Pierre is a first name.
And Jean and Pierre are a guy's first name.
So, I mean, it's really hard for me to store this memory.
You know, everybody stores memory differently.
Like, I never store exact memories, like phone numbers.
I can't remember names and phone numbers if they're unusual.
But I can remember anything that fits any kind of a familiar form.
Because first I'll think of the familiar form, and then it will remind me of the specific.
So if somebody has three first names, I can't remember that.
Because my brain says, all right, what's her last name?
And then there is none. So it doesn't fit into my form, so I can't remember it.
So it's not my fault.
But anyway, she was asked about when was Biden going to visit the border, And she said, he's been there.
He's been to the border.
And since he took office.
Now apparently that is the world's easiest thing to fact check.
He has not been to the border since he took office.
And yet she says it, like straight out, and then doesn't correct it.
No correction. That's very close to gaslighting.
Now, it's just short of intentionally trying to make you feel insane.
But it's a weird kind of lie.
Now, I think Trump and maybe even Biden were, you know, pioneers in this kind of a lie.
The kind of a lie where it's easy to know it's a lie, it still works.
It still works.
Because the Democrats who watch that, what do you think the Democrats concluded when she said he has been to the border?
I'll bet 100% of Democrats, 100% said, oh, Well, he's been to the border.
I guess that was a dumb question, Fox News.
Don't you think? Do you think that there was even one Democrat in the entire United States who saw her claim with a straight face he's been there since he was elected?
I'll bet there wasn't even one Democrat who questioned that.
Do you? Like, literally, I'll bet not even one.
Maybe within the professional class.
But within normal voters, I'll bet not even one could tell the difference.
That's my bet. And of 70, 80 million people, I bet not even one knew the truth.
How many of the Republicans knew the truth?
Probably half. There's a really big difference in knowledge.
All right. Kristi Noem, governor of South Dakota, is banning TikTok, the app, on state devices.
So individuals can still use TikTok in South Dakota, but not government agencies on their government equipment.
Now, what does that remind you of?
What is my analogy for what Kristi Noem just did?
She did something that DeSantis does all the time.
What's the free money?
Thank you, yes. She picked up the free money.
Who exactly was going to argue that government employees should have TikTok on their government devices?
Was there somebody going to come out and say, hold on, hold on, Governor.
We would like to use TikTok on our government phone.
Like nobody. Literally nobody could make that argument.
This was free money.
There will be people who agree with her, and then people who shut the fuck up because they don't want to argue the case even if they think they should.
This is the freest of free money.
Now, remember, I told you this when Trump started doing it early in 2015, 2016.
He always picks up the free money.
He stopped doing that, by the way, which concerns me.
But DeSantis, he was picking up free money every day.
Free money? Sure.
And nobody's going to say this thing out loud, and I get free money if I say it out loud.
I'll just say it out loud. And then he gets his free money.
So, that's a real good sign for a future leader, if they can at least recognize the easy stuff.
Here's another one. Apparently, the Department of Agriculture, the federal government, is still buying and using Chinese drones for their agricultural surveying.
And we know that the Chinese-made drones can send their data back to China, and they can have all kinds of information.
Now, I don't know if the agricultural Information really is helpful to...
I'm not sure that China can get enough from the information from a drone over a farm.
I don't know if that helps them or not.
But don't you think we should ban that?
Don't you think you'd like to know who is the biggest drone manufacturer that's completely American?
Why don't you know that?
Why are we sitting here and if I said to you, oh, the biggest drone maker by far is DJI? Is that the name of the Chinese company?
I think it is. But what's the name of the biggest American drone maker?
I don't know. And why don't you know that?
Yeah, well, I'm talking about the hobby-sized drones, the ones that an individual can purchase.
Yeah, I'm not talking about the big defense contractors.
So DJI is the Chinese manufacturer, but what's the biggest American-only manufacturer of drones?
You don't know. Why don't you know?
Let me ask you this.
All of you are smart enough by now, you're all well informed enough to know that if you had a choice of buying an American drone versus a Chinese drone, you might even pay more to get the American drone.
