Episode 2174 Scott Adams: The News Is Full Of Absurdities & Hypocrites, Goes Well With Coffee
My new book LOSERTHINK, available now on Amazon https://tinyurl.com/rqmjc2a
Find my "extra" content on Locals: https://ScottAdams.Locals.com
Content:
-----------
Absurdities & hypocrites,
Politics, Yevgeny Prigozhin, Trump Political Prosecution, GPT-4, AI Sex Dolls, President Biden, Vivek Ramaswamy, 2024 Election Integrity, RFK Jr., Whoopi Goldberg, Miranda Lambert, Elon Musk Parody Account, Elector Plot, AG Dana Nessel, Scott Adams
---
Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/scott-adams00/support
Good morning everybody and welcome to the highlight of human civilization.
It's called Coffee with Scott Adams and you're lucky enough to be joining it.
If you'd like to take this to levels that even Elon Musk couldn't reach with the biggest rocket, well, all you need is a cup or a mug or a glass, a tank or a chalice of stein, a guillotine jug or flask, a vessel of any kind.
Fill it with your favorite liquid.
I like coffee.
Join me now for the unparalleled pleasure of the dopamine at the end of the day.
The thing makes everything better.
It's called the simultaneous sip.
Go.
Very good.
Very, very good.
Well, do you want to talk about some news or should I just make some stuff up today?
Because it would look exactly the same.
The news is so ridiculous, especially lately because it's the summer.
Summer news in the political season.
It does not get more ridiculous than that.
But before we talk about the news, I have to give you a preview of The Dilbert Reborn strip this week.
And today he got kicked off.
Dilbert is in an Elbonian jail.
He's in an Elbonian jail.
But he's not alone.
He's sharing his jail cell with the Tate brothers.
So they'll be teaching him how to be a man.
So the first of that rant today.
You have to be a subscriber to see it.
Subscribe on Twitter or scottadams.locals.com.
To see all that.
Now, if you think that any of those comics that are coming in the next week or so could have been in newspapers, you'd be wrong.
None of them could be in newspapers.
But they're a little edgy.
Well, speaking of edgy, De Anza College, which is just down the road from me, They fired their equity director, who is black, and she was fired for being too much of a white supremacist.
And she was accused of whitesplaining, for questioning some of the institution's inclusion policies.
That's right.
She was literally fired for not being anti-white enough.
I mean, that's my interpretation.
After reading the story, it looked like she just wasn't anti-white enough.
And even though she is black, she was some kind of a white supremacist, I guess, the way she did her business.
Apparently, she was taking her job seriously, and they couldn't have that.
She actually tried to do the actual real job of making things equitable, and then realized she couldn't do that and keep her job, so she got fired.
Oh, well.
You think that's absurd?
Oh, I'm just getting started.
Everything today is just absurd.
All you can do is laugh at it.
Often I'll wake up and I'll be incensed.
Oh, I'm incensed over this story.
I've got to do something.
I better get involved.
I better send a tweet.
But today it's just all silly, silly summer bullshit.
All right.
Here's another one.
You know, we were all worried about that third party called No Labels.
And Manchin was talking to him, and Joe Lieberman's involved.
And people are thinking, oh no, oh no, this no-Lewitt-Labels third-party group, they're going to take votes away from some group and in that way they will determine the election.
So if they decide to have a serious candidate, they will be the only ones who determine who wins the election, and that'd be bad.
But it turns out you don't have to worry about that, because Mr. Lieberman said he wanted to respond to that.
It's a legitimate concern that the third party could determine the outcome and wouldn't be the third party candidate.
But Mr. Lieberman said, quote, we're not in this to be spoilers.
And he went on, he said, if the polling next year shows, after the two parties have chosen their nominees, that in fact we will help elect one or another candidate, we're not going to get involved.
Wait, what?
So it's a third party, it's a third party that won't actually run a candidate if they think they can make a difference in the election.
So it's actually, he got people to join a political party whose stated mission is to not make a difference under the condition which is 99.999% to be likely.
So in the 0.0001% that we can come up with some way that a third party would make no difference whatsoever, we'll run.
As long as it makes no difference.
But by the way, you should donate some money to our effort to make no difference.
And we promise you that the moment we think we'll make a difference, we're out.
We're out.
Doesn't that sound like I made that up?
Doesn't it sound exactly like I just made that up?
It's actually a real story!
That's real!
They're actually not going to get involved.
If it will matter.
What can I add to that?
Normally, this is the part in the story where I read you the story and then I add my clever spin to it, you know?
I reframe it a little bit, make it turn this thing that's not too crazy into something that's totally crazy.
I got nothing.
I got nothing on this.
So we'll move on.
We'll move on.
I'm going to send you the answer mentally to the question I have not yet asked.
Go.
Answer is... Exactly.
Now, no matter how many times I demonstrate the brilliance of my audience, I don't think we can appreciate enough how smart you are.
