Episode 441 Scott Adams: Omar, Fine People, Vaccinations, Fathers, Food Equality, Ivanka, More

Date: 2019-03-07 | Duration: 50:43

Topics

Michael Caputo says witch hunt and will refuse to cooperate All 81 should say “screw it”, ignore congress perjury traps Jared and Ivanka security clearances, Dems running out of crap Lawyers on both sides agree on the facts of what occurred The argument is whether or not the actions are even a crime Whitehouse tweet about the horrors of abuse suffered by migrants Brandon Darby: Humanitarian crisis is correct assessment Democrats stalled their own anti-semitism resolution Why aren’t they willing to condemn anti-semitism? Are Representative Omar’s comments “secret dog whistles”? Is she signaling her fellow anti-semites? Are claims about “secret dog whistles” just political BS? CNN refuses to address or acknowledge “fine people” thing was BS “Fine people” hoax puts me and Trump supporters at risk Is CNN intentionally promoting violence via propaganda? Candace interview with Hawk Newsome Sunday…MUST WATCH Food equality vs. two parents helping to raise their children Is it still true, that two parents are better? Fix nutrition and it will make a HUGE for communities

I fund my Periscopes and podcasts via audience micro-donations on Patreon. I prefer this method over accepting advertisements or working for a "boss" somewhere because it keeps my voice independent. No one owns me, and that is rare. I'm trying in my own way to make the world a better place, and your contributions help me stay inspired to do that.
See all of my Periscope videos here…
https://www.pscp.tv/ScottAdamsSays/1nAKERDOwylGL
Find my WhenHub Interface app here…
https://interface.whenhub.com

> [!note] Rough Transcript
> 
> This is an auto-generated transcript and may contain errors.

## Transcript

[0:09]

hey David come on in here and the rest of you too it's time Tyler I see you come on in here josea shot Miriam simper arene and Brad it's time for all of you to grab your beverage container I know it might be a mug a a glass it could be a Stein aalice some kind of container I like to fill mine with coffee your mileage may vary but what might not vary is your love for the simultaneous Sip and here it
comes oh I hope you ready for that cuz that was a good one oh yeah there is so much to talk about I almost don't know where to start hey Norm hey Dorothy so let's start with

[1:10]

Dorothy so let's start with uh oh let's start with vaccinations vaccinations um my only the only thing I'm going to weigh in on on vaccinations is that it's like so many other topics we're seeing in the news where there's sort of a pretend debate where people are actually talking about different things but we treat it like it's debating the same thing my understanding is that the antivaxers so-called antivaxers probably not a not a proper term but they say things such as yes we've tested all the vaccinations individually but we give them as a big group and nobody has tested what happens if you give them as a big group that might be a good point might be a good point I don't know but it's different from saying you shouldn't vaccinate all right those are not the same thing it's maybe the way we're doing it should be

[2:10]

maybe the way we're doing it should be spread out is a different statement then you should not vaccinate then there's the Rand Paul objection which is apparently uh apparently it's the maybe the only medical procedure where you don't need the parents approval to uh to treat the child and that's a tough one because I think the medical case for vaccines is pretty strong and therefore you know you can't really let some people say no because if some people say no then everybody is is more at risk so I'm not sure people are always talking about the same thing uh somebody says false false now I know some of you antivaxers and there probably are some of you here think that the the science doesn't make sense I I would tell you that probably what's going on if I put the what I would call

[3:12]

going on if I put the what I would call the um persuasion filter on the vaccination question if you're a parent and you have a kid who has some kind of medical issue and you have two choices you can even you can blame yourself maybe your choice of a partner your genetic makeup that created this kid or you can blame science for giving your kid a bad vaccination in theory if you took millions of people and put them in this position say okay something something bad happened with the health of your child you've got two two ways to go you can blame science and say science is bad and it damaged my child or you can blame yourself you should predict that some I don't know 20% of that population just to pick a
a number uh would say it's got to be science because the way humans are wired

[4:12]

science because the way humans are wired it's not easy to blame yourself for something horrible that happens to your own child so my guess is that at least I don't know 80% of what drives the antivaxers is is is that psychological phenomenon that you can't you can't blame yourself for something so bad happening to a child even if really you shouldn't blame yourself either I mean it's not like you intentionally passed along some Gene that might have had an issue or it's not like you intentionally raised your kid in a way that that damag them uh so that's my guess of where that vaccination stuff is all about all right let's talk about R Kelly did you all see the R Kelly clip of talking to Gail Gail Gail I forget what her last name is um and R Kelly is put on quite an act of being innocent now here's the