Am I right? You would pay a little bit more to get the American one because you might think that it's a little more data secure.
So what's the name of that company?
So, China wants to sell you Chinese drones, and your press has never told you the name of their competitor.
Think about it. Think about the dog that's not barking.
It's a huge story.
You see it in the headlines everywhere.
People should not buy Chinese drones from a company named DJI. And what's the name of the other company they should use?
I don't know. I've never heard it.
Do you think that's an accident?
Is it an accident that none of the stories about the drones that you should not buy includes any reference to the one that maybe you should buy?
What the hell is up with that?
No, I don't think Lockheed, Boeing, and Raytheon, I think they make the big drones, the military drones.
I'm not talking about that.
I'm talking about the little ones that fly over your house.
Is Acme real?
Or are you joking? I'm seeing people say Acme drones, but Mattel?
Now, I'm talking about serious industrial drones, but not military.
But seriously, is anybody's mind blown that you don't automatically know the name of the competitor to DJI? Never even heard it.
Now, some of you are saying EXO, but I've never heard that name.
EXO? So that's the name of a drone.
So you'd have to be sort of in the drone business or a hobbyist to actually have heard that.
So it looks like EXO. Let's do a little search on that.
Let's find this out right now.
So EXO drones.
EXO drones.
Give them a little commercial here if this is what I think it is.
Yeah, so that is EX Drones official site.
And... Let's see if the drone...
Let's see if it comes up.
Okay, yep, there we go.
So you say this is an American company, right?
EXL? Can you confirm this is an American company?
I don't want to mislead you. Well, you can check for yourself, but...
But it's amazing, you know, we didn't all know that at the top of our...
tip of our tongues.
All right, so Musk apparently met with Apple's Tim Cook, and the...
and the outcome is that Tim Cook says Apple never was considering banning Twitter from the App Store.
They never considered banning it from the App Store.
And it took...
Wait a minute, what do I hear?
I hear something.
Ah, yes. It's the dog not barking.
Can you tell me how many days it took Apple to respond that they were not considering taking Twitter out of the store?
How hard was it for Tim Cook to say, oh, no, we're not considering that?
Three days, right?
So for three days, Tim Cook was never asked by any journalist...
Was this true? There was no journalist in the entire world who asked Tim Cook, hey, is this true?
In three days. Come on!
Come on! Come on!
Really?
Really?
Like, what's going on here?
Now, did you also notice that dog not barking?
Did he notice that for three days, the simplest thing that a person could do...
Do you know how easily Tim Cook could have fixed it?
Oh, looks like there's a rumor that's not true.
Let me open up my Twitter app.
At Elon Musk.
That's a false rumor.
We are not considering banning Twitter.
One tweet. And would anyone have said, oh, that's unprofessional?
No. That would be exactly the way to do it.
One tweet? No, no, that's not true.
Has anybody ever tested the theory that you can shoot down a rumor quickly with one tweet?
Yes. Elon Musk does it almost every day.
Almost every day, Elon Musk tweets, that's a rumor that's not true.
And as soon as you read it, do you say to yourself, oh, he's lying?
Never. Never.
You read it, you go, oh, that's true.
He just shoots down the rumors, like, with no ambiguity.
Nope. Never happened.
Who do you believe? I always believe Elon Musk, every time.
Because when somebody is that quick, To shut something down and they don't leave any ambiguity?
No, that did not happen.
You know, there's no wiggle room there.
As soon as I hear that, I go, okay, that didn't happen.
And Tim Cook didn't think that watching half of the United States say they were going to throw their iPhones into the sea, like that didn't get him going in two days?
He had something better to do?
There's something very unexplained.
Here's what I think it is. Let us speculate.
What is one sentence that's always true and always false at the same time?
Now, I asked this on Twitter.
I got a whole bunch of funny answers that are worth looking at, by the way.
Look at that tweet. You'll see a whole bunch of funny answers.
Things that are true and false at the same time.
And here was my entry.
