Episode 2333 CWSA 12/25/23 Merry Christmas And Get In Here For Some Headlines Fun. Bring Coffee
My new book Reframe Your Brain, available now on Amazon https://tinyurl.com/3bwr9fm8
Find my "extra" content on Locals: https://ScottAdams.Locals.com
Content:
Politics, Tucker's UFO Aliens, Kevin Spacey, Public Figure Death Threats, NGO Immigrant Programs, Immigrant Quality, Excess Death Rates, Loneliness Crisis, Israel Hamas War, President Trump, American Color Revolution, Transition Integrity Project, 2024 Awakening, Vivek Ramaswamy, Scott Adams
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
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 Merry Christmas and Happy New Year.
A little bit early.
Well, if you'd like your experience today to go up to levels that even Santa Claus couldn't understand, all you need for that is a cuppa, a mug, or a glass, a tank of chalicestine, a guillotine, a joker mask, a vessel of any kind, fill it with your favorite liquid.
I like coffee.
And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure, the dopamine of the day, the thing that makes everything better.
It's called the simultaneous sip.
What happens now, Bill?
It's too early for eggnog.
Much too early.
Well, should I read the news in a funny and not too serious way?
All right.
All right.
We don't want to get too serious today, do we?
Well, before we start, I should call your attention to the Dilbert Reborn comic, available to local subscribers and also subscribers on X.
And I just want to let you know the theme.
You might note that Mickey Mouse came off copyright, but not the total Mickey Mouse, not the modern version.
Only the version that's 95 years old.
There's a black and white Mickey Mouse, Steamboat Willie.
So in honor of him coming off of copyright, I have him visiting Dilbert's boss.
So that's black and white Mickey.
I have to draw him in black and white, even though the comic is color.
So Mickey says, hi, my name is Mickey.
And the boss says, ah, get out of here.
And Mickey says, settle down.
My copyright expired.
I'm a free mouse.
Disney can't sue you.
And the boss says, phew.
And then Mickey says, can I get a job here?
Or do you discriminate against black and white characters?
And the boss says, that's a gray area.
Yeah, it's a dad joke.
But a solid one, I think.
Solid.
Well, the New York Post is reporting there was a man who was arrested because he used a laser pointer.
He was pointing at a commercial plane, then at a police helicopter.
As you know, the laser pointers can blind the pilot, so that's very illegal.
They arrested him, but the part of the story that they didn't report is they took his laser pointer away from him and they shipped it to Zelensky in Ukraine.
This is all we had left.
We didn't have anything left.
We're like, well, we've got this laser pointer we took off that guy.
I'll take it.
Okay.
You don't like your Ukrainian humor early in the morning?
Well, here's a story that's developing.
I think we can see where it's heading.
I told you that Tucker Carlson suggests that he has information that we don't have.
And that he believes that aliens, or some kind of entity that's not human, may have always been here, as opposed to visiting from another planet.
Might even have a spiritual dimension.
So he thinks maybe he could be here, could be in the oceans, could have always been here, hiding in Antarctica maybe, I don't know.
But then there's this related story.
That says scientists are, they think they can decode whale language.
So they might be able to use AI to decode the complexity of the whale sounds and figure out their language.
Yeah.
So, and then they think that if they could learn whale language, it might teach them how to make a universal communicator so that AI could someday allow us to communicate with aliens.
Have you put it all together yet?
Have you connected the dots?
Yeah.
I think the cat's on the roof.
They're trying to slowly break it to us that whales are aliens and they might have ships.
Now you've got to have some good technology to cart a whale's ass around in a spaceship.
But apparently they have the good stuff, anti-gravity.
So yeah, whales are aliens and they may have already Decided to conquer us because I don't know if you would know the history of humans and whales, but I hope the whales don't know it.
You're going to be really pissed.
Have you heard of whale oil?
Don't ask.
Don't ask.
All right.
I'm so old that you know how things change.
And when you think back what you used to think was true, you're like, oh my God, how did we think that was true when we were kids?
So dumb.
Here's some of the things I believed.
Oh, probably two years ago.
Two years ago, I thought maybe we had too much population on the planet.
So population growth was a problem.
And I thought we had a shortage of lithium.
But Elon Musk has set us straight.
We have too few people.
We need more or else the economy will collapse.
And as he posted yesterday, I think, lithium is one of the most common elements on earth.
Building lithium refineries is the hard part.
That's what we need.
But lithium is everywhere.
How many of you were in the same boat that just a few years ago you thought we had too many people and not enough lithium?
But turns out we have unlimited lithium and not enough people.
Is there anything we know that's true?
The most basic things you thought you knew about reality.
Nope!
Totally opposite.
Not enough people.
Plenty of lithium.
How many of you saw the most bizarre interview ever of Tucker Carlson interviewing Kevin Spacey But Kevin Spacey did it with the character, the political character he played in that long-running Netflix series whose name I can't remember.
But he played a kind of a dirty politician.
So he did the whole interview in character.
Now, you might say to yourself, Kevin Spacey?
I thought he got metooed or he got blamed for some terrible sex crimes with men.
And weren't there multiple claims?
How in the world is he being rehabilitated?
I thought he was a goner.
House of Cards was the name of the show.
Yeah, he was on House of Cards.
But it turns out that... Now, this is just what I see on the X platform.
I'll need a fact check, because I'm not positive this is true.
Is it true that there were four accusers of Kevin Spacey?
I think they were all male.
And three of them died suspiciously.
So those cases went away, and one of them dropped the charges?
Is that true?
The three out of the four people accusing him died suspiciously, and one dropped the charges?
I don't know if that's true.
It feels too like on the nose or something, right?
That couldn't be true.
All right, I'm going to say I don't quite believe it yet.
But I'll say it's a story on social media.
I'm not sure I believe it.
I'm going to need a little more convincing on that one.
Better source, I guess.
But there's also a report that there's a partial Epstein flight list.
Is that real?
Because I saw a few accounts that seem to show as they seem to be showing lists of people who went to Epstein Island.
I don't know if those are real.
They were supposed to be released about now, but I don't want to mention anybody on it because it looks like it might be bullshit.
Is it real?
Does anybody know?
Do we actually have the list?
It's fake?
So that list that we're seeing is one that's been out for years, which we don't know if it necessarily matches the real list, right?
So we're going to call that one BS.
However, On the BS low credibility you-shouldn't-believe-it list is Kevin Spacey's name.
Now here's what you should look for if we should ever confirm that we know who flew with him.
Look for people who are, let's say, famous celebrities who are unusually politically active.
That's what I'd be looking for.
All right, but we have to wait to make sure that it's a real list, so we don't know if Kevin Spacey was ever on anything like that.
That would be a rumor.
There's a story that there's a big rise in threats to public officials.
Can you believe it?
Can you believe that our elected officials are getting more death threats than ever?
Is that because the public got worse?
I don't think so.
Maybe there's a reason.
One of my favorite comics of all time was, I can't remember the cartoonist.
I don't think the cartoon runs anymore.
It was a single panel comic and it showed a guy in jail.
And he was talking to his bunkmate, and he had, you know, scratched a bunch of scratches on the wall, and he was counting them up.