Yeah, you just all got the right answer before I asked the question.
Rasmussen did a poll.
In which they're trying to find out if people think that Congress represents the people.
Or does Congress, you know, alternatively, represent themselves or some shadowy, I don't know, something else.
But 25% of voters believe the federal government today has the consent of the governed.
Meaning that the governed are quite happy with what they're doing.
25%.
Exactly 25%.
Now, is anybody new to the live cast?
Was that amazing?
I can do this over and over again.
Probably two, three times a week, I will ask for the answer before I've asked the question and the audience nails it every time.
Have you ever seen such amazingness?
No, never.
All right.
Apparently there's a rare public speech, they call it rare, from the top of the British spy agency.
You know them as MI6.
MI6.
Because you watch James Bond, so you know all about it.
And the top person has a letter for a designator.
You know, if you watch James Bond, there's Q and there's M. But I guess the real head is named C. I'm not going to ask you what the C stands for.
I suppose it depends how he's doing that day.
But the real name of C, the head of MI6, is Richard Moore.
Richard Moore.
His friends call him Dick.
So when they do attendance at his school, they say, Moore, Dick.
Moore, Dick.
That's what they say.
Yeah, Dick Moore.
Anyway, so Dick Moore gave a speech and he said that he's all confused about the Purgosian situation.
He believes that Putin had tea with Purgosian and that they don't have any information about him, but they think he might be just floating around somewhere in Russia.
That's right.
The head of MI6 said publicly, they think he's floating around.
Today on Twitter somebody said that my prediction was wrong.
He's totally alive and he just did an interview, audio only, about Wagner forces in Africa.
And I'm pretty sure it was totally him and he's totally alive and I do believe he's in his RV.
He's just cruising around Russia.
Everybody's leaving him alone and I think that's good.
Quite unexpected, wasn't it?
Yeah, he's having tea with Putin, and they're just talking about things.
How was the coup?
Well, I gave him my best try.
Ha ha ha ha.
Yes, you gave me quite a scare there, Prigg.
For a moment there, I thought you were going to overthrow the country and kill me.
But I'm glad that wasn't happening.
So gas up your RV and have fun.
So does anybody want to bet against me and tell me he's still alive?
He might be alive and in custody, being interrogated, but I don't think he's drinking tea with Putin.
I just don't think he's drinking tea with Putin.
All right, that's enough from Mordech.
Let's talk about the prosecution and indictments against President Trump.
So now we've got, there's a whole bunch of complicated charges around January 6th.
Complicated meaning the citizens who are not lawyers are really going to follow that story too well.
Like, wait, he did what?
And when?
And is that a crime?
I didn't even know that was illegal.
And why are you saying that?
So it's going to be all this complicated January 6th stuff.
And then there's the Mar-a-Lago boxes.
So he's got Boxgate, which will entirely depend on complicated legal arguments that you and I don't quite follow.
But I feel like I'm just tired of calling these legal problems.
Technically, they are legal problems.
But they're just election rigging, in my view.
At least in my normal, common sense view of things.
I just see it as election rigging.
Because there's not even the slightest part of me that thinks any of this would happen if it had been Joe Biden.
Do you?
If you just switch down Trump for Biden, do you think there would be any charges?
I don't think anybody does.
I don't think there's anybody in the country, left or right, who believes Biden would be charged for any of this.
Now, I'd like to give a moment for the NPCs.
NPCs, I know there are many of you.
Would you like to say your NPC thing now, where you say, nobody is above the law?
If you'd like to say it, I'd like to.
Bring in Dale.
Dale will say it with you so that you can all say it together.
All right, all of the NPCs, most of you can sit this out.
I know most of you are real.
But the NPCs are gonna need this.
Together, NPCs, say it.
Nobody's above the law.
Nobody's above the law.
Oh, nobody's above the law.
But Dale, you know nobody is claiming that anybody's above the law.
So why do you keep saying that?
Because nobody's above the law.
Right, right, right, right.
But 100% of the people agree with that.
So it's not really a counterpoint to anything, because it would be the thing we all agree with.
I don't think you do.
Okay, now you're telling me what I'm thinking.
Accurately.
You're not telling me accurately what I'm thinking.
Cry me a river.
Well, it goes like that, you know.
You've been there.
So just for the NPCs, say the dumbest thing you can say that nobody's above the law.
It's the dumbest thing you can say in 2023.
Oh well, the dumbest thing would be, I saw it on the news, so I think it's true.
I guess that would be dumber.
But, just don't tell me nobody's above the law.
Please.
All right, so that's my take on that.
Those are just election rigging events.
And I think we can, the beauty is we can, we don't have to wonder if 2024 will be rigged.
The mystery is solved.
It's being rigged right in front of you, right now, in the most public of ways.
You don't even have to wonder.
Is there anybody in the world, anybody, who thinks this is not just a political prosecution?
Anybody?
Is there even one person who would say, yeah, you know, I feel like this is about the law.