This is always true and always a lie at the same time.
We were considering it.
We considered it.
It's always true, and it's always a lie.
Always true and always a lie.
Do you know why I know this for sure?
I made a very big mistake once when talking to my doctor years ago.
I forget what the context was, so this was years ago.
And the doctor asked, had I ever considered ending my own life?
And unfortunately, I didn't think this through.
And so I said, yeah, every day.
Of course. I consider it every day.
So that immediately got me into the mental health...
I managed to get myself out of it, but it immediately puts you into the mental health process.
And now you've got to talk to a psychologist, and you'd better get on drugs, and basically everything's in question at this point.
Stop everything, they're going to have to help you.
And then I said, hold on, hold on.
We must be using language differently here.
You asked me if I ever considered it.
And I answer to you honestly every day.
And then I decide that it would be a bad idea.
And then I go on with my day.
I consider everything every day.
When I run into somebody in the street, I think about killing them.
I've just never been serious about it.
If I see an attractive woman, I think about having sex with her.
I just don't act on it.
I consider everything.
Considering is just my mental internal process.
Considering has nothing to do with the likelihood of something is going to happen.
Those are completely unrelated concepts.
Yes, I literally consider everything.
And then I choose what makes sense.
So did Apple ever consider knocking Twitter off?
Of course they did.
Of course they considered it.
The same way I consider ending my life every day, even when I'm nowhere near any kind of suicidal thoughts.
So just to be clear, I have zero intention of ending my life.
Zero. But do I consider it?
Yeah, every day. Every single day.
Along with every other possibility in my life I consider.
Everything. So I think it's true that Apple considered it.
And I think that when they were asked, are you serious?
They said, no.
Which could be construed as not considering it.
So... There are things that you consider and you also don't consider them because you're meaning the terms in slightly different ways, right?
Considering means I thought about it in my mind, but in your mind it might mean I took it seriously.
That's different. I think that's all that happened, but I don't know.
Just a guess. All right.
Lee Zeldin said the smartest thing that a Republican has said in...
I don't know, a year?
Maybe a year?
Every once in a while you'll see a Republican say exactly the right thing.
And honestly, I'm surprised.
Because Republicans are not super good at messaging.
Nobody is, really. None of our, except maybe AOC every now and then, and Trump every now and then.
But here's Lee Zeldin getting it exactly right.
Here's a tweet. He says, whenever they, they, meaning Democrats, whenever they propose ballot harvesting, totally oppose it.
Whenever they pass ballot harvesting, do it so much better than them that they deeply regret ever passing it in the first place.
All right, standing ovation.
So here's the answer to your question. - Yeah.
Did you ever wonder how Lee Zeldin did so well?
He lost, but he came incredibly close in New York.
Did you ever wonder how a Republican could get that close to a Democrat state governorship?
This is why.
This is why. Everything you need to know about Lee Zeldin is in this one tweet.
He just told you, I'm smarter than all the other Republicans.
That's what I heard. I just heard, I'm smarter than all of the other Republicans.
Because I just told you exactly what to do, which is the right thing to do.
That is leadership.
Right? That's leadership.
This is exactly, exactly the leadership I want.
And you know what? I would agree with this...
Whether I'm Democrat, Republican, or Independent.
Because we have a competitive system.
And our competitive system we thought was about getting the votes, but it turns out that our competitive system is also about getting out the vote.
I mean, we knew that, but we need to extend that to getting out all kinds of votes.
So Lee Zeldin is saying, this isn't the game we want to play, but if you're in the game...
Don't fucking stand there while the ball rolls past you.
I feel like the Republicans were like, we don't want to play baseball.
No, we don't want to. Okay, we're on the field.
Okay, we're on the team.
We are playing baseball, but we don't want to be here.
Then somebody hits the ball and it rolls through their feet.
They're like, I could have picked that up and gotten you out, but I didn't want to be here.
So fucking dumb.
Pick the ball up, right?
Lee Zeldin is telling you the most obvious, logical, strategic thing to do.
There's no complexity here at all.