[5:13]

being innocent now here's the interesting thing so we're watching R Kelly and we're we're watching there's this special about Michael Jackson accusing him of pedophilia Gail King thank you Gail King interviewed um AR Kelly and here's the thing in any other time if you had gone back say 5 years um if you gone back 5 years you probably would have seen the Michael Jackson um thing and you would have said that's that evidence is solid he's definitely guilty five years ago you would looked at the arelly thing and said well I saw the special I watched the documentary there is no way there's that they are anything but guilty no way they're anything but guilty but here's the thing it's not 5 years ago now you have a better understanding that both the Michael Jackson thing and the R Kelly

[6:14]

Jackson thing and the R Kelly thing could be complete now my personal belief is that they're not my personal belief is that the evidence is overwhelming and that I would just be I would be blown away if either of those documentaries about R Kelly or about Michael Jackson are fundamentally wrong they might have some details wrong but I would be amazed but here's the here's the lesson of the day my certainty is not an indication of reality and that's what that's a little lesson that you should take with you all the time the fact that I'm positive they're both guilty is in no way evidence of their guilt and in fact since I can look at even a very recent case the Covington boy situation where I was completely fooled by my own eyes I thought right I thought I saw something with my own eyes and I was

[7:15]

with my own eyes and I was fooled so here's the cautionary lesson if you are positive that arelly is guilty and you're positive that Michael Jackson is guilty because you saw those documentaries you haven't learned anything you haven't learned
anything the odds of them being guilty pretty darn high but if you're 100% positive you haven't learned anything because you could be fooled by either one of those situations I think that's very unlikely but you have to at least keep that open keep that possibility open it keeps you safe for the next situation where you can at least ask yourself what is the other case now I told you that with the Michael Jackson case there's there's a pretty persuasive evidence on the other on the other side it's pretty persuasive I'll bet you that when R Kelly is done presenting his defense it will be persuasive to at least some people it might not persuade you it

[8:17]

people it might not persuade you it might not persuade me but I'll bet you the fact that he's pleading innocent suggests that his lawyer has an angle on this thing and the and the angle might be that you know there are so many witnesses that say it didn't happen so don't be surprised if you're feeling about how definitely these people are guilty starts to shift over time when when the persuaders weigh in on the other side don't be surprised let's talk about aanka and Jared's security clearance so apparently the president has the authority to order somebody to get security clearance even if they haven't been cleared he did something like that with both Jared and aanka and everybody's upset about it
it why why does anybody care about that do does anybody think that the president of the United States doesn't have a pretty good sense about his

[9:18]

good sense about his daughter and you know his son-in-law who he's been close to for a long time I would think that he has a pretty good idea what those two are up to now and and I guess there's some you know understanding that they both had International you know dealings um so that story is such a non story there's so little to it uh that it's it's telling you something that that's a story the fact that it's even a story tells you that the Democrats are running out of ammunition and that's sort of a theme of what I'm going to talk to talk about next um here's a rule I want you to test going forward so I think this is a predictive rule in fact I'm quite certain this is a predictive rule so I'm going to make a prediction about the future based on a rule and then I want you to track it and see if this rule you know comes through

[10:21]

see if this rule you know comes through so there's a question about the president's uh cam um whether he violated campaign Finance laws by making a payment through Cohen to Stormy Daniels and so the people who are who were critics of the president say he violated campaign law now there are lawyers who would agree the lawyer there are lawyers who would say yes that is if if these facts check out that's a violation of campaign law but here's the thing there are other lawyers who went to law school who who passed the bar who have practiced law for many years who look at the same set of facts and they say even if all the facts are true it's not clear that there's any law violated now hold that thought right all right so with the with the stormmy Daniels payment they're lawyers on both sides not of whether he's guilty here's

