God's Debris: The Complete Works, Amazon https://tinyurl.com/GodsDebrisCompleteWorksFind my "extra" content on Locals: https://ScottAdams.Locals.comContent:Politics, RFK Jr., Nutrition, Bill Gates, Democrat Arabella Group, Conservative Anti-Crime Bill, Trans Mass-Shooting, Bluntness Trend, Robbie Starbuck, AI Deadbots, Nvidia, Revenue Sharing Pact, Alcohol is Poison, Word Association Programming, Worldwide Alcohol Decline, OpenAI Legal Reporting, Lisa Cook, DC Union Station, John Bolton, President Trump, RICO George & Alex Soros, Gavin Newsom, Democrat Dangerous Rhetoric, Wikipedia Bias Investigation, DNC Policy Platform, Autism Cause Investigation, CDC Director Firing, Susan Monarez, Covid Vaccine Policy, MI Teacher Certification, Gaza Hospitals, Trump's India Tariffs, Sand-Based Batteries, 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.
Let's do a show, because there's so much going on.
A lot.
Boom, boom, boom, boom, boom.
I feel that cat pulling on my leg.
Gary, come join us.
Well, let's do that first.
Boom, boom, boom.
Good morning, everybody, and welcome to the highlight of human civilization.
It's called Coffee with Scott Adams.
You've never had a better time.
But if you'd like to take a chance on elevating your experience up to levels that no one has even experienced or seen before or could understand with their tiny shiny human brains.
All you need for that is a copper mugger, glass attacker, chaucer, stein, canteen jugger flask a vessel of any kind fill it with your favorite liquid I like coffee and join me now for the unparalleled pleasure of the dopamine end of the day thing that makes everything better it's called the simultaneous sip it happens now go oh that was really good there
we go wait everything's working Yeah Well, did you hear about the Florida man who stopped a burglar?
while he was in his Batman pajamas.
Now what that burglar was doing in that man's Batman pajamas, I don't know.
No, it wasn't the burglar.
It was the man who stopped him, who had the Batman pajamas.
And the best part about it is that when asked about the Batman pajamas, he said, it gave me the confidence I needed.
Now that is a great answer.
I don't know if the man wearing the Batman pajamas had any kind of mental issues.
but I hope he was just a normal person who likes Batman.
And then we got a chance to go all Batman on the burglar he did because it gave him the confidence he needed.
Well, I immediately ordered myself some Batman pajamas because although I wouldn't wear them every night to bed, what if you heard a noise downstairs?
Well, I would put on my Batman pajamas just to go downstairs.
Because if you're a burglar and you see the home motor come down in Batman pajamas, you know he's going to attack you know you you know you've got a fight coming so you might as well get out of the house well apparently the gdp has been revised and it was 3.3 which is really healthy that's a that's a pretty good gdp so
good news there however fortune magazine reports that there's a noticeable drop in traffic at restaurants and shops and malls.
I have noticed that too.
Have you noticed that?
And it makes sense because people are feeling their budgets are constrained.
And what is the first thing you do if your budget is constrained?
You stop eating out.
That's like number one.
It's the first thing you stop doing.
shopping for entertainment you definitely wouldn't do that so I feel as though people are really going to have to try hard to reduce their food
Well, the middle-aged, according to the economist, the middle-aged people are no longer the most unhappy.
That honor has gone to the young.
So young people, according to news surveys, are the least happy.
So middle-aged people, you're winning.
I would guess that is 50%.
So yeah, I can say it.
There's definitely, if you change people's economic situation and their access to sex, they are going to be the least happy group.
So at least the middle-aged people could have some, you know, middle-aged sex.
And they might have a little bit of money compared to the young.
Well, RFK Jr. made a bunch of news and the first part is that they're going to add nutrition education to pre-med programs across the country.
I don't know if they're making it mandatory or if they're just making it available.
But you probably know that doctors will go through medical school without being trained in nutrition, which is just mind-blowing.
Not trained in nutrition.
What?
But will that work?
In my lifetime, all the science about nutrition has been fake.
Do we believe, do you believe that after 300,000 years of civilization, where people didn't know much about nutrition, do you believe that you were lucky enough to be born in the exact era that we figured out nutrition?
Well, it certainly didn't happen when I was young, but did it happen recently?
I thought it happened when I was young.
Do you think that we're going to find out that absolutely everything we believe about nutrition is wrong?
Maybe because we found that out every other time in all of human history.
We've never been right about nutrition.
But now we're right.
We finally got the right answer.
Yeah.
I don't know.
So I think it's probably a good idea to teach as much as we know.
But I'll bet you a lot of our nutrition science is still crap.
Well, apparently Bill Gates is going to discontinue funding.
something called the Arabella Group, which is some big Democrat-leading organization.