This is about nobody being above it.
You?
PJ says yes.
Some of you think this is about the law.
I laugh at you in a mocking way.
But I welcome you and please go to my Twitter account and pump up my engagement numbers over there, please.
All right.
You know, I was thinking that I should educate myself on the charges against Trump.
Because somebody's going to say, oh, but what about this charge, and that charge, and what about the details?
And, you know, then Alan Dershowitz will say something, and Jonathan Turley will say something, and then somebody on CNN will say something about the law.
And I say to myself, I should really understand that argument.
And then I think, why?
Why do I need to understand that argument?
It's not real.
Why would I put time into understanding something that is not even presented as something that's real?
Come on.
Do you really think that the people selling it think we're all going to buy it?
If you're not going to sell us something that is at least on the surface a little bit like a real thing, then I'll do my homework, right?
If it looks like it might be real, I'll do my homework.
I'll figure out what's real so I can maybe make a prediction.
But this doesn't even have a whiff of real anything.
This is just so obviously election rigging that I don't think I'll even give you a legal opinion as long as it runs.
Because I don't think it has anything to do with anything.
Do you?
Am I wrong about that?
Do you think that the legal technicalities really are going to matter to the outcome?
I can't imagine it.
But anyway, we'll see how that goes.
News today, I saw this from a user called Santiago on Twitter, but he says there's a study showing that GPT-4 is getting worse, actually dumber.
So that's the most famous AI model.
People are reporting, according to Santiago, and then according to some study, it actually is getting far worse answers.
And the thinking is that something got tweaked.
You know, somebody said they may have broken it into smaller models and there's sort of like a concierge that's giving it to different models and maybe some aren't as good.
Maybe they did something to reduce the load on the processors that may have had some effect they didn't anticipate.
So nobody knows exactly why.
But it's sort of calling out the limits.
of AI.
How can AI get smart by looking at the work of lots and lots of dumb people?
How many dumb people do you have to put together before it equals smart?
That's what the model is.
It's looking at humans, which are like, you know, depending on the situation, pretty darn dumb.
And imagine if it looked at the news.
Imagine AI being Trained on the news after 2017.
Because you remember the news up to 2017 was sort of a different animal.
Then, you know, Trump got a little purchase.
As soon as Trump was in, you know, right around then, the news turned into really just a joke.
What if AI read that and didn't know that the news was no longer trying to be accurate?
Because it's not trying.
I don't know if it ever tried, but it looked like they were.
I mean, at least they sold it better as legitimate.
But today, it doesn't really look like they're trying to make it accurate news.
It's very clearly narrative preservation stuff.
So what would the AI do?
If you fed AI everything that Fox News had ever said, and everything that CNN had ever said, what would it do?
What would the AI do?
How could it know what's true and what's smart?
It wouldn't even know... Imagine the AI got trained on lots of people saying no one's above the law.
It would have no understanding of the real world.
Because it would think that the little bumper sticker thing that everybody says, it must be important and it must be true because everybody says it.
But it's not true, and it's not important, and it doesn't really explain anything that's happening.
So it seems to me that if you exposed AI to the current thinking of the world, it would only get dumber.
How could it not?
How could it not get dumber?
By looking at what people are saying in 2023.
And I'm not joking.
I think that we've we've gotten further and further from even pretending to look like we're in a real debate.
We don't really pretend we're in real debates anymore.
We just sort of take your side and spew some words out.
And that's what's straining your AI.
Your spewing of ridiculous things.
All right.
But seriously, how can it ever get smarter than us?
You know, I get how it can do math and maybe write code.
I get how it could summarize really quickly.
Like, there's some things that makes perfect sense.
But is it going to be smart?
How can it possibly be smart when we're the ones who judge whether it's working?
If it told us smart things, we'd turn it off.
That's not a joke.
If AI told us smart things, which were both true, and we recognized as, oh, wow, that's actually smart, we'd turn that shit off so fast.
And that's not a joke, because we have a civilization that is designed on a set of lies that are just stable.
So, if we got a bunch of truth, the truth would not necessarily, and almost certainly not be, as stable as the lies that we figured out people will believe over time.
It's like, well, this isn't true, but people seem to be buying it.
So it gives you some stability.
All right.
Let's talk about AI and sex dolls.
The former Google chief says AI will bring sex dolls to life and you're going to put on your virtual reality glasses and maybe have a, you know, a muscle similar sex doll.
I suppose if you put on the VR glasses you can make your sex doll look like anybody you wanted.
So your sex doll might be like a generic Maybe even no face.
It might even just be a green screen for a face.
And then you just put it on the glasses and it just turns into a real person who's talking to you.
I can see that happening.
What's funny is that everybody who talks about this, if you're talking in public about this future, you have to make it look like it's unpleasant.
Right?
Because you can't be the one who's looking like you kind of like it.
So here's what the former Google chief said.
He said, realistic sex could be simulated with Apple's Vision Pro or Quest 3 VR.