And he was talking about his own experience, and the prisoner says, 19 arrests, 19 convictions.
Maybe it's me.
And I've been laughing about that for like 40 years.
Maybe it's me.
19 arrests, 19 convictions.
I'm starting to think the problem's on my side.
So yeah, there are more death threats of public figures.
Is that because the public got worse?
Or is there an unmistakable pattern of bad behavior that would certainly suggest there would be more death threats?
I'm gonna go with the latter.
I feel like we know too much about government now.
We're like a little bit smarter.
Our eyes are a little bit more opened.
And maybe they're worse.
Maybe they're worse than they've ever been.
But I would certainly expect more death threats given our current situation.
Not that I encourage them.
I don't encourage that.
So don't make any death threats.
But if the government is wondering why there are so many, maybe they should examine their own behavior.
Maybe.
Consider all possibilities.
Well, I saw an interesting and provocative post by Naval Ravikant.
And he has a way of saying things in a very succinct way.
And he said this, Argentina may prove that you can vote your way out of poverty.
And then he shows some stats of South American countries and their poverty levels.
And it is very clear That it's a political problem and not a resource problem.
You can see that when the political leadership changes, the economy just either goes to the toilet or does well.
And it seems to be one-to-one.
So Argentina has their new pro-capitalist president.
He was doing a lot of stuff and cutting departments and stuff.
I would bet on Argentina recovering.
I would say the smart money says Argentina is going to go well.
And here's the thing.
Sometimes it's just about energy.
So the new president of Argentina brings in this reformist energy, which makes people say, oh, I'm optimistic now because of all that reformist energy.
Oh, he did something in the news that looks like a big deal.
He got rid of some departments or something.
Oh, reformist energy.
So then because there's reformist energy, people create their own energy.
And that becomes a self-fulfilling issue.
So it will be partly what he does, the new president, but partly how people feel about it.
And apparently people are feeling good about it.
So, good news from Argentina, which may be spread to other places.
Well, Zero Hedge is reporting that what is becoming evident is that the NGOs, the non-government organizations, These are the organizations that usually rich people have funded, but are not directly controlled by anybody's government.
So they're like little governments, but non-government, because there's some rich person allowing them to do what they do.
Rich people, usually.
And apparently these NGOs are now well known to be the organizers of the mass immigration that's happening in America and probably elsewhere.
So it's organized.
It's not just that they made it, let's say, comfortable for people who are going to immigrate anyway.
They actually created an entire travel network to inform people how to go and then help them immigrate from everywhere in the world.
Now, this had nothing to do with the American government, but has a gigantic impact on the health of the United States.
So it's not a country, they're non-government organizations.
It might be people from different countries in some cases.
Now, how should we respond to that?
Well, if it's just a non-government organization doing legal stuff, then I guess it's all legal.
In fact, you can find out, you can get their documents, you can find their maps, you can find out their whole plans.
And they're doing exactly what I said.
They've created a whole platform to make it easy for people to leave where they are and end up in America and survive.
Now, my first problem with that is the following.
One of the things I've always liked about American illegal immigration, and even legal immigration, is that it was hard to get to America.
It was hard to get in legally.
You had to be qualified and know how to jump through all the hoops.
You had to be able to afford a plane ticket, depending where you're coming from.
So the people we would get are people who would cross a very high bar.
They could figure out how to get here, they could go through all the complications to do it, and they were high enough educated quality that the country said, oh yeah, we like people like you.
But what happens, and then also for the people coming over the southern border, they were unusually risk-taking people, because they didn't necessarily know how they were going to make it work.
I like those people.
But here's the problem.
What happens if it's so easy, it's just easier to leave than it is to stay?
Now you've reversed it.
If it's easier to stay than it is to leave, you've got a natural filter.
So you get all the risk-taking, high-quality people who can do this difficult thing, getting here.
Now you make it so easy, and where you are is so bad, That the laziest, lowest qualified people say, hey, I might as well get on this bus, it's free.
Might take me somewhere better.
So, didn't we just reverse the best thing about immigration?
That it got us the people who could pass the filter, and now the filter's reversed, and we're getting the people who couldn't make it in their own country, and probably can't make it as easily in our country as The people who had a harder time getting past the filter.
So that's bad.
But I'd like to add this following thought.
Is there a reason we can't kill the NGO leaders under the rules of war?
Wouldn't we just have to declare this an illegal invasion and part of a war?
And then we could kill them, couldn't we?
No, I don't think we should just go murder the people in the NGOs.
That would be kind of crazy.
I'm not saying that.
I'm saying we should create a legal process in which we designate the NGOs as terrorist organizations.
Because they seem to be working diligently for the destruction of the United States.
What would you call that?
Well, you'd say, well, they're not doing anything violent.
And I would say, they're shipping in Military-aged people that we don't know.
How does that not end up with more violence than there would have been if they hadn't done it?
Of course there are.
So I would say we should at least examine designated the NGOs as terrorist organizations or paramilitary or military supporting or funding of terrorists or something like that.
And then we should give them warning, plenty of warning, Because you don't want to kill anybody you don't need to kill.
Say, look, if you keep organizing these immigrants, we're actually going to kill you.
Wherever you are, in any country, wherever you are, you're just going to get mowed down.
And we're not going to apologize.
Because you're ruining our country.
No.
You don't think we should be able to murder the heads of the NGOs?
Legally, it should be under a legal umbrella with lots of warning.
Because America is being destroyed.
That's not hyperbole.
There is some level of immigration that guarantees the destruction of America, and the NGOs are heading toward that limit.
I don't know if we're there yet.
I think we're below that limit, but we're heading there as quickly as possible.
I say you have to kill the people behind it.
But give them warning, and do it under a legal structure.
Certainly nothing illegal.
Has anybody ever said that?
I don't know how you just let them do it.
So, but, and whoever funds it probably should be looked at as well.
Oh, here's something interesting.
Let's see if we can figure it out.
You've heard that there is excess death rates in the United States, but here's the weird thing.
So the pandemic is over, and there's still these excess death rates.
So you're going to say, oh, it's the vaccination.
Oh, it's this or that.
Here's what we know.
Apparently it's across all demographics in the United States, and it's not as severe in Europe.
Is that enough to tell us what it is?
Think about it.
It's all demographics, but not so much in Europe.
Can we figure it out from there?
Nobody's figured it out.
Let's see if we can.
So here's what I think it would not be.
If it's all demographics, I would say it's not lifestyle.
Because there wasn't that much of a lifestyle change that would affect all the demographics the same.
So I'm going to rule out a lifestyle change such as staying home too much, less active, etc.
I don't think the diet changed.
I don't think the diet changed in one year or two.
Did it?
We'll get the vaccines.
I don't think diet changed.
And even if it did, you would see that in some demographics more than others.
Because I think we have some demographics that don't eat the same as others, right?
I don't think seniors eat the same as young people.
Young people don't eat the same as... So we should have demographics that are not having the problem, if it's food.
Because it wouldn't be everything you eat everywhere all at the same time.
It'd be like some element of the food, the food would be bad and you'd see it in some demographic more than others.
So I don't think it's food.
I don't think it's anything that affects all of us all the time.