And I will even go further.
So I don't think Lee Zeldin can say this directly because he's in the political sphere, but I can.
So here's my strategy for the Republicans.
Whether or not they actually care about their people voting by mail...
No matter whether they care about it or not, they should say it's their number one priority, and they should tell Republicans, this is a vote-by-mail election coming up.
You can also vote in person, but you should consider it a vote-by-mail election.
If you're a Republican, we're voting by mail this time.
If there's anything you can do, make it a vote-by-mail and make sure that you've legally, legally, helped everybody vote-by-mail It was anywhere in your environment.
You should check with everybody, especially the elderly, especially the people with special needs.
You should make sure that all of their votes are heard.
That would scare the living shit out of the Democrats.
But right now, the Republicans are playing as stupid.
They're like, oh, we hate it that you do that ballot harvesting so successfully.
What is that?
Is that the leadership you want?
The leadership you want is complaining that the other team is better.
That's it. Oh, I'd like to vote for the team that doesn't do a good job on ballot harvesting, rather that they complain that the other team does a good job in a completely legal process, as far as I can tell.
Right? There's no leadership there.
Lee Zeldin just showed you leadership.
So, now, who do you want to be your Speaker of the House?
Too late. Did McCarthy already get picked?
Or is that not until the actual...
That can't happen until the actual majority happens, right?
After January something.
Right? But am I wrong?
Like, Lee Zeldin is the best leader who doesn't have another job.
Well, I guess he has another job, but...
I don't know. They should think about him as a speaker.
Um... Neuralink is ready for human testing if the FDA approves.
So Musk says that that's a go.
And the potential uses for Neuralink, which is literally a chip which they literally will drill into your skull.
Not into your brain, but they'll put a little dent in your skull and put a little chip in there.
I'm not sure I'll ever be able to sign up for that, but maybe, who knows.
Anything is possible. But among the things that might be possible with this little chip is restoring sight to the blind.
Is that amazing or what?
Restoring sight to the blind.
Holy cow. But also maybe restoring use of the limbs to the paralyzed people.
What? Restoring the use of your limbs to paralyze people?
Like, this is so futuristic, I can't even...
It's hard to even wrap your head around it.
But what if it works?
So I think here's...
You know, this is certainly a signal that the cyborg age is upon us.
You know, clearly we're already cyborgs because even though your phone is not physically attached to your hand, it sort of is, you know.
It's sort of attached to your hand.
So you're already cyborgs, but this chip would make it a little bit better.
Better even than the Apple Watch to turn you into a cyborg.
Well, and by the way, what Lee Zeldin was doing by saying that you should ballot harvest better than the other side, that's embrace and amplify.
So that's your lesson on persuasion today.
So what, instead of complaining about the thing you don't like, embrace it as hard as you can, and use it as hard as you can, and the other side will immediately see it was a bad idea.
And that's what Lee Zeldin is correctly, correctly suggesting.
There was a YouTube presentation last night of Neuralink.
I bet that was interesting. Yeah.
Sometimes I think we're all Captain Pike.
No one more than me.
Oh, you tagged me on that?
Okay, I'll look for it. Yeah, if the refs aren't calling fouls...
Exactly. So there was a good analogy, which I approve.
If the refs are calling it loose and they're not calling fouls, you should be fouling.
Right? If the other team is fouling you and not getting called, you should foul as soon as you can.
immediately fell.
That is correct strategy.
Now, do you think that Apple may have blinked because Elon Musk saying he might have to build his own phone?
Doesn't sound like a bluff, does it?
How would you like to play poker with Elon Musk, where nothing he says is really ever a bluff?
I'm going to build a rocket to Mars.
No, you're not.
You're not going to build a rocket to Mars.
No, actually, I'm building a rocket to Mars.
I'm going to build a chip that people will drill into their skull and be happy about it.
No, you're not. That's freaking crazy.
Nobody's going to put a chip in their skull.
Maybe they will. So I'm going to build an electric car when nobody thinks that's economical.
And now I'm the most economical car company of all time.