And I don't know much about the Arabella group, but I do know that Democrats, their entire structure, which we've learned in the past couple years, is this hugely complicated set of NGOs and charities and packs and groups.
So tons of groups.
And if you have enough groups and they're all working together towards some common goal, such as Democrats being in charge, they can hide all kinds of money because it's kind of clever that you can give money to a charity knowing that the charity is then going to give your money to some kind of uh you know politician so that's a pretty clever way to hide your money and
what you're doing it makes me wonder because i did hear that uh bill gates has met with trump a couple of times and it seems to me that bill gates would have lots of things that he really needs the government to do in order for Bill Gates to do what he wants to do.
In other words, there might be regulations that prevent his investments in nuclear power.
Could be lots of things he needs the government to do.
Do you believe that Trump would have said, sure, tell me what you need from me and I'll go do it?
Does that sound like Trump?
Or is Trump the kind who would say, so what is it you need?
Okay, so if I do that for you, what are you going to do for me?
I've got an idea, and he talks to his staff, and they say, tell them that you'll do what what he wants if if if he stops funding the arabella group that might have happened now i have no information that would suggest it did, but it's hard for me to imagine that Gates would go to the White House unless there was something he needed or wanted, you know, something specific.
And I can't imagine any scenario in which Trump would just give it to him as opposed to saying, you know what, there's something you could do for me.
Maybe this is it.
Or it could be that this is all part of the big money people saying the Democrats are broken and giving money to them just doesn't make any sense at all.
You know, the whole thing is collapsing.
So it might be that Gates just thought it was a waste of money and maybe he was looking for a way to stop doing it anyway.
So that maybe he agreed to give up something he wanted to give up anyway.
I don't know.
Maybe.
I'm just speculating.
All right.
Apparently the House Republicans are moving to create a, quote, comprehensive crime bill.
Now, if you've been watching the news and opinion people, you know that they've been saying, hey, you know, this Washington, DC surge by the feds to take on crime.
That seems to be working, but what we really need is maybe some kind of comprehensive crime bill so that, for example, it might fund a bunch of more cops for cities across America, something like that.
They haven't figured out what that comprehensive crime bill would be.
It's comprehensive, so it would be something about cash bail, something about funding cops, I suppose.
But what I love about this is that I kept seeing, was it Harold Ford Jr. who kept saying almost every day on the Five, on Fox News, saying that the Democrats should try to be proactive and do something useful about crime instead of acting like maybe they're in favor of crime more than their crime prevention.
And he kept saying, you know, they should propose a comprehensive crime bill.
Well, it looks like the Republicans just took that away from them.
by being the ones who were initiating the crime bill.
Now, of course, the Democrats would have trouble getting anything approved, but at least it would.
look like they were doing something.
You know, they could say, well, we don't agree with this federal takeover of Washington, D.C.'s police, but we are working on this crime bill.
Look how smart we are.
If we were in power, you'd have this crime bill and you'd like it.
But no, Republicans are going to take that completely away from them.
Will a comprehensive crime bill be popular?
Probably at least 60%.
I don't know if it's an 80-20, but yeah, I think it'll do fine.
fine with the public well you probably know there was another shooting yesterday and I wasn't going to talk about it because the two topics that I try to avoid are anything with you know individual crime like a mass shooting and anything about trans those are two topics I generally try to avoid.
It's only because the trans topic is just everybody saying the same three things.
There's nothing to add, really.
And, you know, the mass shooting things, they all start to look alike.
and then you say all the same things.
It's like something about trans and then people will say something about their hormones.
Elon Musk did.
He goes, this is Elon Musk.
Violent crimes per capita by trans-identified individuals is 10 times higher than the overall population.
Large doses of artificially administered hormones are driving them to extreme violence and murder.
These extreme hormone treatments should be withdrawn by the FDA.
Now, the first question is, is that per capita data correct?
Is it true that, you know, if you adjust for how many there are, that the trans people have a 10 times higher odds of violent crime.
Remember, my rule is I don't trust any crime data.
Don't trust any war data.
Don't trust any economic data.
Yeah, maybe.
But I wouldn't automatically think that that was true.
But anecdotally, it looks true.
Anyway, and I don't know if we've proven that the artificially administered hormones are part of what's making them do what they do.
But it's a popular opinion.
A lot of people have that same opinion.
I don't know if they're right.
So we're going to talk about all the same boring things.
What's up with trans and gun laws and how did he get his guns and why didn't his parents know that this was going to come?
And then there's going to be the conversation about prescribed drugs.
because I don't know if he was on any, but the obvious question is, were you on any antidepression drugs that may also be implicated in causing people to be violent.
And then it was a Christian school, so we'll talk about Christianity being under attack.
There's nothing I can add to that, right?
The entire conversation is so scripted in advance that there's just nothing to add.
so you don't need me to say all the usual stuff.
I don't know if you've noticed.