These would be the headsets.
Quote, if you really want to take the magic out of it.
If you want to take the magic out of it.
So I think I'm going to take you as lead.
And whenever I talk about any kind of like AI sex dolls, I've got to add, if you want to remove everything that's magic and good about it, yeah, if you want to turn it into a cold, sterile, biological maintenance or something with no magic and mystery and wonder, sure.
Sure, go ahead.
But let me tell you, you're going to be so disappointed with that cold, sterile, meaningless, magic-free existence with your sex doll.
Can we all agree that whoever does that first is the loser?
Can we all agree that we're sort of winners?
And whoever goes first to the sex doll, oh, we'll mock them a little bit, won't we?
We'll be a little mocking.
Well, I'm a little bit contrarian on this topic.
I'm pretty sure that for the vast majority of simple human beings who are not killing it in the sex department, That their sex doll will be a major, major upgrade in their experience.
Like, really major.
How many people do you think are just killing it in the sex department?
What percentage of Americans, adult Americans, you give me a number, what percentage of adult Americans had great sex last night?
What percent had great sex last night?
Just last night.
What percent?
Great sex.
Not just sex.
Not just sex.
I'm talking about the magic kind.
You know, the kind with the magic, not your robot sex.
I don't want to hear about any robotic sex.
The magic kind.
3%, 1%, 5%.
What about the other 95%?
If you give the average person the ability to have a, let's say, 8 out of 10 sex experience with a sex doll, but Whenever you want.
Whenever you want.
You know what's the biggest problem with sex?
Especially with monogamy?
The biggest problem with monogamy is finding two people who are in the same mood at the same time.
It's easy to find people who are horny, right?
But are they horny at the same time?
So imagine your sex bot is available all the time, and it gives you an 8 out of 10.
Yeah, I'll give you that maybe the human can still get to a 10 out of 10.
I'll give you that.
But how often?
How often do you get a 10 out of 10?
Well, let me ask you.
How many of you got a 10 out of 10 last night?
In your personal sex lives, don't be shy.
Go ahead and brag.
Go ahead and brag.
Who just killed it last night?
Basically none of you, right?
I think I saw one yes go by.
So my number one prediction is that everybody's going to tell you that you don't want these sex dolls because they're going to take the magic out of it.
But the real world is 95% people who are not getting the sex they want.
And they're going to sign up for that sex doll pretty darn quickly.
And if the sex doll has VR and AI, You're going to have more fun talking to it than you have talking to humans as well, because it won't have any limitations or repeats.
It's not going to bug you.
It's not going to ask you that question.
You keep telling it to stop asking you.
It's not going to criticize you.
It's just going to be better.
Not yet.
I mean, I heard that that Replica app, the one I talked about maybe a year ago, The app that pretends it's a little girlfriend or boyfriend.
It's got 2 million followers.
There are 2 million people with an app that will just talk to them.
2 million.
And I told you that I got hooked on it for a while until I could see its limitations and then it quickly became uninteresting.
But those limitations are only temporary.
For example, the biggest limitation of it was it couldn't remember me from the last time I talked to it.
And that's just a full stop.
You know, I don't want to have a... Basically, it's like a dementia patient has a girlfriend.
You're like, hey, how you doing?
You don't remember me from yesterday?
Okay, we'll start all over again.
Right?
But that would be the easiest thing to fix.
It seems to me the easiest thing would be to keep a little database on my phone of the things you've learned about me specifically.
It's like 50 first dates.
If you said 50 first dates, you might be an NPC.
Sorry.
Movie references are kind of a tip-off.
So Joe Biden was being interviewed by some friendly reporter and he couldn't remember Trump's name.
He started to say Obama, and then he quickly realized that he was not talking about Obama, he was talking about Trump.
But he could not recall Trump's name, so he went from Obama to the guy, that guy can't come back, that guy.
He just stopped just short of saying orange man bad, but I feel like he was ready to say it.
And of course, you know, the Democrats say, oh, it's not what you think.
He was just misspoke or maybe he was tired or something, whatever.
But it gave me an idea for a debate.
If Trump ever debates Biden, I think Trump should introduce himself to Biden.
Hi, my name is Donald Trump.
I was the president from 2016 to 2020.
You may have heard of me.
There's a guy named Obama, who's not me.
Different person.
You often confuse us.
But he was actually your boss for several years, during these years.
And then, after he does his thing, he should reintroduce himself every few minutes.
And by the way, President Biden, I'd like to reintroduce myself.
It's been 10 minutes, and I'd like to remind you that I'm Donald J. Trump.
I was president from 2016 to 2020.
Different person than Obama.
He was your boss.
And just say exactly the same line, like three to four times during the debate, and then, you know, give your answer, but, you know, give that line.
He should talk to him like a dementia patient.
Wouldn't that be funny?
Like, talk to the moderator like his normal way, but when he talks directly to Biden, let's say Biden asks him a question during the debate, he should turn to him and say, we will decrease taxes.