So the last thing I would do is say to myself, you know, Nobody can compete with Apple on phones at this point.
I mean, Google and Apple have it all wrapped up.
There's nobody who could enter the market at this late stage and make an impression.
Except the one person in the world that you would be afraid of would be Elon Musk.
I'm going to make another prediction.
I don't think we'll find out if this is true.
But my prediction is this.
Elon Musk already has a phone design.
The specs.
Not a full design.
Not a buildable design.
But I'll bet you somewhere in his messaging or in his files, he's got an actual design for a new kind of phone that would not use apps.
I'll bet you. I'll bet you he's at least intellectually engaged enough That he would be super interested in what that would look like.
Like from an engineering perspective, how would you build a phone that would leapfrog current phones?
Here's the first way you do it.
How often do you want to use your phone but your hands and your mouth are busy doing something else?
It's like all the time, isn't it?
Do you know how many times I want to Google something while I'm walking to my car?
Like, all the time.
And I don't always want to take out my phone and look for it.
Here's what I like to do. On the way to the car, I like to have a question, and I like to just think it, and then have it spoken back to my brain.
Or, you know, maybe I speak it out loud when nobody's hearing.
You know, maybe it's an audio thing in my ear.
But I like to just be walking along and say, huh, what is the capital of Elbonia?
And then in my ear it says, Elbonia, it's the capital of Elbonia, or something.
Like, all day long, I want to know things that I should Google, but I'm not going to.
So, if Neuralink could get to the point where I don't need a physical phone, then your Apple phone is worthless.
Imagine if Neuralink could get to the point where you could see a screen that other people can't see.
If Neuralink can give vision to the sightless, it can also put things in your environment that aren't there.
I'm assuming, right?
So couldn't it do in augmented reality where if you've got the chip in your head, any time you want, a virtual screen pops up that only you can see.
And you turn around and it just follows you.
And you can just make it go away by wanting it to go away.
So imagine I'm walking to the car...
And I think, ah, what's the capital of Elbonia?
Boop! Screen pops up, and I see it on a map.
I think that's where we're going.
Now, would you have a smartphone that you had to carry around in your hand if you could do 100% of all the things you need to do just by thinking it?
That's where we're going. So I think Elon Musk is going to put Apple out of business.
One way or the other, it might take 15 years.
But I think you're...
Does anybody think you're going to be carrying a physical phone in 15 years?
Does anybody think that's going to happen?
I don't think so. That seems the least likely future possibility.
Yeah. I don't know what it will be, but it's not going to be a phone.
It might be glasses with a chip or something like that.
Yeah.
Yeah.
I feel like some kind of technical glasses are in the future because they have so many potential uses, everything from sunglasses to whatever.
Oh, could it help with brain chemistry?
I would think so. Imagine if Neuralink could help you change what you think about.
Let's say you could just tell it, hey, make me see images of happy things, puppies and kittens.
I think it would make you happier.
Now, is anybody concerned...
I'm going to just change the subject totally here.
Is anybody concerned that the relationships can't work anymore?
Like they sort of can't?
I feel like we've crossed some kind of a bridge here, socially, and it has something to do with social media, something to do with, I don't know, wokeness, something to do with division, maybe.
I don't know. But I don't see men and women agreeing that they should even be together.
I'm seeing men and women both agree that the other doesn't offer them enough.
And the general argument that I'm seeing everywhere from both men and women on social media goes like this.
In the old days, there was a definite benefit to getting married and having kids.
The biggest benefit is that was your retirement.
You had to have kids to take care of you when you're old and to run the farm and to give you physical defense if you had sons, etc.
So it certainly made sense.
And then there was a period, let's say the 50s, where if the man was working and the woman was raising the kids, as long as everybody was okay with that, that was a system that seemed to be successful.
But we're in a different world now, and today if a woman offers, let's say, herself to a man, this is what I'm seeing on social media, the man says, what are you offering?
And the woman says, well, of course I will be expensive, because I would expect you to take most of the financial burden.
Because that appears to be the thing that we hear the most.