But there's, as a wokeness is trying to be put back in a box, people are being a lot more blunt about race and trans and everything else.
Robbie Starbuck was recently asked in an interview, aren't there some people who genuinely believe that they were born in the wrong body?
And Robbie says, yes, but there's also schizophrenic people who believe they're Batman.
Hmm, there's batman again and think they can fly off the empire state building pretending their delusion is true makes you evil not virtuous um yeah and then uh robbie on a ex post says today's a good day to remind people that there's nothing kind or virtuous about validating a delusion that leads to a dangerous mental spiral now Am I wrong to say that you
couldn't really say that in public just a few years ago?
Now, you know, I have a lot of empathy for people who are in that trans situation.
Whatever they're going through sounds tough.
So, you know, I feel like empathy is perfectly appropriate.
But I do agree with the idea that we are not obligated to join somebody's preferred view of reality.
The whole idea that you can, you know, transition is a view of reality.
And you're not really obligated to join it.
And you're not really obligated to make happy talk as if you do agree with it or you do enter that version of reality.
And I'm not going to make an opinion of who's right or who's wrong in this case.
I'm just going to say, you're not really obligated to join somebody's reality.
If you're sure that it's just an imaginary structure in their head, you are not obligated.
Well, you know, I've talked quite a bit before about trying to create an agent.
that would look like me, like a clone of me, and would survive me and go on forever as my AI version of me well apparently that's a growing industry they're called dead bots ai dead bots and a dead bot would be a bot or an agent or an ai entity that represents somebody who's passed away and apparently this is like a real thing now
and they're you know there are companies getting into it and managing your digital assets and stuff like that.
So the digital afterlife industry, it's an actual thing.
is expected to be like a really big industry.
I'm not aware of any company that can do this.
I know there are a lot of companies that can do parts of it.
There are companies that can make something that looks and talks just like you.
But I don't believe there's any company that can make something that looks and talks like you and doesn't hallucinate.
And I don't think that you could even make one with off-the-shelf apps anyway that would even, you know, reliably look at a file you provided for some facts you wanted to get right all the time.
I don't think the technology is there.
So I don't know if this industry will really take off unless people are happy looking at their dead loved ones saying, you know, crap that never happened in the real world.
I mean, that would be weird.
Well, apparently, I think the White House was asking Nvidia for a share of the revenue.
of chips that the White House would allow them to sell to China, which would not be their best ones, because that would be too dangerous to let China have their best.
But Nvidia is putting up a fight and I guess they're saying that they'll fight any government action to try to get a revenue share.
So this is one of those cases where the government can blackmail a company, but I don't think it's like some other cases where the government is just being helpful.
and get something in return, you know, like keeping them from becoming bankrupt and something.
They get something in return.
I feel like it's different if you just say, oh, well, I'm the only one that can approve this, but all they're doing is approving something.
Do you get 15% of revenue for just that particular kind of business just because you approved it when approving it is your job?
Because the government, it's their job to approve things or disapprove things, right?
So if they just do their job of approving a thing, why would they get 15% of revenue?
So I could see why.
NVIDIA would fight that.
I'll bet they can afford some really good lawyers.
So how many of you have had the following experience?
You mentioned something, you were having a conversation and you said something about, I don't know, I'll just make something up, bonsai trees.
And then you see that all your advertisements and all your devices have turned to, you know, Are you interested in a bonsai tree?
And you say to yourself, ah, my technology is listening to me and it's modifyingied the algorithm because it knows I want a bonsai tree.
Now you've all had that experience, right?
Probably every one of you, you've had that experience.
Well, there's another experience I want to see if any of you have had.
many of you have had the experience where you were thinking really hard about a thing but you never wrote it down and you never once even whispered it out loud and then your social media deletes Have you had that weird experience yet?
Let me tell you mine.
So yesterday, I was craving a certain food from a certain restaurant and I was thinking to myself, you know what?
One of the things I love about this restaurant is that they deliver their food in these nice plastic, hard plastic containers.
And so I don't like it when it comes in cardboard or something, you know, some kind of paper product because I feel like the food and the paper have merged by the time you get it.
You're eating paper.
But the hard plastic ones, to me, that seemed like a safe bet.
So all day long, I was thinking, God, I can't wait for dinner.
And this is unusual for me.
I usually don't have dinner cravings.
And I'm thinking, I can't wait to get that food that was so delicious before.
I'm going to get it.
And then I go on social media and there's a video from some American doctor saying that the most dangerous thing you could ever do is eat something in a black plastic container.
Specifically, a black plastic container.
That's literally what I was like craving all day long as a thing coming.
in a black plastic container and apparently it's pretty bad black plastic is made from recycled electronics such as old televisions computers and other electronic waste so allegedly the black plastic contains flame retardant chemicals just all kinds of chemicals and you're eating it now how many of you have had that experience where the news serves up exactly,
exactly what you were thinking.