So if it's not our lifestyle and it's not the food, what about the COVID itself?
Well, Europe had COVID and we had COVID, but Europe is doing better.
So it's the same COVID.
So it's probably not COVID hangover.
And then your obvious question is the vaccinations.
But I don't know this for sure, but I strongly suggest that the vaccination status would be the main thing people are looking at.
It's so obvious.
So don't you think that we would know by now if the unvaccinated were a demographic group that we're doing fine?
Don't you think?
If we really knew that unvaccinated people just weren't having this excess death rate, wouldn't we know that by now?
I feel like we would, because it's the most obvious thing you look at, right?
I don't think it's more sugar, because that didn't change much.
So I don't think it's food.
I don't think it's big pharma.
I don't think it's just that we got fatter, although we did, because that doesn't happen fast enough.
What do you think of this?
All right, I've got two hypotheses that I don't have a lot of confidence in.
But the fact that it's across all demographics, that's the sketchy part.
Here's what I think.
Number one, it's a data collection problem.
So either Europe is doing a bad job of collecting death data, Or the U.S.
changed their mechanism or is doing a better job or a different job.
So if I had to guess, the fact that it's across all demographics and it doesn't affect Europe as much, that strongly suggests the data is just wrong.
That maybe we changed the way we collect it or something like that.
Yeah.
So here's one possibility.
It's a bad data collection.
Some kind of change that affected all the way everybody does it, maybe.
But I feel like we'd know that.
Don't you think we'd know that by now?
Don't you think somebody would have said, hey, the data collection changed?
I feel like that would have bubbled up.
So probably not that.
But there is one thing that affects all people in America in a way that doesn't affect Europe.
What is it?
What is something that does seem unique to America that's not affecting Europe as much?
As much?
Loneliness.
Loneliness.
Now that's a hypothesis that Europe has a different culture and may simply be more social.
Is that true?
Would you say that Europe is simply more social?
I don't know if that's true.
But if they are, that would explain it.
Because we do have a loneliness problem in the United States, and it's the only thing I can think of that is across all demographics.
Every demographic is lonelier.
Our shutdown in the pandemic apparently made a big difference to our permanent habits.
So another story in the news is that people are not using their cars as much.
We have the same number, we actually have more cars than we had before the pandemic.
So the number of cars went up, but the miles driven dropped like a rock.
Do you think that miles driven dropping like a rock is entirely work related?
Some of it is.
So a lot of people are working at home, So that increases your loneliness.
You have more, you know, the technology is better all the time, so that increases your options.
Humans are worth less to each other.
I think it's loneliness and the depression that comes with it.
Anybody want to offer another alternative?
What do you think it is?
Is it Pharma, food, obesity, data, vaccination, dehydration, alcohol.
Well, Americans, oh, relative to that, so I think Americans are drinking way less, or actually, maybe the ones who are drinking are drinking more, but there are a few people drinking at all, more people quitting, so they're less social.
All right, let me ask you this question of all of you.
You ready?
Do we have a problem here in Locals?
Looks like the locals' comments are having a problem, so I'm going to open up the locals' comments on my other device.
That usually works.
All right, just a moment.
Where am I?
Hold on just a second.
There we go.
All right.
Yes, I have your comments now on my other device.
Can you see me?
I think you can see me, but the comments are delayed.
All right.
So I got all your comments now.
There was a change in data.
Media, psyops.
Yeah, maybe.
Hey, John, you're kind of an asshole.
I just want to tell you that for Christmas.
A guy named John.
You're a total asshole.
Thanks.
Thanks for joining.
Quitting alcohol is the best thing you've done for yourself.
Good.
All right.
Well, we've already ruled out the vaccination.
Because I think that would have been noticed.
Yeah, I don't know if it's depression.
But here's a question I was going to ask.
Let me look at the comments.
The question is this.
How many of you have increased loneliness since before the pandemic?
How many of you have increased in loneliness?
I'm seeing lots of no's, but there are lots of yes's.
I don't know.
Oh, my God.
Sorry about that.
Yeah, some people got widowed.
Uh, yep.
So some of it is, yeah, loneliness and retirement and all that other stuff.
Okay.
Oh, we got our comments back.
Well, that's my guess.
All right, here's a Sam Altman prediction.
So he was bragging about his prediction.
He said 27 months ago, he made the following prediction.
He said that by 2030, so now just six years away, it will become clear that the AI revolution and renewable plus nuclear energy are going to get us there, which is near zero cost for intelligence and energy.
Near zero.
So what Sam Altman is talking about is, I think, Fusion made some breakthroughs, and there are a lot of green energy breakthroughs.
And now you have the AI breakthrough, which he suggests, and he said in a comment, that at some point, ChatGPT will be free, except for the newest version.
So you'll be able to get a really, really useful free one.
But if you want the really, really useful one, maybe that's connected to more services or something, you pay a few bucks a month.
So at some point, most people will have free AI.
Just think about that.
Free AI.
It won't be the best you can buy, but you know, for 20 bucks a month, you probably get that too.
And then we're heading toward free energy.
So the answer to your question, what do you do about a national debt that is so high you can't even imagine any scenario in which it would be paid back?
Free energy would get you there.
If energy approached to free, then the cost of all products would drop and suddenly everything gets fixed.
So it is a once in a civilization change.
Only once in all of human civilization will energy costs go from real expensive to almost free.
Only once.
It will never happen again.
But only once have we run up debt that looks impossible to pay off.
Luckily, it happened at the same time.
This is one of the things that makes me think we're in a simulation.
Like, how could that be?
How could it be a coincidence That the one time you have a crushing impossible to pay off debt, you have a once in a ever, in the history of the universe, ever, this, you know, one time change in energy prices.
Kind of lucky.
People got lucky.
All right.
Yeah, people are staying home more, blah blah.
So, Wall Street Journal says that kids are preferring YouTube to all other forms of entertainment.
I'm going to echo that, although I'm no kid.
Have all of you noticed that if you turn on YouTube, you'll find something very interesting to watch every single time?
Have you ever noticed that?
It works every time.
If I have some free time and I open up YouTube, no question about it, There are going to be five to ten things that it suggests, all of which interest me.
Now go anywhere else.
X actually works that way.
When I go on X, I'm always entertained.
It's really, really strange if I don't have an entertaining time on X. But if I open Netflix, what are my percentage odds?
Not that good.
Maybe one in three?
That I'll find something I want to watch.
At most.
One in four.
And that's the same for all the streaming services.
At one point I just signed up for all the streaming services.
Like I just had every one of them.
And I could not find anything to watch.
Once I got the YouTube Premium service, where there's no commercials, I always, always have something fun to watch.
YouTube is just killing everything else.
There's no... And here's why.
I don't want to spend a whole bunch of time looking for what I want to watch.
And Netflix is just a nightmare.
And if you have more than one streaming service, you can't remember where you stopped watching one thing.
How many times... Have you ever done this?
You have more than one streaming service.
You'll watch a show and you watch a few episodes.
You say, Hey, this will be my new thing.
I'll watch the rest of these.
And then you can't remember which streaming service it was on.
And then you get frustrated because you're looking for it and it's not in the first three you try.