And the guy says, okay, so that's what you're going to take from me.
You're going to take my money. Now what are you giving me?
And she'll say, well, I'll give you children.
And then the guy says, okay, so you can guarantee that no matter what happens with us, I get to keep those children?
And she'll say, no, no, no.
If something happens to us, I'll probably keep the children.
So he goes, okay, you're not really giving me children.
Like, you can't even offer that.
It's not within your power.
And then she says, but you don't have to worry about that because I will offer you faithfulness.
I will be true to you and only physical with you, and then you don't have to worry about us breaking up and taking the kids.
Then the man says, I live in the real world.
As soon as you're financially capable of taking care of yourself and your kids, why would you stay with me when you could find somebody better?
And then she would say, well, that's a good point.
I could find somebody better.
Because once I have enough of your money and I have kids, you know who's going to look not so good?
Whoever you're living with is going to not look good.
Because your co-worker is always clean and well-dressed, and that's the only time you ever see them.
But you're at home, you're seeing the worst of your mate.
So... So, women and men are asking the same question.
What are women offering to men in 2022?
And I actually don't know the answer to the question.
Literally, I'm not being argumentative.
I don't know. What do they offer?
If the most they can offer is a 25% chance that you'll live a happy life and get to see your kids the whole time, is that something you want to trade your whole...
Your entire net worth for?
Your entire financial future, you're going to trade for a 25% chance of being able to see your kids in 20 years?
I mean, it just doesn't sound like anything that anybody would do if they were rational.
Now, I think that we're a zombie culture.
A zombie culture in that we're doing what we used to do even though it doesn't make sense anymore.
So we're still sort of running through the, oh, I guess I'm dating, and I guess I'm supposed to get myself a wife.
So I think we're just zombying our way toward it with no sense that it makes any sense at all, or that it even could.
You're saying feminists ruined everything?
I don't know about that. Maybe it was the economy that did.
Maybe it was consumerism that ruined everything, because then you needed two jobs.
You could take this a lot of ways.
But am I wrong that women are not offering anything to men that is reliable?
They do offer, but nothing reliable or lasting.
Would you agree? Now, is it the same the other way?
Would you say that men do not offer anything to women?
Because I feel like they offer money sometimes.
And physical protection sometimes.
But do men really offer physical protection to women?
Think about it.
Do men really offer physical protection to women within the house?
Alright, women? Tell me, who has been your biggest physical threat over the course of your life?
Somebody inside your house or somebody outside your house?
There's no competition.
The biggest physical threat to a woman is a male inside their house.
I don't think in 2022 men protect women.
I think men are a bigger threat to women than they are a protection.
Obviously, it depends on the situation.
Plenty of cases where men are legitimately protecting women.
Don't have a heart attack over this.
Plenty, plenty of cases where the man is absolutely protecting the woman.
But what I'm saying is, is the woman really seeing that benefit?
If you're a 20-year-old woman, and the only time you've ever been abused is by your own boyfriend, maybe once or twice, are you saying to yourself, hmm, I really need a man to protect me?
Or are you saying, I'd better live alone, because the most dangerous thing I can do is live with a man?
So I think the entire, what do we call it in business, the value proposition.
I think the value proposition for both the men and the women is that they're not offering what they used to.
Not offering what they used to.
And how about having kids?
Let me be brutally honest.
In the old days, like what I imagined the old days in the 60s, I think having a kid was sort of a good deal.
Because you can interact with your kids and sometimes you can do some family stuff that everybody liked.
Do you know it's like having a kid today?
If you don't have a kid, allow me to give you my impression in one act of all of your quality interaction with your kid after the age of 10.
Uh-huh. Yep.
Uh-huh. Pretty satisfying, wasn't it?
Now that's the sort of thing you want to organize your entire life around.
Because if you do everything right, you can get that.
Yeah. You can have the satisfying experience of having your kid not give a fucking shit about whether you live or die.
They only care what's on social media.
And you get to make one of those.
And then get to sit there and feel like what you did wrong.