[11:22]

sides not of whether he's guilty here's the key point they're not arguing whether he's guilty they're arguing whether it's even a crime now let's uh let's go to the um obstruction of justice claim there's a claim that the president may have acted in a way that obstructed the Muller investigation and so some lawyers say if that happened and those facts can be demonstrated he's he's committed a crime obstruct obstruction of justice other lawyers who also pass the bar who also are practicing professional capable lawyers look at the same situation and they say the Mueller investigation is not a criminal investigation it's an intelligence investigation and there's no such thing as a law against the boss having influence over an intelligence investigation and therefore we're not

[12:25]

investigation and therefore we're not talking about whether he's he's guilty or innocent we're talking about whether it's even a crime so here's my predictive um predictive variable if smart intelligent working experienced lawyers are on both sides of the following question is that even
illegal nobody's going to jail you can take that to the bank I think now track this and see if I'm right in my opinion and I'd like some lawyers to weigh in on this given that these sort of things you know always end up in the Supreme Court if if they have that capability you know if that track is available because it's a president and because the stakes are high and there's some ambiguity you know you end up in the Supreme Court in what world does somebody get convicted of a crime in which there's a universe of lawyers

[13:25]

in which there's a universe of lawyers who went to law school looked at the facts everybody agrees on the facts and they say there's no crime this is not even illegal we don't even have to we don't have to ask ourselves if he committed a crime because there's no crime described it's not there's no illegality to be had no matter what he did because there's no crime here in my opinion you can make a prediction that there is essentially no chance that the that the president has legal any kind of significant legal um risk for either the stormy payments or for obstructing an investigation because there are smart lawyers who say we don't even know if this is a crime so I'm going to say that that's predictive and you could you could Bank on that you know you don't even have to worry about those two things anymore there might be other things you know that might be related other things but those two

[14:25]

related other things but those two things I have zero worry about and that's why why all right um I saw that there was at least one adviser I can't remember his name adviser to the Trump campaign at one point Who's Who got this who got the document request he was one of the 81 people and entities that the Congress um asked for documents and I believe he said he wasn't going to do it and he said it because it would just be a a crushing financial burden for all the lawyers and that it's a Witch Hunt and he's just not going to do it um Caputo yeah I think that was his name and Michael kaputo to which I say Michael kaputo is now my hero he's my hero I assume that this is a risky play I assume it's risky to say I know you're asking for these I know you have a legal right and I'm still not going to give it to you I really respect

[15:26]

going to give it to you I really respect that and I would respect it even more if the other 80 entities said the same damn thing because I think this one's worth fighting over I think you know there's everybody talks about the slippery slope and I always say there's no such thing as a slippery slope because as some point resistance appears maybe this is it maybe this is it you know maybe kaputo stand is is what gives other people a little backbone because if all 81 of them say all right I wanted to swear there but I I pulled myself back I hope you appreciate that I'll will say what if all 81 say screw it let's let's take it all the way I'm not even going to hire a lawyer you know what if all 81 had said I'm not even going to spend a penny I'm just going to ignore this put it in a drawer what would happen I don't know I mean because this you know Congress does have oversight but they don't have the right to ruin the country for political

[16:28]

right to ruin the country for political reasons and if it becomes obvious that they're trying to destroy the government for political reasons a perjury trap as somebody saying in the comments if it's sort of obvious that that's what's going on does anybody have a responsibility to comply let me put it this way you're a citizen of the United States you're a patriot and you're a patriot first let's say just a mental experiment you're a patriot first that's who you are that's your identity and you get this subpoena and you know that complying with it will make the country worse off resisting will put you at risk but if everybody else resisted maybe the country is better off because it you know it stops The Witch Hunt at least this part of the Witch Hunt I would go with the Patriot I would say that Michael kaputo is a patriot and I support his T if he decides to not

[17:30]

I support his T if he decides to not give them any documents uh I very much support it I support it for his his benefit I support it for the benefit of his family because there's a financial implication and I support it for the country so there's that um let's talk about the humanitarian crisis at the border um
um so Brandon Derby who I've had on my periscopes who is a expert on all things border on the uh on the southern border um I I Look to Him for the reasonable opinions on all things border so whenever whenever everybody gets a little crazy everyone every now and then you need to you know reorient yourself towards somebody who actually knows what they're talking about you know has lived and breathed that atmosphere for a long time as an expert on it and is reasonable and that's Brandon Derby