And then you just give up and you never watch it again.
Yeah.
It's not just me.
Apparently it's not just me.
Yeah.
I give up on most of the things I try to watch, even when I like them, because I can't figure out where the next episode is.
And it frustrates me, because I sit down, and if I spend 10 minutes looking for something to watch, I'm going to give up.
I'm literally just going to change my mind, and say, well, that was my 10 minutes.
I didn't have half an hour.
I had 10 minutes.
And I spent the whole time looking for something.
So you go to Amazon, and it's like, Oh, yeah, or not Amazon, but YouTube.
Oh, there it is.
And also a lot of the content is ten minutes.
So I can see ten minutes of something from beginning to end without looking for it.
There's no competition.
YouTube is just gonna own everything.
Well, apparently there's an Egypt plan for solving the Gaza situation, in which they do a, in broad terms, They would end the war with Israel and Hamas with a ceasefire, a phased hostage release, and then the creation of a Palestinian government of experts who would administer to the Gaza Strip an occupied West Bank.
So the plan would include a different kind of government for the West Bank in addition to Gaza, which is probably important.
You know, having Gaza different than the West Bank It's good that they're talking about it.
Wouldn't it be nice to have one?
And the proposal worked out with the Gulf of Nations of Qatar that's been presented, blah, blah, blah.
But it falls short of Israel's goal of crushing Hamas, so we don't think it'll happen.
It's good that they're talking about it.
Now, yesterday there was a brief social media bit that I can't find in the news, so I think it's not true that Saudi Arabia had a plan for administering the West Bank and Gaza.
Yeah.
Is that true or not true?
Did anybody see a story about that?
It was briefly on social media, but I didn't see a source.
I think it's not true.
But I'm going to double down and say that the smartest thing that Saudi Arabia could do is offer to administer the region with With Israel in charge of all the security.
Because it would make Saudi Arabia the adult in the room.
And it would position them in the strongest position, not only to oppose Iran.
Because remember, Iran wanted to scuttle the growing closeness between Saudi and Israel and the other countries.
So it really was about thwarting the Saudi from becoming more integrated with Israel and the West.
So the best way you could defeat Iran's intentions and Hamas's intentions is to make sure that when, as soon as you're done, the other countries that were trying to stop getting together are not just getting together, but more getting together than they ever were contemplating before.
So that there's a real, it really didn't work.
You got to make sure that Iran thinks, oh crap, that didn't work.
Right?
So they're not tempted to do it again.
So, I think maybe a Saudi involvement would be the right answer, but I don't see any kind of answer where the Palestinians are governing themselves.
I just don't see it.
Now, as someone pointed out to me this morning, you have all these brainwashed young people in the West Bank and Gaza.
How in the world do you fix that?
An entire youth group completely brainwashed to just want to kill Israelis and Jews and whatever.
Can you fix it?
I'm going to give you a weird optimistic answer to that question.
Number one.
Here's the number one persuasion rule you need to know.
It is way easier to brainwash a young person.
Old people can be brainwashed.
But it takes more work because they're more settled in their opinions.
You really have to unsettle their opinion before you can change it.
Young people are starting with no real opinion and certainly not strongly held.
So you can brainwash them easily.
You can make them believe in Santa Claus, anything.
Right?
So that's what happened.
So now you've got this all this weaponized, you know, million or so young people who are weaponized.
So how in the world do you solve that?
Well, I don't know if it's solvable, but you could imagine a scenario in which, let's say, Saudi or somebody else had control of all of the education system.
So somebody had real tight control of the curriculum and what the teachers were telling the kids.
Then, you just reprogram them.
Now, you'd have to get the 20-somethings because they're already out of school, but you can get them.
So here's the good news.
Remember I told you it's simple to brainwash young people?
It's really simple to un-brainwash them.
Do you know what's easy to convince a young person?
There's nothing easier to convince a 20-something or a teenager than the following statement.
You ready for this?
When I tell you how easy it is, you're going to laugh.
It's the easiest un-brainwashing you'll ever do.
Ready?
Here it comes.
The adults were lying to you.
That's it.
That's it.
And you're done.
You just have to explain what they lied to you about.
And that's it.
Young people, especially men.
All right.
Let's put this to the men.
All right.
Because it's the men who are doing the fighting for the most part.
So we'll just say to the men.
Don't you think you could be easily convinced that your adult, you know, your elders have been lying to you all along about anything?
About anything.
Just pick a topic and I tell you your elders were lying to you.
You think I could sell that to young people?
It's the easiest thing.
There's nothing easier.
They're already primed for it.
It's easy to convince somebody of something they're already primed to believe.
So if you already believed in ghosts, it would be really easy to tell you that I saw one, and you'd believe it.
But if you didn't believe in ghosts, well, good luck, right?
I'm not really going to convince you I saw one if you don't believe they're real.
But young people, specifically young men, are all ready to believe that everybody's lying.
It's the single most believable thing when you're a young male that you've been lied to.
So you just take that approach.
You don't say, oh, here's a better way.
You say, no, they were all illegitimate.
You know those Hamas leaders that were in charge of your education before?
They all became billionaires.
What?
Yeah, they all became billionaires.
It was never real.
It was just a plot to brainwash you.
You know how long it would take to unbrainwash a young person?
Under those conditions, a reasonable person comes in and said, you know, I had to tell you, it was all an op.
They were just brainwashing you so that they could get billions of dollars in power.
And really most of what they told you wasn't even true.
A young person, you can flip them in 10 minutes.
So if you're thinking, oh, there's no way you can unbrainwash all those young people, 10 minutes.
10 minutes.
Yep, you can un-brainwash every one of them.
Now, can you un-brainwash their parents?
Good luck.
Good luck with that.
That's going to be harder.
Way, way harder.
But the kids?
The 20-somethings?
Yeah, you can get every one of them.
Every one of them.
All right.
Bill Ackman, still going hard at the president of Harvard who refused to quit.
And I guess the board refused to fire her.
But now he says, Bill Ackman says, I have heard from a source that is reliable, but a step or two removed from the situation, that the Harvard Corporation has asked President Gates to resign.
And she has refused.
Who could have seen this coming?
I wonder what she did instead of agreeing to resign.
Huh.
Does it involve hiring a lawyer?
And then the source said that she hired a lawyer and she's gonna sue.
Okay?
A little bit dependable.
A little bit dependable.
Now, let me ask you this.
If you were a white man, and you thought, where should I go to, you know, go get a job?
Did you really have a chance of getting a job as president of Harvard this latest time?
You really didn't, did you?
Do you think you should stay away from situations in which you have a natural disadvantage and try to find situations where you have some kind of natural advantage?
I would.
So I wouldn't go anywhere where you're in physical danger or where other people have a competitive edge against you in hiring.
I wouldn't go any of those two places.
I guess I wouldn't have been cancelled if I'd said that.
But that's basically what I said.
Basically.
All right.
The polls are saying, according to The Hill, they looked at a whole bunch of polls, 507 polls, and they found that Trump is leading by over 2% against Biden.
Now that's, remember, that's 2% in the general election.
And Republicans win elections without winning the general, you know, the general vote.