And it wasn't even like a normal thing you're thinking.
Like how much time have you had ever spent thinking about the awesomeness of black plastic food containers?
I actually did that yesterday.
I actually almost posted that if your food comes in a black plastic container, you know, that you'd be happier if you got DoorDash.
I can't believe that that exact thing came into my feed at that exact time.
If we live in a simulation, the way you steer it is by what you're thinking about the most.
One of my theories about why affirmations work, which is just speculative, is that reality is not what you think.
It's more of a simulation.
And the way that you can change the simulation is by what you're thinking about in the most dedicated way.
Maybe just thinking about those damn plastic containers changed reality until something was presented to me on that topic.
Maybe.
So that's all part of why affirmations might work.
Maybe.
Well, here's another one.
According to Canadian Affairs, I guess that's the publication, there's a senator in Canada who wants alcohol to have warning labels on it because, as the headline says, alcohol is poison.
So Canada might label alcohol as poison.
He may be not using that word, but that's the sense of the story about it.
is that alcohol is poison.
Now, if you're new to me, you don't know that I've been saying for quite a number of years, alcohol is poison.
It's a refrain that helped a lot of people quit drinking.
They just have to hear those words alcohol is poison and it's based on the idea that human brains are really like ai and we're just programmed by the words that are most frequently repeated in our heads so if you say hmm alcohol is a beverage i sure would like to have a beverage you're going to do a lot more beverage drinking than you're going to be doing poison drinking So if it seems like,
well, that couldn't possibly work because all you did is call it a name, say everybody knows what alcohol is, the fact that you're calling it a poison how's that gonna help me stop drinking and the answer is because that's all it takes the word that you most associate with it will reprogram you so if every time you think of it or someone offers it to you you say no thanks alcohol is poison most of you not all of you but
most of you that would be enough to never have another drink again It works.
I hear all the time from people who used it successfully.
You'll probably see a few in the comments.
And apparently Gen Z, as you know is not drinking nearly as much but that as in past generations but that's also worldwide so germany's having a problem because you know they got a big beer industry there and the young people are turning away from beer and alcohol in general sure enough now only 38 of men in germany under 25 drink
at least once a week.
It used to be 55% a generation earlier and it was 85%.
percent in the mid 70s in the mid 70s in germany 85 percent of the population had to drink at least once a week 85 percent and now that's down to 38 percent with men under 25 that's a that's a big change wow um if you're worried about ai um affecting your privacy Well,
I got a story for you.
A fairly open AI says it scans user conversations with its AI.
and can report some of them to the police according to an article in Futurism.
Now the things they would report would be the obvious things like if somebody was asking how to end their own life, they might report that so the person could get help.
Or if they were saying something like, you know, how to hurt people or I don't know.
make a nuclear bomb or create a poison or something like that that uh you know obviously is subjective but if ai spots that sort of thing, it surfaces it to some humans and the humans decide whether or not that should be turned over to law enforcement,
to which I say, that would really mean that AI is listening to everything you say and is using a filter to judge whether you should be getting a contact from law enforcement.
That would really change the things I'm willing to use AI for.
Because I always thought one of the great advantages of AI is that it wouldn't be censored in any way and that I could ask all of those banned questions.
That doesn't mean I'm going to do something, but sometimes you're just curious, you know, you're just curious about a domain that, you know, would be very bad if you were to take that action.
But sometimes you just wonder about it.
And I guess you get turned into the police if you wonder about the wrong things while you're in the presence of the AI.
And it might not even be something that you asked the AI.
It might be just something you heard.
You know, if you had it in voice mode accidentally and you said something on another topic to another person, they could just overhear it and then next thing you know knock knock knock so that's pretty creepy i'm not sure they should not do that i mean i don't know how to i don't know how to judge that one well as you know uh trump fired lisa
cook one of the fed governors because she's accused quite credibly and I don't believe she's denied it that she did some mortgage fraud when she was a little bit younger and she She claimed two homes as her primary residence to get better rates, I guess, and that's illegal.
So she's fired, but I think she's going to fight it in court.
And I saw a post by Eric Doughty talking about how the experts were imagining that if he fired one of the Fed governors, it would cause all kinds of chaos in the market, and that'd be bad for investors.
Well, the stock market went up.
Now, it didn't go up because of that.
I think it went up because there's a recognition that her job is completely unimportant.
Now, I could be totally wrong about that, but like I said yesterday when I was joking about it, what exactly does a Fed governor do?
And if suddenly one of them stopped doing it, do you think you'd even notice?
We don't even know what they do.
It's hard for me to get worried that there might be one less of them.
Oh, no.
We might have one fewer Fed governor than we had before.
Well, that will certainly change.
What?
Anything?
So I guess the markets were smart.