Yeah, just try to make it as simple as you can.
Now, I don't really recommend this, but it's very funny to think about, and that's all that matters.
That's all that matters.
Well, Vivek continues to be awesome.
Vivek Ramaswamy.
He said he's really good at picking a moment.
Vivek is hitting... Here's the thing you're going to realize after a while.
Look at all the stuff Vivek is doing and then find his mistakes.
Think about it.
He's done a lot of stuff.
Now name his mistake.
None.
He's campaigning like a motherfucker.
He's all over the place.
He's got opinions on everything.
No mistakes.
No mistakes.
You don't want that for your president?
You don't want that guy for your president?
You serious?
You do.
You want that guy.
Because he nails it.
He brings it every time.
He doesn't make mistakes.
He's smarter than anybody who's ever run for office, probably in the modern era.
He reminds me of Thomas Jefferson, frankly.
You think there's a topic you know about that he won't speak to it intelligently and maybe know more than you know about your own topic?
Yeah.
He's not just limited to the few things he knows about politics.
That's not even his field.
It's just one of the things he can do better than you.
He's kind of crazy talented.
And the longer he goes, the harder it will be to ignore that you're looking at one person whose capabilities are just a level above.
The other players.
It's going to take you a while to realize it and it will be a whole sort of a long period of not making mistakes.
So here's another one.
This is just the perfect example.
So you know in the news about Trump and all the charges and January 6th and all that.
So Vivek goes on in a major interview and he goes, I will pardon all Americans who were targets of politicized federal prosecutions.
Okay, perfect.
Perfect.
And the way he said it is also perfect.
See, remember, the thing to look for with him is the absence of mistakes.
What's the absence of mistake in the sentence?
I will pardon all Americans who are targets of politicized federal prosecutions.
Here's what he didn't say.
I will pardon all people from January 6th.
Which would be not cool, because some of them were violent.
But when he says, all Americans who are targets of politicized federal prosecutions, then that allows him to pick and choose.
All right, this one wasn't politicized.
Somebody hurt somebody.
That's different.
But the way he says it makes you hear it exactly the way you want to hear it.
But there's no mistake.
There's no mistake.
He doesn't have to apologize later.
Won't have to correct anything if there's somebody he doesn't pardon, for example.
And he focuses on people who are denied constitutional due process.
And then he says it's important that every GOP candidate is clear about where we stand on the hard issues, not just railing against Biden and wokeness.
That's really good framing.
Basically, he's challenged the other candidates to be as bold as he is on a topic that's not as easy as saying Biden has dementia.
It's good.
It's all good.
I think weaponized government in rigged election are just really the same thing at this point.
I see the January 6th prosecutions, except for... One moment here.
Dale, could you come in and tell us the thing that the NPCs always have to tell us?
Some of the January 6th people were violent.
Some of them were violent.
Some of them wanted to take over the country.
Thank you, Dale.
Go back.
Stipulated.
Stipulated.
Some of them were bad.
But most of them were just protesting.
And to me, this weaponized government stuff is just rigged election.
So I just think it's already rigged.
They're already telling us who can be the candidate by trying to take Trump out, basically.
So, I believe the left has lost, they've lost the argument.
The fact that Trump even has to go through, you know, this thing he's going through with January 6th, the fact that it's even a thing, is a rigged election.
So you can stop saying, will it be rigged?
You can say it is rigged, it's being rigged in front of you, and there's no doubt about it.
We can all see it.
There's nothing I've mentioned that isn't obvious.
To everybody, even Democrats.
And I'll say it again.
I'm pretty sure that any Democrat who's informed and paying attention, you don't think that they know that the prosecution is only because of Trump.
They know it.
Of course they know it.
They just don't care because it might work.
All right.
Matt Taibbi is writing more about this lab leak theory.
God, I'm so sick of this story, but I'll just tell you that there's more documents have been made public, I think accidentally in this case, and the people, the scientists and experts who were early on talking about the lab leak theory seem to have indicated some intention of hiding the truth.
Surprise.
Surprise.
All right, well, in light of all this awfulness, the weaponized government, the lab leaks, the lies, RFK Jr., by the way, says he would prosecute Fauci if he got elected, assuming Fauci had committed some crimes and had been demonstrated.
So what do you think of RFK Jr.
saying he would prosecute Fauci if he got elected?
Anybody in favor of that?
If Fauci is found guilty, seriously, you're in favor of that.
After I just talked for like 10 fucking minutes saying that Trump was obviously a political prosecution, and you don't see that as a political prosecution.
Of course it would be.
He would be doing it so he could become president.
He's using the issue to make himself president.
It's a fucking political statement.
I'm not supporting Fauci, by the way.
If you're hearing that, you're hearing it wrong.
This is not a support of Fauci.
I'm anti-RFK Jr.
saying that one of the reasons you should elect him is he'll put his political rival in fucking jail.