They just have to win in the key states.
So that would suggest that Trump probably has like an overwhelming advantage in winning the election.
Because if he's two points ahead in the general, that would be better than basically any Republican has done since Reagan?
Give me a history fact check.
When was the last time, if ever, a Republican won the election and also won the popular vote?
When's the last time?
Oh, was that Bush?
No.
George Bush?
Did George Bush Jr.
win the popular vote?
Bush in 04?
All right.
Well, it does happen.
But so far, it has accurately predicted, you know, anywhere that a Republican won the popular vote, they also won the election, right?
Is that right?
Let's check that.
Every time the Republican won the popular vote, they also won the election.
True?
And won it handily.
If they won the popular vote, they didn't just win the election, they won it, like, really popular.
They won it by a lot, right?
I think that's true.
So we have a situation that guarantees civil war because either Trump wins and the bad guys create a civil war to stop it or Trump loses and his supporters start a civil war because it looks rigged.
It's hard to avoid the civil war this time, isn't it?
Now I'm using hyperbole.
I don't think there'll be a civil war.
I don't think there's a civil war either way.
I think we just complain a lot and do what we can in courts, like always.
So you know that weight loss drug that's a big deal?
You get the injections.
I think Ozempic is one.
But there are others in the same category.
And apparently they really, really work.
And people lose weight.
But believe it or not, this is the conversation that's happening.
Whether or not these shots should be considered a lifetime treatment.
Because apparently, as soon as people stop taking the shots, two-thirds of them gain back all the weight in a year.
Two-thirds.
So, the medical community is debating whether it should be treated like diabetes, which is, once you have it, you have it.
So, it's lifetime.
You know, like high blood pressure.
Once you have it, you have it.
So, you just always take the blood pressure pills.
Now, is everybody okay with that?
Isn't there something wrong with this reasoning by analogy?
All right.
So it's permanent for diabetes and hypertension.
Now, obviously if you're, if you somehow show it as non-diabetic or you somehow show it as no longer having hypertension, they'd stop.
But generally speaking, the assumption is you're just doing it forever.
Isn't that different than eating?
Because I'm almost positive people can eat less, like by, you know, if they could eat less.
If you lost a bunch of weight with Ozempic, and then you got off it, so your hunger came back, it's not impossible for you to find another way to stop eating, is it?
Like a diet?
You know, the way everybody else does it?
Now, I don't do fat shaming, because I don't believe in free will.
But since it's a real thing that people can keep weight off with their own drugs, shouldn't you always take them off it after a year?
Am I wrong about that?
I would think that 100% of the time, you say, I'm going to do this for, let's say, two years.
You're going to do this for two years, and then we're absolutely taking you off the drug.
Now, if two years later, it looks like you couldn't handle it, we'll talk about putting you back on.
But we're going to have to take you off it.
To see if you have any chance at all of maintaining your weight.
Shouldn't that be the rule?
That you're guaranteed to get off it?
Well, we'll watch it.
And if, you know, if you can't figure out how to do it on your own, we'll have to put you back on.
Because the drug itself can't be completely safe.
Is it?
Anyway.
So there's a, there's a movement now, there's a book by Let's see, book by Jones.
Somebody named Jones.
He was talking about the white supremacy founding of the country and wants to remind us that the original exploration of the, at least of white people, by the Americas was super, super racist, which I didn't actually know.
So here's something maybe you didn't know.
This author, Talks about the Doctrine of Discovery.
So back in 1493, back in Columbus days, the Pope put out a Doctrine of Discovery that said any land not inhabited by Christians was available to be, quote, discovered, claimed, and exploited by the Christian rulers.
Did you know that?
Did you know that the Christians believed that if they found land that wasn't run by Christians, they could conquer it?
Because they were Christians.
What's that sound like?
Doesn't that sound a little bit like the radical Islamic thing going on right now?
All right, so the Catholic faith and Christian religions could be exalted and spread everywhere because we were the good ones, I guess.
And it became the basis of all European claims in the Americas, that it was basically a Christian right, basically, to take over anything that wasn't already Christian.
That sounds worse than anything I've heard America do yet.
That's pretty bad.
Yeah.
Boy.
Was it... I think I saw Vivek Ramaswamy saying that, you know, he sort of understands why people want to tear down statues of slave owners.
Right?
You might not agree with it, but it's not without an argument.
It's not without an argument.
Slave owner.
Is that the message we want to send?
But as Vivek says, why don't we replace them with people who are the opposite of slave owners?
And he mentioned two people in particular.
President John Adams and President John Quincy Adams, who apparently were not slave owners and worked very hard against the evil of slavery.
So we do have presidents in the same era as the slave owners.
We're working very hard on the opposite side of things to try to free slaves and give them legal representation and everything else.
So why not build a statute to my relatives?
How about that, huh?
Didn't see that coming.
My cousins, the Adams presidents.
I just assume I'm related somewhere down the line.
I'm not descended from them, but I might be a cousin of some kind.
Well, Michael Schellenberger has a fascinating, again, article about how the color revolution methods that our government has used in other countries, they used it against America to defeat Trump.
So the color revolution is when you do a bunch of non-violent things which collectively destabilize a country.
So it could be processes in the street, it could be lawfare, It could be anything that's legal, but would destabilize the country.
That's the color revolution.
And as Michael Schellenberger points out, the Democrats had previously proposed in both 2016 and 2020, no hold on, as his publication Public reported, I'll just read what he said, on Wednesday,
Political operatives and journalists, these are Americans, held a summit called the Transition Integrity Project, or the TIP, in 2020.
So now a bunch of important Democrats got together in 2020, and during that they did simulated exercises in which the players plotted how to challenge the election results in the event of a Trump victory.
Just think about that.
Trump is maybe going to go to jail, or not be on the ballot, or challenging an election.
And the Democrats were planning to challenge him if he won, even if it was a legal victory.
They were planning to challenge it.
And we know that, it's documented.
The exact thing they're blaming him of, they were planning to do.
Very much planning it.
I mean, really, really planning it.
All right.
Here's the punchline.
In one of their simulations, they had states send alternate slates of electors.
That's right.
They actually did role play and war games in which they did what Trump tried to do with the alternate electors.
And then when Trump did it instead of them, they tried to put him in jail for it.
So the very thing that they war-gamed that they were going to do as soon as Trump did it, and by the way, they tried to do it in earlier elections as well, so it was a very common thing.
They actually got their illegitimate media to sell it as an insurrection so they could put Trump in jail.
The very thing that they knew was legal because they'd done it before, and so legal that they even war-gamed it and documented it.
As a thing to do.
Amazing.
And then Michael Sullenberger says the Democrats quote insurrection narrative rests on manipulative arguments and cynical language games.
And this narrative has been used to destroy foundation of our democracy.
The right to vote for the candidate of your choice.
Now.
This is a case of everything is exactly as bad and rotten as you thought it was.
It couldn't be more of a worst-case scenario, and apparently it's all documented.
It's as true as anything's ever been true.
It's all documented.
Let me say it again.
Trump will not be kept out of the election.
He will not be jailed.
And he will not be prevented from running.
You know why?
Because that's too far.
That's just too far.