The funniest thing I'm starting to think is to imagine that the public will get really active and worked up about anything.
I don't think that's the thing.
I think the only thing that anybody gets worked up about are artificial, where there's somebody funding.
you know a protest but if nobody's funding a protest things like this just don't happen you know things like people going oh no he's firing a Fed governor.
I'll have to remove all my stock investments.
It just doesn't happen.
In the real world, people just look at the news and shrug.
They just go on with their lives.
I think only in the social media world do you imagine that this is going to cause some big reaction with the public.
And not really.
It's just one of a million things I had to process today.
Well, Trump, quite cleverly, the administration is looking to take over Washington, D.C.'s D.C. Union station.
and where you grabbed a train, I guess.
New York Post is talking about this.
And it used to be sort of the jewel of DC, people say, but now it's too dangerous.
And if they take it over, I guess they can remove all the danger.
I think people are going to love that, don't you?
So I would say it's another home run.
by the Trump administration, simply identifying something that you guaranteed to get people on your side.
How would you like it if we made that place that you all go to on a regular basis?
How about if we made it safe?
Yes, please.
Yes.
How about yes?
Even the mayor of D.C. is, I won't say she's pro-Trump, but she thanked him for surging all this resources into her city and reducing crime.
Yeah, there was some question.
At first she seemed positive about it and then she seemed negative about it.
Now she's back to some version of positive about it.
I feel like probably.
probably she's she's wrestling with the fact that she knows she wants it and she knows it's good you know the federal surging of law enforcement and uh but the Democrats are probably pastoring her, saying, you can't say that.
Whatever you do, don't say it worked.
Don't.
And then she's thinking, you know, I'm just speculating.
I don't know.
And then I imagine her thinking, everybody knows this worked.
Everybody knows it worked.
And you're asking me to go in public and say, oh, this is a terrible mistake.
We like the crime.
I'm not going to do that.
So I have a, if that's what happened, and it feels like that's what happened, I don't know, if she's just rebelling against the stupidity of claiming something obvious didn't happen, well, I like it.
So good for you if that's what's happening.
Well, we're hearing a little bit more about John Bolton.
As you know, his house got raided and he was accused of doing some bad things with classified information.
But now we hear that the reason that we know this information was classified and that he was involved is that he used an unclassified email system to send some of it to someone close to him.
And apparently he was hacked or it was detected by a foreign country, a hostile foreign country.
And I guess we were hacking the hostile foreign country.
somebody was watching John Bolton's email, but somebody else on our team, maybe in another country, was monitoring the people who were monitoring him somehow.
And so now we know that the information was at least seen by a hostile foreign country.
This is reported in the New York Times, which doesn't make it true, but it's a big media entity.
So here's my question.
Isn't the person who leaked this story to the New York Times just as bad as Bolton?
I can't believe that there's a leak about the leaker because the New York Times should not know that there was a hostile foreign country that is the reason that we know about this.
They should know that, right?
So whoever leaked the story about the leaker is as bad as the leaker.
I mean, either way, it's pretty bad.
Well, here's something I thought I would never see.
Trump is turning on George and Alex Soros.
I'm going to just read what he said in Truth Social, but I didn't expect this.
So Trump says this.
He goes, George Soros and his wonderful radical left son should be charged with RICO because of their support of violent protests and much more all throughout the United States.
We're not going to allow these lunatics to rip apart America anymore, never giving it so much as a chance to breathe and be free.
Soros and his group of psychopaths have caused great damage to our country.
That includes his crazy West Coast friends.
Be careful.
We're watching you.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
he always says.
So related to that, the Gateway Pundit is reporting.
that Representative Luna had demanded earlier this year that Congress subpoena the Soros organization.
And the probe was around whether the agency had done something to expedite his acquisition of a whole bunch of radio stations, 220 radio stations.
So, you know, somebody like Soros is always going to be sick.
Well, what do you imagine they would discover if they started indicting Soros?
sorrows what would happen if through legal means the government got access to all the sorrows organization emails for the past seven years or something, what kind of things would they find out?
And would there be crimes involved?
So I don't know that there's really a RICO.
It does seem organized, but it seems organized in sort of a common sense.
He can give money to anybody he wants.
And if those people have decided to give that money, then he gave them to somebody specific and he knew about it.
Is that a crime?
Maybe you don't like it, but is that a crime?
So I guess I would have to hear what crime they think he's done.
But I do think that having George Soros have that much control over the country is obviously bad.
So the fact that Trump is pushing back on it all seems good to me.
I just don't know if he has any We'll find out.
Well, did you know that that Fed governor, Lisa Cook, the one that got fired, and Letitia James and Hunter Biden, did you know they're all using the same lawyer at the moment?
It doesn't mean anything, just a coincidence.