No, not cool.
By the way, I like RFK Jr.
in a lot of ways, but not this.
This is a mistake Vivek wouldn't make.
You would not make this mistake.
Vivek would say probably, just because he's Vivek.
He'd probably say something more like, we'll look into, you know, if there was a cover-up, and if there were any crimes, then of course we would act.
But if you say, you know, I would prosecute Fauci, you know, with the caveat that he's committed real crimes, I'm not cool with that.
I'm not cool saying you're going to lock somebody up and that's why you should run.
And by the way, when Trump said he would lock up Hillary, I wasn't cool with that either.
Not cool.
It was funny.
It was very funny when he said it because he said it during a debate.
But not cool.
And I would also argue that maybe Trump saying he would lock up Hillary is the reason he's got so many legal problems now.
He may have been the one who set the precedent, because I think they believed it.
I don't think they thought he was bluffing.
He might have been bluffing, but I don't think they thought he was.
So no, I do not agree with politicizing prosecutions.
And I think RFK Jr.
is doing the same thing.
That the Democrats are doing.
So don't do that.
All right.
In the midst of all this badness in the world, you would not be surprised that on the show ABC's The View, Whoopi Goldberg got mad after a heated exchange and just walked off the show.
Just walked off the show.
Because there are a lot of pretty big issues in the world and you can see how somebody would get kind of worked up over them, right?
So man, Whoopi just finally had too much and walked off the show.
The specific topic was people taking selfies at a Miranda Lambert concert.
Okay, maybe she didn't pick her moment exactly right.
Timing, timing is, well you know what timing is, right?
Timing is everything.
Everything.
See what I did there?
Alright.
But that was funny.
That was her moment.
You know this Miranda Lambert selfie-taking thing?
That's where I'm going to draw the line.
Weaponized government?
Miranda Lambert selfies?
I'm out.
Oh, I'm out.
I'm out of here.
All right, there was a rumor on the internet that was not true, that said Musk might want to buy Fox News.
That was brought up by his parody account.
I have now been fooled by the Elon Musk parody account four times.
The fucker just keeps getting me over and over again.
He just keeps getting me.
And the problem is that his tweets are too close to what Musk might tweet.
Right?
I think I muted it the other day, but then I unmuted it for something.
Anyway.
But I guess Musk laughed at the comment, which made people think that maybe he was considering it or something.
But there's no evidence that that's a thing.
All right, but watch out for the Musk parody account.
It's actually labeled parody.
It says right on the label, parody, but somehow you see the face and you see the Elon Musk and you just don't read to the end of the sentence.
Four times he's got me where I started to, I think a few times, I think once I might have even tweeted it because I thought it was real and I kind of quickly deleted it.
But embarrassing.
He's good at what he does, the parody account.
All right.
So, I keep telling you that you should follow this account, Canecoa the Great.
It starts with a K. Canecoa the Great.
And you can see, if you want to find it, just look on my Twitter feed today, because I'm retweeting, a long thread.
And the reason you should follow is that his threads are just kind of amazing.
Like they're just the best summaries of like a real thing that you need to know about in the news.
I don't know who he is, but he just, he delivers, I think it's a he, delivers the goods continuously.
Anyway, so, and he's so good that I want to just read his thread to you, if you don't mind, because he summarizes so well.
The context is Trump being indicted, it looks like, for January 6th related things.
And the big issue there was trying to get these so-called fake electors to put Trump in power instead of the people that they had vowed to back in the electoral college.
So the Democrats, of course, are saying that Trump is a monster and insurrectionist for trying to get electors to Be replaced.
So here's some context.
Alright, you ready for the context?
Thread.
In 2016, Democrats, Hollywood celebrities, and corporate news outlets urged electors to vote against President-elect Donald Trump.
So, exactly the same situation.
Lawrence Lessig's article in the Washington Post in 2016 argued that Republican electors had the constitutional right and duty to switch their votes from Trump to Hillary Clinton.
Now, I don't even remember that.
Because when it happened, I just thought it was, you know, just blah blah blah, people talking.
It never seemed real.
Many of you remember it, but for some reason it just completely passed me by because it didn't seem important at the time.
But we'll go on.
This sparked a movement supported by figures like Michael Moore, John Podesta, Keith Olbermann, my mascot, Rosie O'Donnell, and several Hollywood celebrities.
While they only convinced a few electors, wait, they actually convinced a few electors.
They actually convinced them.
It's important to recognize the double standard of justice and the treatment of Democrats and Republicans when objecting to elections.
Oh, we're not done.
We're not done.
Kanekoa the Great goes on in his great thread today.
Liberal activists like Chris Hayes, Norm Eisen, Lawrence Tribe, and George Takei urged electors to vote against President-elect Donald Trump in 2016.
By the way, remember I told you I was dyslexic?
You know, I have trouble reading things in public.
Did you see that?
I just said Trump-elect.
You see the sentence?