There is a line, and in case Democrats are wondering where the line is, there might be other lines, but that's definitely a line.
Yeah, if you keep him from winning using a trick, I can't predict what happens after that.
I never suggest violence, of course, but things are going to get real unpredictable if that were to happen.
So I almost can guarantee you it won't happen, because the risk that Democrats would be putting themselves to would actually be existential.
That would be an existential risk, meaning the whole thing could fall apart.
So I don't think that's going to happen because I think nobody would take that kind of risk.
But Democrats might be thinking they're fighting for their lives.
You know, there might be somebody, well, lots of people, so crooked that they fear a Trump presidency because he might actually put the crooks in jail and they're going to have to act in a way that's like trying to protect their own life.
So I do hope his security service is up to the job.
All right.
I saw a post by Mike Cervic that the energy felt bad and he was feeling a sort of negative cloud coming.
I don't feel it.
I actually feel like we're in an awakening and that the awakening will be bumpy and won't be easy.
But that is where we had to go.
So what I feel is a huge destabilization, and I think maybe that's what Mike is feeling.
There's a level of destabilization that I've never seen before.
We're definitely destabilized and things are definitely going to change.
But here's my being too American part.
If there's one thing that Americans are good at, consistently good at, and nothing's changed, like we're still those same people, we're really good at breaking our ship and then fixing it.
Breaking is the hard part.
Sometimes you got to break it or else you can't build it back.
We're experiencing a great breaking, meaning that everything we were doing before stopped working.
Right?
Everything that used to work just stopped working.
So we had to wait until it broke before we could really fix it.
And you had to push it a little bit too.
And now you're seeing things breaking everywhere.
Remember DEI and the ESG stuff?
It was just sort of rolling along.
And we had to break it before it could be put back together in a better way.
So yeah, I see a whole bunch of things that were just sort of rolling along that now just have to be broken.
I feel far and away more positive forces than negative forces are forming.
That's my feeling.
Just a hunch.
But I think you can feel good this Christmas.
I think you can feel good.
To me, it feels like Ukraine is winding down because it has to.
I think Israel did what it needed to do, and the situation that was in Israel was unsustainable.
It had to break.
But first, something terrible had to happen before you could do the extreme thing needed to do to maybe get something stable.
This was it.
It was an extreme thing.
Nobody wanted it to happen, but it did.
So now they have a chance of building something stable.
Maybe with Saudi or somebody else having some role.
We'll see.
I see two wars that are likely to wind down.
I don't see a war with China starting.
I see China on the decline.
I see Russia sort of should stay kind of stable once Ukraine winds down.
And Energy's trending toward free, and AI is coming, and robots are going to save us.
I don't know.
I see a lot of positives.
Now, keep your eye on Argentina, because Naval's comment is way deeper than you think it is, because he says it so succinctly.
But if Argentina, quote, proves you can vote yourself out of poverty, that might change everything.
Might change everything.
If, by Election Day, Argentina has already started to turn around, I think Trump gets elected easily.
Don't you?
Don't you think Argentina is a referendum on Trump?
It's also a referendum on Vivek.
Because Vivek has ideas that seem as, let's say, bold.
I'm going to say bold.
As Argentina.
My cable management is, yeah it is.
I do have cable, I have terrible cable management, you're true.
Yeah.
It's not bad enough yet?
Maybe.
I think it is.
No way.
Someone stole your cat last year and you just received a box with your cat in it?
That did not happen.
Are you serious?
Somebody sold your cat and they gave it back to you on Christmas?
Did that really happen?
I want to see if that's really happened.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Probably a different cat.
Yeah, we're asking if it was dead or alive.
It was alive?
Huh.
Thank you.
Thank you.
You're worried about Vivek because he's too charismatic.
You know, that is the problem with smart people.
One of the things that Trump does best is he acts less smart than he is.
Have you ever noticed that?
One of Trump's greatest magic tricks is to convince you he's not as smart as he is, because then you feel comfortable with him.
Vivek has the other problem.
He's so obviously smarter than all of us that you wonder if he's got a trick up his sleeve, right?
There is an automatic distrust for smart people.
Bill Gates has this.
Now, I'm not going to defend Bill Gates.
He can defend himself.
But I'm saying that even if he had never done anything wrong, and I'm not saying that, I'm just saying if he had never done anything wrong, it's hard to trust him because he's too smart.
I think Elon Musk has that problem too.
That if you don't like what he's doing, you worry because he's too smart.
Too smart is scary to most people.
So you need to be too smart, but also clearly empathetic.
So the thing that Vivek has to do, is make sure that he is communicating his empathy with the same power as his capability.
If he gets his capability higher than his empathy, he looks like a monster.
If he gets his empathy up to the level of his capability, it's called charisma.
Do you get that?
It's a very important point, by the way.
Let me say it again because it's so important.
If his capability is higher than his empathy, he'll look like a monster.
Because he's capable of doing anything, But you're not sure he's on your team because he doesn't have the empathy.
But if he gets his empathy to the same level as his capability, which is extraordinary, you're going to say to yourself, Oh, we can't have anybody else.
You will become, uh, you will become, what's the word?
Just guaranteed.
If his empathy, and I don't think it does yet, by the way, the reason, the reason you're afraid of him is that he doesn't, hasn't done it yet.
His empathy has not achieved the same level of his capability, but not because he doesn't have empathy.
It's exactly because his capability is so fucking high.
It's really hard to get that much empathy, even if you have plenty of empathy, because he's just operating at such a high level.
If he gets it there, and he could easily, this is more of a communication thing than a real thing.
If he just tweaks his communication to get his empathy to the same level, it's magic.
Have you seen the viral videos of Vivek, I'm going to say, turning a critic in the audience?
I've seen two of them so far.
I think there might be more.
But in both cases, the way he turned his critic was he said, I'll give you the microphone and let you talk.
And let his critic fully express everything.
And then where he could find places of agreement, he would agree strongly.
And then without losing any empathy, he would tell you why his version actually shows the most empathy.
And once he had done that, because the person had talked themselves out in both cases, they realized that he was coming from a place of empathy, not a place of technical, you know, Republicans like this.
It was actually Derived from an empathy position.
Now, that's not obvious.
It's not obvious that all of Evake's policies are empathy based.
It's just that he thinks capitalism fixes your problem better than socialism or communism.
And he thinks, you know, the truth works better than a lie.
Right?
So he's definitely has an empathy first
Approach it's just that he knows they have to go through a certain path to get to the best outcome and not everybody knows that So he looks a little off model because people are not as smart as he is about how you get to the best place but given his level of capability Could he ever bring his his perceived empathy because it's perception his perceived empathy to up to up to his actual empathy and
Where his capability is.
If he does that, he goes supernova.
Supernova.
Now, I would say that's what Trump gets right.
One of the things that makes Trump so popular is that his empathy for regular Americans is through the roof.
Would you agree?
I've never seen anybody more consistently, and here's the key, genuinely.
Trump is full of shit about a lot of stuff.
But if he doesn't genuinely have empathy for the, let's say, middle class of America, that would be the greatest trick ever, because he looks completely consistent.