But it does make me wonder, hmm, Fed Governor Letitia James and Hunter Biden, is it possible that there is one billionaire who's funding the lawyer and trying to protect, you know, all good Democrats?
And is it possible that That's why they all have the same lawyer because there's one lawyer who works with one billionaire and the billionaire says, all right, we can't have Trump.
abusing all of our fine Democrats.
So you're going to be their lawyer.
I'll pay you.
Maybe.
There's a new drug coming out of China via the cartels, the usual way, that is way stronger than fentanyl, and you can't stop it with Narcan.
So it would be, therefore, way more dangerous than fentanyl.
It's already here, so it's not hypothetical.
And it sounds like the Chinese producers just keep finding ways to keep doing something like fentanyl or worse.
And they're just going to keep doing it.
So there's nothing we could do legally.
They'll just say, well, if that's illegal, what about this?
So it's called nitazines, NITAZ nitazines.
And they're not even included in routine drug tests.
So if you did a drug test on a person who's too new, it wouldn't even show up.
So, that's all.
That's bad.
Well, Governor Newsom is ratcheting up his rhetoric, And what he means is that he believes that Trump will not leave office.
And he's getting really animated about it.
And by animated, I mean jazz hands.
That will never be.
We'll never see an election in 2028.
28.
Jazz hands.
Anyway, I feel like that has now crossed over
I am absolutely convinced there won't be an election in 2028.
Just look at what he's doing.
Look at what he's doing.
That's pretty dangerous stuff, Newsom.
And I really have a problem with the Democrats' rhetoric that gets people into a dangerous headset.
And this is definitely it.
I mean, when he talks like that, it guarantees that if you're a Trump supporter, you can't be invited to the neighborhood block party.
It just guarantees it.
Because nobody wants you on, you know, to socialize with you if you're going to be supporting what Newsom says.
is this terrible dictator who's going to ruin our democracy.
So it's a kind of rhetoric that just destroys the country.
I don't know that, is there a Republican version of this?
You know, we do talk about if Mom Dami gets in, he's going to ruin New York City.
But does that sound like a cult of violence?
It doesn't, does it?
It's more like a, oh, this is going to be economically devastating.
It's going to be really bad.
But when you say that he's not going to leave the office and you guarantee it, like you're not even talking speculatively.
You're just guaranteeing it.
He will not leave office and therefore he'll try to become a dictator.
That feels like a cult.
call to violence doesn't it you know i don't recommend any violence but it feels like it well according to newsmax the there's a government oversight committee that's going to look at wikipedia and check it for bias uh do you think they'll find any uh so james comer republican and representative nancy mace are working on that.
Of course there's bias.
Of course there is.
Is there really any doubt about that?
that so I don't know what they're going to do about it and I guess they're worried also that some of the bias might be coming from foreign entities pretending to be editors so we'll see well apparently the DNC the Democratic National Committee they've got their annual meeting and they were meeting in Minnesota And Victor Davis Hansen is writing about this.
I saw it in the post millennial.
So they've been addressing their policy platform.
And what do you think that they decided to do So is that what happened?
Did they meet and say, we've got to really change everything because we really just destroyed everything that we hold dear?
Nope.
They double down.
Yep, they double down.
Apparently, Attorney General Keith Ellison got big applause when he said, we are not going to scapegoat our transgender community.
And Bill Owen of Tennessee is going hard at DEI in a good way.
He said, DEI is the very foundation of the Christian church.
Really?
DEI is the foundation of the Christian church.
I don't remember the sermon on the mount where Jesus said, Whatever you do, don't hire those white guys.
Did I miss that page in the Bible?
The part where discriminating against white men was highly recommended.
No, I don't believe DEI is the basis of Christianity.
No, thank you.
Anyway, it appears that Democrats have learned exactly nothing, not a thing.
I feel like the problem is that you can only be an honest Democrat if there's no other Democrat in the room with you.
Like if you're just writing on your blog, you can say, oh, these Democrats need to try harder.
You know, I'm a Democrat.
We need to try harder.
But you can't do it if there's a crowd in front of you because there'd be too many people in the crowd who would turn on you.
You just couldn't do it.
You get booed.
So they don't have a chance.
Apparently some activist judge in Utah is ordering the state to redraw the congressional map that would take one away from the GOP.
So it's sort of a technical argument about, you know, who can do what with redistricting.
But it looks like the order will take one away from the GOP.
So the GOP majority in the House looks like it's going to go down by one and it's already razor thin.
That might make a difference.
All right.
Well, as I mentioned, RFK Jr. is saying, I guess he's had an interview today, that they're getting very close to revealing the true causes of autism.
Now, I don't know if they're gonna claim they found all the true causes I don't know if that's the claim.
It might be weaker than that.
We'll see.