Because every moment you sit with that kid, you'll fucking hate your life.
Because you're like, I love the kid, but I fucking hate this.
I hate this moment.
I hate dinner. I hate sitting in the car.
I hate walking with him.
I hate having a conversation.
Shut off their phones.
Try shutting off a phone.
Has anybody tried punishing a kid by turning off their phone?
How'd that work out? I mean, it happens all the time.
Have you ever seen anybody change their behavior because you turned off their phone for a week?
I haven't. I've never seen any kid change their behavior because they lose their phone.
Because they just find a laptop or an iPad, usually.
Cernovich's kids, let's see, don't have screen time.
Yeah. So that's also true of people in the tech business.
The people who are least likely to allow their kids to use technology are the people who make it.
You know that, right? The people who are least likely to get hernia surgery are...
Who? What class of people are the least likely to get hernia surgery?
Doctors who perform hernia surgeries.
Because they know too much.
The people who make your technology are the ones who don't let their kids see it.
China doesn't let Chinese citizens see TikTok.
They have a version of TikTok that's just like a propaganda version.
China doesn't let their own citizens use TikTok.
The people who know the most...
Keep their kids away from it.
That is not true.
Well, it's not true for every person.
Your wife quit using her phone when she's with you?
Wow. Yeah, they use the phone in school now, too.
That's right. Scott needs a hug.
All right, well, I don't have anything else to talk about, so I'm going to say that's it for today.
I'm saying all true, but you're taking your personal hatred, I don't know if this is to me or to somebody else, your personal hatred, yes, we can be brutally honest too, of women to an unacceptable level.
You're going to lose people unnecessarily.
Tone it down, please. Do I sound like a...
Does that sound like me?
Do I have...
Here's what I think I'm doing.
I think I'm just being a straight caller of balls and strikes.
I don't think that men are adding enough to women and women are not adding enough to men.
So I don't believe that I'm showing a bias against women, am I? Because I'm saying that neither is giving enough to the other.
I just did a whole explanation of how the most dangerous thing to a woman is a man in her own house.
Does that sound like woman-hating?
Maybe it does. Maybe the truth is too brutal.
Or maybe you were talking to somebody else.
I can't tell. What about Steve Jobs?
Yeah, Steve Jobs didn't let his kids use stuff.
You married an Instagram model.
Yes. What exactly is the point of that comment?
Your equal blame is not the same experience for everyone, of course.
You've been a little hostile toward the ladies.
Back to November 9th, when you said women were toxic to men.
Women are toxic to men.
Yeah, but that's a biological explanation.
The biological explanation is that the biological purpose of a woman...
Is to transfer resources from a man to a child.
So, there you go.
I mean, from a machine perspective, that's what the machine is doing.
The machine has created these creatures where the shift of resources works very well for keeping the next generation alive.
All right. Um...
What?
Where is Musk's election interference release?
Yeah, we're still waiting for the big report and of Twitter.
Man. You're calling Christina to yell at her.
Now, don't yell at Christina.
Um... Remember when you called your relationships rental wives?
I do. Yeah, I think rental is going to be the model that has to be at least tried by some people.
New York Post on Elon Musk, I didn't see it.
Oh yeah, maybe.
I think the trouble is that marriage is a rental that we don't acknowledge.
I think people look at the statistics and they say, yeah, I'm going to try to be the one that lasts forever, but realistically, it's probably a rental.
Like, if you got married thinking that you were going to be the one who beat the odds, I would question that point of view.
I should follow Andrew T. Tate and go Muslim.
And Wouldn't you love to see an honest poll of Muslim women versus other women to see who's happier?
What do you think that would show?
If you did an honest poll, I don't know if you could do it unbiased, but if you could find a way to do it, do you think that Muslim women would be less happy?
I don't know. I do not know.
Yeah, it could go either way.
I wouldn't even know how to predict that.
Yeah, Iran's a special case, but...
All right.
All right, that's all for now.
I'm going to talk to you tomorrow, YouTube.
I'll stay with the locals people for a little bit.