Everything he does in person, every little act of kindness, every word he picks, every policy he picks, they all seem to be consistent with a genuine empathy for Americans, like ordinary Americans.
So I think when the Democrats pick up what they call the cult, you know what the cult is?
He showed empathy.
That's it.
They called him a cult because he showed genuine empathy.
Like the real kind.
Like, I think it's real.
And believe me, I'll be the first one to tell you Trump is a showman.
I'll be the first person to say he uses hyperbole.
The first person to tell you he doesn't pass all the fact checks.
No, no argument about any of that, but he has completely sold me, after decades and decades of total consistency, the average Americans he really loves.
And also, the other thing he sells me on is, I love his pirate ship.
I call his supporters a pirate ship, because it's all these, you know, a whole lot of ne'er-do-wells and, you know, controversial characters, People who've had brushes with the law, you know, just really edgy and out there people.
He embraces all of them.
As long as they're on his side and America's side, he embraces all of them.
And I like it.
What I see with the Democrats is that they only embrace the politically popular.
Oh, trans are very important?
Let's bring in some trans!
Because they're getting a lot of publicity.
Trump brings in the people who didn't get any publicity.
Middle America is not getting a lot of publicity, but that's the ones he caters to.
So, I think Vivek can take a lesson from the master, Trump.
Trump actually, in my opinion, it's pure opinion, I believe he lowers his perceived capability by talking in a plain, simple way.
He says stuff like, if the wind stops blowing, your windmill won't work and you can't watch TV.
Now, nobody thinks that's really true, I hope.
But it's just a simple way to say what he wants to say, which is the green technology is overrated, basically.
But if the vague were to say the same thing, he's going to give you the really compelling, smart, I-understand-this-topic-from-top-to-bottom explanation.
And then you're going to say, whoa, his capability is way up here.
Where's his empathy?
His empathy is out of whack, right?
So he's so smart and so good, his perceived capability got out of whack with his perceived empathy, but the reality is they're probably the same.
All he has to do is put them back in balance.
So Trump lowers his perceived capability, has a tremendous perceived empathy for regular Americans, and they match.
What happens when those two match?
Your capability and your empathy?
If it's high capability.
Charisma.
That's what gets you a cult.
You don't get a cult by being good at what you do.
Let me say this a thousand times.
You do not get a cult following for being good at what you do.
Nobody does.
It's not a thing.
You get a cult following for having empathy.
That matches your high level of capability.
Period.
There's no other way to get there.
Now let's look at the president of Argentina.
Capability?
Looks pretty high.
High level of capability.
But!
Empathy.
Resident of Argentina.
Tell me, tell me your impression of his empathy.
High.
It's high.
Because he's, he's going after the elites for the benefit of the regular people.
And he's spent enough time, you know, being a interesting wild man that you think he actually cares about people.
And he's so diverse, you know, he's just sort of a character who's done a lot of things, that you believe he actually really cares about regular people.
And then he does high capability things.
Whoa!
High empathy.
High capability.
Magic.
Magic.
So Vivek is one twist away from magic.
Trump has magic.
President Milieu, I don't want to say his name, Milieu in Argentina.
He has magic.
Empathy and capability matched.
Vivek is still out of whack.
But he's out of whack for exactly the best reason.
Not for lack of capability.
His capability is too high.
He's out of whack with anybody's level of empathy.
How does anybody?
How can you possibly have that much empathy?
Because he's got to get up to that level of capability.
If he does it, which he could do, he could absolutely do it, but the moment he does it, you know, it's going to be a moment if it happens.
It's going to be a moment in American history because it's going to be fireworks like you've never seen.
Oh, damn it.
I was trying to trigger the platform, but it didn't work.
All right.
Let me check in on locals and see if Everybody still good there?
All right.
Well, okay.
Well, here's a very honest statement.
All right.
This is a comment.
I won't say from who.
People aren't quite sure whether to trust an Indian yet.
Now, I hate to say it, but that's true.
Not my opinion, obviously.
But I do think there's a A racial discomfort that people don't like to say out loud, but it's a trust thing.
But if I could make one correction.
He's an American.
He's not an Indian.
He's literally not an Indian.
He's an American with, you know, Indian heritage.
But you can't get more American than Vivek.
Yeah, he's like 110% American.
He's more American than Americans.
He's the one who reminds you how to be an American.
That's like the most American you could be.
He's not a Hindu.
Oh, some people think he's a Hindu.
He's not a Hindu.
He's a Christian.
He's a Christian.
Wait, I'm seeing smart people saying he is a Hindu.
Now, this is interesting.
them.
Thank you.
You're telling me he's a Hindu who believes in the Christian He's a Hindu who believes that Jesus Christ was the Son of God?
That's a Christian.
Let me ask you this.
Do you think Vivek believes in heaven or reincarnation?
Does he believe in...?
Because I think you're talking... I think he might be... Culturally, he comes from a Hindu background.
I think you're confusing his religion with his culture.
Is that what you're doing?
I think actually all of you are wrong.
I think you're all wrong, actually.
Let's check on this for the next time, okay?
Should we check on it now?
Let's check on it now.
Let's do this in real time.
So here's what I think.
I think he identifies So we can check it right now.
If I'm wrong, you get to see it in real time.
Does anybody want to stay and see if I'm wrong?
It'll be fun!
Don't you like to see me wrong?
Alright, we'll find out the answer to the question.
And I'll say, is Vivek a Christian or Hindu?
What do you think?
He said, he said, I'm Hindu and I'm proud of that.
I stand for that without an apology.
But wait.
Hold on.
So remember I said, I didn't disagree that he identified as Hindu.
But we're talking about his religious belief, right?
We're talking about his religious belief.
So let's get into his religious belief.
All right, let's see better answer.
Shares the same values.
Thank you.
How do we get a good answer to this?
New York Times.
Don't believe that.
Don't wanna, how about News Nation?
I'm gonna go with News Nation because I'm trying to find a unbiased source.
Wait, we might have an unbiased source here.
Thank you, Jenny Mitchell.
She is an entomologist at Iowa State University from Boone, Iowa.
She is a Republican who is currently undecided.
Jenny?
Alright, listen.
Thank you.
Thanks for being here and thanks for coming to Iowa so much.
We appreciate your visits.
So freedom of religion is a part of our Constitution and obviously a huge part of our country.
What do you say to those who say that you cannot be our president because your religion is not what our Founding Fathers based our country on?
I would say that I respectfully disagree.
And I want people to understand this about me.
I would rather speak the truth and lose an election than to win by playing some political snakes and ladders.
I mean, if I wanted to map out my political career and really solve for that, then I could fake convert.
You know, I'm not going to do that.
I'm going to tell you about my faith.
I'm hinting.
Now, I went to Christian schools.
I went to St.
Xavier in Cincinnati, and I actually have been on the board of St.
X, except for a hiatus to run for president.
And I can tell you with confidence that we share the same value set in common.
I'll tell you about my faith.
My faith teaches me that God puts each of us here for a purpose.
One God.
And we have a moral duty to realize that purpose. - One God. - That God works through us in different ways, but we're still equal because God resides in each of us.
Now, I had what you would call not a traditional upbringing, but probably a very traditional upbringing.