And that there will be regulatory action about those causes of autism and this is what R.K. said he junior said he said this is a crisis there is not a single cause so if you thought he was going to say oh it's those childhood vaccinations probably not because he says it's not a single cause he says there are many aggregation of causes We're now developing sufficient evidence to
ask for regulatory action on some of those or recommendations.
So we're really going to find out something radical and interesting.
I assume.
that the reason you have some certainty about some things but not others is that there's data that looks credible about some of this stuff.
So what do you think?
How much of it do you think will be vaccinations and how much of it do you think will be diet and how much of it will be pollutants?
I don't know.
I don't think you could make It could really be a surprise.
It really could.
So we'll see.
And apparently there's other.
drama at the CDC.
So the director, Susan Monares, has been ousted by RFK Jr. because she was pushing for the COVID vaccine.
Now, I don't understand that story because my understanding is that Secretary Kennedy has okayed more of the COVID vaccine.
I'm trying to fit these two stories together because they appear to be opposites.
So I don't know what is true.
I do think it's true that the director is ousted.
I do think it's true that she was pro-COVID vaccines, but let me tell you what Kennedy posted about his own accomplishments.
All right, so this is part of the same story.
So Kennedy told us that he promised us four things.
One, to end COVID vaccine mandates.
Now, ending the mandate, I didn't even know there was a mandate, did you?
What mandate?
Was there a mandate for school children?
Still?
I wasn't even aware there was a mandate.
So I don't even know what he's talking about, but he said he would end COVID vaccine mandates, and apparently he has.
He said he would keep vaccines available to people who want them, especially the vulnerable.
Now, if he's keeping the vaccines available to people who want them, wouldn't that suggest that he does not have definitive data that they're dangerous to some part of the population, I guess?
How in the world is that possible?
That he doesn't have data that would suggest he should cancel the COVID vaccines.
Do you think it's coming or that he's still studying it?
Or do you believe that the data on all things COVID is unreliable?
Because that's where I've been for a long time.
I don't know if you can say they're safe or not safe.
The only thing you could say for sure is I wouldn't trust any of the data no matter which way it pointed.
I wouldn't trust any of it no matter what it said.
So I'm a little confused on that.
And he said that he would demand placebo-controlled trials from companies, which apparently he has.
Now that doesn't mean that there are no things that have placebo controlled trials already.
There were things.
So apparently he likes those things.
But I will be the, if you don't know this, those randomized controlled placebo trials, that doesn't mean it's true.
You know that, right?
Because the way you can fake those is by what data you decide is good enough to be in your study.
So there's always this filter where you go, well, you know, the first two weeks of the data, we collected a little bit differently.
So why don't we take that out?
Yeah, we'll just take out the first two weeks.
And then suddenly the data, you know, points in the opposite direction.
So there are ways that even the finest of controlled trials could be completely fraudulent.
That's a real thing that happens.
And he said he promised to end the emergency.
What was the emergency?
I guess it was an emergency classification that allowed them to do the vaccine mandates so, he got rid of that so i don't know what mandates there were unless he's talking about school children that is that the only one or were there some mandates for maybe government people, maybe the military.
I don't think there were any, there were no mandates for the military still, were there?
Or maybe he's taking credit for getting rid of them.
But the FDA has now issued marketing authorization for the COVID shots for those who are at higher risk.
So How do you square in your mind that RFK Jr. is the most famous vaccine skeptic we know, not just the COVID shots but vaccine skeptic in general he's the most famous vaccine skeptic and he's in charge of looking at all the data and deciding if the covert vaccine is too dangerous to justify whatever benefits you might get from it if any and
at this point he does not seem poised to ban it does that mean that he hasn't finished looking at it Or does that mean that he looked at it and he's satisfied that the data is sufficiently good that it's useful for some classes of people who are higher risk.
Wouldn't that blow your mind?
It looks like he must think the data suggests that it's better to take it than not take it for some categories of people.
Now he does say that you should only do it if your doctor says to do it.
He's not saying that you should just go to the drugstore and get it.
I feel like he's saying, but only if your doctor says you should get it.
So some acknowlednowledgement that there's an extra risk involved.
But maybe there's some category of people he believes the data supports.
Getting it, I don't know.
Apparently in Michigan, there were teachers who were required to take a test to grade their levels of whiteness.
Wall Street Apes was talking about this on X. So there was a public school teacher.
who had been there for 31 years and she quit because she was unwilling to stand in a circle to rate her level of whiteness.
I guess the problem was that the black students were struggling in their schools, and so they wanted to figure out how their whiteness was affecting that.
And the things that they thought would affect their level of whiteness was how many people they referred for discipline and whether or not that was a balanced number.
And she said she had a higher percentage of black.
students that were referred for discipline so that made her more white and let's see and also the laziness so if she marked the black kids late, that would be extra whiteness.
And she said, I was told to decrease the number of detentions that were issued for a certain race, obviously black, that showed up late because culturally it's acceptable for them.