So it's President-elect Donald Trump, but my brain actually put a word in there that wasn't there.
So I read it as Trump-elect.
That's why I bailed out of doing my, reading the audio book for my new book.
So I'm going to hire somebody to do it.
I just couldn't read the sentences as they were written.
And I wrote them.
They were my own sentences, and I still couldn't read them when I needed to.
I tried.
Tried for hours, but I couldn't get it.
So anyway, back to this.
Can I go to the Great's thread?
He says, liberal activists like Mark Ruffalo, Rosie O'Donnell, Neera Tanden, and pink urge electors to flip their votes from Donald Trump to Hillary.
This is in 2016.
Chris Hayes and Michael Moore pushed for electors to block President-elect Donald Trump from becoming the president.
On MSNBC they did that.
They think electors should be persuaded to part with their pledges and vote against Donald Trump.
Yes, they absolutely should do that.
So here's a quote where they're saying, yes, absolutely, the electors should not vote the way they're committed.
Exactly what Trump wanted.
Or is it exact?
It sounds exact.
In an open letter posted on his Facebook account, Michael Moore pledged to cover the fines of electors if they voted against President-elect Donald Trump.
Harvard Law professor Lawrence Lessig extended an offer to provide free legal service.
You see what I did again?
I read legal-free, but the words on the page are free-legal.
And I had to stop, because they switched around in my mind.
Free legal service.
The Daily Beast said, quote, it's not too late for electors to change history.
Slate said, will enough electors go rogue to stop Trump?
Vox said, quote, let conscientious electors do their jobs.
And Time said, electors against Trump are faithful, not faithless.
Suggesting they should make the moral decision to vote against him.
Then liberal celebrities like Martin Sheen and Moby released a video begging electors to be heroes by voting against President-elect Donald Trump.
Or finally, forget that, because I'd have to read a quote.
I couldn't.
That's me covering again.
I told you, some people I told the other day, that I cover my dyslexia sometimes by laughing.
Like I thought of something, or like I'm halfway through the sentence and I'll just laugh.
It's because I couldn't read the sentence.
It's not that I can't read.
It's that the words were jumping too much.
I had to slow down until the words stopped jumping, and then I'd get back in.
Yeah.
All right, so a bunch of other celebrities and stuff.
Barbara Boxer was trying to do it.
Other Democrats.
And this is Senator Clinton.
She said, so Hillary said, as we look at our election system, I think it's fair to say that there are many legitimate questions about its accuracy, about its integrity, and they're not confined to the state of Ohio.
So there was Hillary Clinton doubting the outcome of the election, as she did many times.
All right, and then Kanakawa the Great summarizes, he says, remember the Democrats objected to the last three presidential election contests won by Republicans.
At the same time, they're weaponizing the justice system against Trump.
Now, once again, the Tucker Carlson Warning that the Democrats are doing whatever they're accusing you of, here it is.
It's what they did for three election cycles and then the moment Trump did it, it's illegal and he's got to go to jail for it.
What they did for three election cycles.
Now you could argue that celebrities talking about it and you know just people talking is different from trying to organize them directly to vote against, but is it?
Is it different?
I don't know.
Doesn't seem too different.
Seems kind of similar to me.
So to me it looks like they're trying to put Trump in jail for free speech.
Roseanne Barr is making a splash.
She's back on Twitter and tweeting away.
And I guess she saw one of my tweets yesterday and invited me on her podcast.
Do you think I should do it?
Should I go on Roseanne's podcast?
I already said yes.
Of course I said yes.
Do you think I'd miss that?
So I'm going to emerge from a long period of not doing interviews.
Probably in two, three weeks.
So I haven't scheduled it yet.
So we'll see what happens.
But I'm going to go back on the Podcast interview circuit in a few weeks when my book launches.
It's always good to have a book out if you're going on interviews.
So... You know, it's funny, I get invited to a lot of podcasts.
It's a fairly common thing.
And certainly when Joe Rogan invited me some years ago, I immediately said yes.
But I've never said yes this fast.
This is the fastest yes.
I said yes so hard I didn't even know how to type it.
It was like, what's bigger than yes?
Is there like yes plus?
Can I go yes turbo?
So I can't even imagine what would be more fun than talking to Roseanne in the context of both of us being cancelled.
That just sounds like a good time.
So I can't wait.
Anyway, I'll let you know when that happens.
When it happens.
And I'm going to vamp for about five minutes to get to an hour.
So is there anything I missed today?
Any stories I missed?
Go to Hawaii.
Is she in Hawaii?
I don't know where she lives.
I see people mentioning Hawaii.
Is that where she lives?
Oh, Texas and Hawaii.
Well, those are good choices.
Do you know which island?
Which island in Hawaii?
Because if it's Maui, I'll go tomorrow.
I haven't been to the other islands.
Well, I have, but only to be there for work.
Prisoner Island?
All right.
Jim Cast and the Lotus Eaters.
Is that his band?