My parents taught me family's the foundation, marriage is sacred, divorce isn't some option, you just prefer off a menu and things don't go your way.
Abstinence before marriage is the way to go.
Adultery is wrong.
That the good things in life involve a sacrifice.
Now, are those foreign values in this country?
I know it could look that way at times.
You turn on the television, go to the movie theater.
The local DEI training at a company or what they're teaching your kids in schools.
That could seem a little unfamiliar.
I don't think it's unfamiliar to most of us.
I think those are the same Judeo-Christian values that I learned at St.
Acts.
When we get to the Ten Commandments, what do they say?
There's one true God.
Don't take his name in vain.
Observe the Sabbath.
Respect your parents.
Don't kill.
Don't lie.
Don't cheat.
Don't steal.
Don't commit adultery.
Don't covet.
That's when it hit me.
We share the same values set in common.
There's another core teaching in my faith, which is that we don't get to choose who God works through.
God chooses who God works through.
So we get to the Old Testament a little bit further along, we get to the book of Isaiah.
And if any of you are familiar with that one, God chose Cyrus, a Gentile all the way in Persia, to lead the Jewish people back to the promised land.
And so yes, I believe God put us here for a purpose.
My faith is what leads me.
On this journey to run for president, my gratitude to this country is what leads me.
And even when we think about the founding fathers, I'm a fan of history, okay?
I talked about Thomas Jefferson earlier.
We'll stick to Thomas Jefferson.
He was a deist, actually.
Let's be honest about it, because the left wants to rewrite our history and tell you he was a slave owner, an evil man.
No, I wouldn't do that.
We're not going to have anybody rewriting our history.
Thomas Jefferson was a deist.
He made the Jefferson Bible.
You know how he did it?
He didn't believe in all the parts of the New Testament, but he took A blade, razor blade by hand, glued it together.
And that made the Jefferson Bible, which we have today.
John Adams wrote letters to Thomas Jefferson, actually became something of a Hindu scholar after he left.
And so I think it's important to see our founding fathers three-dimensionally, not the way that they've been rewritten post-1990 either.
And so yes, would I be the best president to spread Christianity through this country?
I would not.
I'd be not the best choice for that.
But I also don't think that that's the job of the U.S.
president.
But will I stand for the Judeo-Christian values that this nation was founded on, that I was raised in, even in the Hindu faith?
Yes, I will.
You're darn right I will.
And as a young person picking up on that strand from earlier, I think it's my responsibility to make faith and patriotism and family and hard work So here's my interpretation.
I think they're pretty cool.
I think that's my job as your next president.
Back to the First Amendment, we will stand for religious liberty in a way that neither Republicans nor Democrats actually have.
That's what the First Amendment says.
You get to practice your faith.
Every pastor in this country gets to do his job without the government getting in their way.
That's what I'm going to keep as a president.
So here's my interpretation.
See if it matches yours.
That he believes there's one God.
you What does he believe about Jesus?
because that would be kind of i was just looking to see what he thinks about jesus um depending on my homes let's see Who is Jesus to the Hindus?
I think they see him as a teacher.
Well, I guess that would be the main question.
What do Hindus say about Jesus?
He's a Akaira.
He's a light in the world or something.
Do Hindus believe in the Bible?
Interesting.
So what would be the difference between someone who thought there was one God and believed all the Christian values, but was a Hindu by self-label?
So here's what I think you need to ask.
Thank you.
Does he believe any of the Hindu-specific beliefs, such as reincarnation?
Isn't that a key thing?
If he believes there's one God and you go to an afterlife, but the Bible might not be literal, that's pretty close to Trump religion. that's pretty close to Trump religion.
It's kind of better than I thought it was.
I'm more comfortable knowing that he's compatible with Christian religion without being a true believer.
To me, that's the ultimate.
That would be the best situation.
So, I will accept your statement that he identifies as Hindu.
Can we agree on that?
Can we agree that He identifies as Hindu.
Would you also agree that he does not identify, at least out loud, with the things that Hindus believe, such as reincarnation?
Or don't they have multiple gods?
Wait.
How many gods do the Hindus have?
How many gods?
Let's get a number on that.
33.
How many gods?
33.
So he believes there's one God, which he says all the time.
Now let me ask you this.
Using his own words to describe himself, he is compatible with all of the Christian concepts, and he believes there's one God, And he agrees with Thomas Jefferson that the Bible is human-made.
So is Thomas Jefferson a Christian?
Was Thomas Jefferson a Christian?
Because I don't think he believed Jesus was the Son of God.
You know that, right?
I'm pretty sure Jefferson didn't believe in Jesus.
Did he?
He was a deist, not a Jesus lover.
What about Washington?
All right.
So this is more interesting than I thought.
It's actually better than I thought.
I would have been uncomfortable if he said he was Hindu and believed the specifics of 33 gods and reincarnation.
I would be equally uncomfortable if he said he was a Christian And believed everything in the Bible was literally true.
Sort of the Mike Johnson thing.
That doesn't make me comfortable at all.
But, if you say you believe in one God, like most of the Americans who believe in anything do, and you say you're completely 100% on board with the cultural, you know, aspects of Christianity, that's sort of the ideal situation for a president.
I don't think you could do better.
Now that might make him hard to be elected, so that's a separate issue.
But I want a president who says, I like all the good parts of your religion, but it's up to you how much you believe about the historical details.
But I like what it says.
So let's deal with what it says, because we all like that part, and then you individually can argue about the historical part.
He attended church, so we know he believed in God.
He just didn't believe that the Bible was the work of God.
That's why he kept some parts and threw away other parts.
All right, so I wouldn't say that he's, I would not call Vivek, I wouldn't say a classic Hindu or a classic Christian, but he's, he's hit a mix that's, Pretty appealing.
I think he found a sweet spot there.
Now, it doesn't mean it makes it easy to get elected.
Just in my opinion, it would be the perfect place to be.
If you're a deist, you automatically don't believe in Jesus, right?
Thank you.
Is that right?
Give me a fact check on that.
Deists believe there's one supreme God, which Excludes Jesus being a, like a God-let situation, right?
No?
Or true?
I get a little disagreement on that.
I would think a deist is just, there's a God and that's the end of the story.
There's no Jesus.
Yeah.
So that they would not believe that Jesus necessarily is God.
So you can believe in Jesus, but not believe that Jesus is God.
You could believe he's the son of God, but not God.
Okay.
All right.
Well, there's some wiggle room there.
All right.
Well, I'm glad we've sorted that all out.
But I will take your correction.
Are you listening to this part?
This is the part you wanted to hear.
I accept your correction on the Hindu part.
But it's not... If you'll accept my definition that he's not a classic Hindu.
To me, he sounds more culturally Hindu.
And belief-wise, he's a lot closer to the Christian model.
So, I'm going to say I was 25% right and 75% wrong.
Will you accept that?
I graded myself 25% right but 75% wrong, which means you're 75% right and I'm 25%.
Do you accept that?
All right, we have agreement.
I call it a Christmas miracle.
It's a Christmas miracle.
All right, everybody, go have a great Christmas.
Enjoy your families.
I hope some of your families were watching, and I might have another live stream tonight.