Now, isn't that the racist thing?
Imagine being in a training class.
where the class is told that black people are allowed to be late because it's culturally acceptable to them.
Isn't that racist?
Or do I not know what racist is?
I mean, the point of saying that they're more likely to be late because they're black, that's racist, right?
Am I hallucinating now?
This is just crazy.
anyway.
So I don't even know what that story is about.
probably was interesting at one point.
So are you watching Israel and Gaza and all the hospital bombing stuff?
Now, I'm not there and I don't know.
Is there some military doctrine that suggests that bombing a hospital is a good idea if you're trying to really conquer a population?
Has anybody ever heard of that?
Why would Israel intentionally bomb a hospital?
Now, obviously, you know, sometimes they say, oh, it's because beneath the hospital, Hamas has some major facility.
And if we, you know, we can't leave them forever, so we'll just warn the hospital, tell them to get out of there, and then we'll bomb it.
But does that explain all the hospitals?
Yeah.
So I went to Grok and asked him a few questions because I wondered how big a thing this was.
First of all, There's a reported 36 hospitals in Gaza, or that's how many there were at the start of the conflict.
36.
Doesn't that seem like a lot of hospitals for that one little strip of land.
I feel like I'm having a hard time understanding the size of Gaza because I keep thinking it's tiny, but that 36 hospitals, that's pretty serious.
Allegedly, 31 of the 36 have been damaged or destroyed.
in the conflict 31 out of 36 but you know damage is big difference between damaged and destroyed um and the world health organization says that only 19 of the 36 remain operational, which would be better than I thought.
When we see pictures of Gaza, we never see a building that's still standing and functional, right?
The only pictures I see are complete devastation.
So I'm kind of still impressed that half of the hospitals are still in some kind of business.
How do they even have electricity?
It's kind of surprising.
I mean, my sense of what it's like there doesn't line up with there's still 19 hospitals that have electricity and they're functioning.
I mean, albeit with short on supplies, but, hmm.
I don't know.
I guess I don't have evidence that would suggest that that makes sense as any kind of a military strategy.
But if somebody tells me, oh yeah, that's a classic military strategy.
If it is, then I might change my mind.
But I've never heard that.
Have you?
Let me know if you've heard it.
All right.
Well, certainly, certainly they're trying to depopulate Gaza.
That's no secret.
Well, according to Breitbart News, Trump has implemented his 50% super tariff on India for buying Russian oil.
Now, India's being kind of tough about this, but they'll still have to pay the tariffs.
I mean, they're not going to get around it.
So I wonder if this will work.
It's not going to work right away if it does work.
But if this takes like a.
big bite out of the entire Russian economy, and it might, maybe enough that they all notice, I don't know.
It's a pretty big deal because India is the number two buyer of energy from Russia.
And if this shuts it down, because it makes it too expensive for India to do it, if that shuts it down, it's going to be a big impact on Russia, but I don't know if it's big enough to make a difference.
But I'll point out that Trump is once again monetized, a problem.
So now Trump has found a way to make a decision And now he's making all kinds of tariff revenue from India buying Russian oil that they shouldn't be buying.
So he just monetized it.
The more he monetizes it, the better his negotiating position gets.
because he's not losing people.
He's making money.
Let's end this tomorrow.
Oh, whatever.
You guys do what you want to do.
Obviously, Ukraine wants to fight and Russia wants to fight.
And we've tried everything we can do, but now we'll just monetize it.
I don't hate that.
I do not hate that.
The monetizing part.
Apparently, there's a technology that's been spun up already successfully to turn sand into batteries.
So it's a gigantic container that they fill with this with heat and it just stores it and can somehow they can release it to heat homes.
So it's a sand battery, but all it stores is heat.
It doesn't store electricity, but they're working on having it store heat, which they would use a separate technology to turn back into electricity.
So my suggestion for Gaza is to turn it into a battery.
There's a lot of sand there.
It's very hot.
All right.
And according to interesting engineering, there's now a new method that some U.S.-China team, there's a U.S.-China scientific team.
Why?
Why is it even legal for our scientists to be working with Chinese scientists?
Is it because we're picking up all these great ideas from the Chinese scientists?
Or is it possible that maybe I didn't know there were any U.S.-China teams.
But anyway, they allegedly figured out how to turn plastic into fuel at 95% efficiency in the transition.
So they can take this toxic plastic waste and at a room temperature process, they say they can turn it into a variety of chemicals and fuels.
It's a one-step conversion, which means that it might be economical.
Can you imagine that?
If they find a way to turn plastic into energy?
That would be cool, wouldn't it?
All right, everybody.
It's a newsy day, but I just ran through it quickly because I know you need to get some more stuff done today.
And I hope you enjoyed listening to the news and my bad opinions about stuff.
And I'll see all the rest of you back here tomorrow, same time, same place.