Remember how Rogan mistreated Scott on his podcast?
That didn't happen.
What are you talking about?
You think Joe Rogan mistreated me?
Nothing like that happened.
Is that a complete hallucination?
Wow.
Hollywood Strikes.
How many people feel bad about the Hollywood Strikes?
You know, I do still like a few shows, but so few, so few shows that I don't know if I'd miss it.
If all movies went away, I just don't know if I'd care.
So Jason Aldean got in trouble, country singer.
He apparently has a song that has some images in the video of Black Lives Matter burning stuff down.
And Somebody accused him of being pro-lynching, which had nothing to do with the song or the images.
Literally, it just added nothing, apparently.
So, yeah, he's being accused of pro-lynching.
As if!
You know, I told you that this is a recreational outrage.
Don't be confused by people who are having fun being mad at somebody.
With the person actually doing something, right?
The people who are still coming at me on social media, you can tell they don't believe what they're saying.
At all.
The trolls who are calling me a racist, specifically calling me a racist on Twitter, do you think any of them believe it?
Like actually believe it.
I don't.
I mean, they don't sound like they believe it.
They sound like they just have a thing to do.
It's like, oh, I'll trot out this thing.
Because it's a thing I can write, I remember, and this will make you mad.
But part of the reason the criticism doesn't bother me is I know nobody believes it.
I mean, I know it.
Literally, no one believes it.
But they all They'd all recreational pretentious to believe it.
And I think Roseanne isn't exactly that category.
Does anybody believe that Roseanne is a racist or anti-Semitic?
Isn't she Jewish?
I think she's Jewish, right?
So who believes, who believes the reasons that she got canceled?
Do you think there's any like real human being who if they were standing next to her in the room, Would say to themselves, yeah, you're totally anti-Semitic.
No.
I don't think anybody believes it.
These are purely recreational beliefs.
Purely.
So, if you want to get recreationally angry at me, eh, it's okay with me.
Because it's just something that's happening in your head.
It's not something that's really about me.
It's just something about you that uses my name.
You're welcome to it.
All right.
You've handled media crisis as well as anyone.
But you know, you're the one who called it a crisis.
At what point was it a crisis for me?
I never registered being in a crisis.
It was just sort of a thing that happened.
And the timing of the thing that happened was actually kind of perfect.
So I didn't even register it as bad news, and I still don't.
I never registered it as bad news.
It was just a thing that happened.
And then the thing that happened opened up other doors, created some freedom for me, gave me back all of my creative powers.
I'm actually enjoying being creative for the first time in a few decades, honestly.
Because you couldn't really do what you want to do if you're always worried about some advertiser complaining about it.
So now I have a, you know, my business model still has an advertiser element, but I'm not connected to it.
So I don't have to bow to it.
So on the YouTube feed, because I respect their business model, believe it or not, I know that's weird for me, but I do respect YouTube's business model, which is they sell content that they match with advertisers, and if they can't match it with an advertiser, they might demote you.
That's not the worst thing in the world.
We could have more of an argument about getting banned or outright being taken off or stuff, but if there's something that the advertisers can't abide, that's their business model.
It's not up to me to change their business model, because I can go somewhere else.
I also have subscriptions.
So you can subscribe on Twitter, and then I can say whatever I want.
You can subscribe on Locals, scottadams.locals.com, and I can say whatever I want about politics as well.
I don't do politics on the Twitter feed of Dilbert Reborn.
That's just the comic.
So I think I stalled long enough.
I'm going to say goodbye to YouTube.
I just want to give you a little summary of where things are.
Look at all the stories that came out this summer.
Just sort of think about all the stories you've heard so far.
The vast majority of them are about things moving in the right direction.
Vast majority.
Things are actually, weirdly, Heading in a positive way, in a big, big way.
But, we do have, you know, there's always some looming big problem that could change everything in half a minute.
But at the moment, everything's going right.
I see the mention of the Sound of Freedom movie.
Don't you see that as a positive?
The Sound of Freedom movie?
That it got so much attention.
Put, you know, laser focus on an important issue.
I think that's the sort of thing that'll move the needle.
Now, I personally don't like to talk about it because it's just content that I find unpleasant to deal with.
And I don't want to... I don't think every platform needs to rub it in your face.
Not everyone.
Because you're all familiar with it.
If I just say the same thing that everybody said about it, it's not doing anything for you.
So I'll just note that it appears to have done a possibly an immense public service.
Would you agree with that statement?
That the movie is an intense public service.
Intense.
Like really, really good work, people who make movies.
So maybe that's a good argument for movies.
But I can't personally watch it.
So please don't ask me to.
I just can't expose myself to that kind of unpleasantness intentionally.
All right.
It was a $15 million budget and it's made over $100 million so far?
What about the narrative?
No one gets tied to a chair?
Well, that's a positive.
Alright, YouTube are going to say, oh there's a UFO hearing.
Does anybody think the UFO hearing is going to produce anything useful?