[18:30]

reasonable and that's Brandon Derby writes for Breitbart and he tweeted something that I retweeted and uh this is really important so this is from the White House so it's not from the president but it's from the White House so same family and the White House tweeted uh human cargo all right just catch the drift here right human cargo sexual assault filthy stash houses debt bondage all Horrors that would have no place place to hide in a modern safe and secure immigration system the truth is that the crisis at our border hurts US citizens and migrants alike and then there's a graphic that one out of three women are sexually abused uh on the Jour Journey to the border so in other words the White House has started to frame this as a humanitarian crisis I'll read it again so instead of saying criminals are coming across the border and they're going to M you know Murder Americans that was the old thing or that's maybe

[19:31]

that was the old thing or that's maybe the president still says that we don't know but the White House the official thing concentrated on the human the humanitarian element of it that the migrants themselves are suffering greatly because of the situation uh Brandon retweets that and he says imagine if you folks talking about the White House imagine if you folks had presented this humanitarian argument for border security from the get-go yeah imagine that how much better that would have been uh we'd have the needed barrier built by now I hope you continue with this focus and I would like to amplify that thought same one that I've been saying largely you know in a sense taking his lead so um what I've been saying for a while and some of you um I
always morning allergies I always like to uh remind you that I do criticize the president's choices sometimes

[20:32]

the president's choices sometimes because people say he you're you're SE in the bag for him all you say is good things we can't trust you but here's one the uh here's a situation in which I criticize the president's approach I think his talking about crime was a great thing to get elected but once he's got to govern the whole country I think talking about the humanitarian crisis is a stronger way to go because it's less susceptible to the the racism um charge so at this point I think that uh I do have a Netty Pot for my allergies it's great but I use it after I do these things that's the next thing I'm going to
do um so so my point being that if the president takes the lead that maybe is just being tested out by the White House Twitter account I think sometimes you know the president a little AB testing coming from other accounts so if he sees something from the White House and the

[21:34]

something from the White House and the White House says let's focus let you know let's look at this humanitarian element if that gets a good response you should expect that the president might want to adopt that you know based on how it how it works out so I hope he does because that would be the most healing thing that could happen is if the president just focused on the humanitarian element and probably would get us to the same Place uh I saw there's some some potential contractor for building the wall who offered to do it for a much cheaper price than what the budget looks like right now so that's an element that's kind of interesting too
too um now let's talk about a little more racism somebody says cannabis is good for your allergies yes it is if anybody doesn't know that if you have bad allergies by the way um if you smoke a little weed in my case I can't speak for other

[22:35]

weed in my case I can't speak for other people and I certainly would not give you medical advice so don't take any medical advice from cartoonist but I'll tell you my experience is that we'll it stops an anal it stops an allergy cold like it stops it immediately and it's just over just no more no more allergies is just gone as soon as you as soon as you
you smoke um so but not what I wanted to talk about I want to talk about representative Omar now this is interesting so as you know representative Omar has said a number of comments about Israel and About the Benjamins so to speak meaning money and about the is Israel Lobby running Congress and buying them off and such and of course the critics are saying you anti-semite these are anti-semitic Secret whistles so it seems the secret dog whistle is in the other mouth now doesn't it does it sound

[23:38]

doesn't it does it sound familiar yes it does sound familiar so the
the president tweeted let's see do I have his tweet yes so then there's a a bill that's been considered in the house to condemn anti-Semitism and Nancy bosi uh sort of got cornered by this and now she has to condemn anti-Semitism but the the bill got shot down now from a political perspective is there anything more entertaining than watching the the you know the Charlottesville fine people hoax being put on the other foot because the Democrats now have to either condemn their upand cominging stars because if you condemn Omar you're sort of condemning anybody who supported her such as AOC they either have to do that and have this big split where they're fighting

[24:39]

this big split where they're fighting with each other but if they don't condemn them they have to explain why they're not willing to condemn anti-Semitism it's just like this perfect political setup you know it feels like the Democrats have been herded into this you know this small Ravine and then you know the SHO is going to
start I shouldn't say anything with shooting in it when I'm talking about politics so remove the shooting that was a bad analogy um so the president weighs into this and he says in his his tweet he goes it is shameful the house Democrats won't take a stronger stand against anti-Semitism in their conference anti-Semitism has fueled atrocities from history and it's inconceivable they will not act to condemn it exclamation mark so the president sees this opening and and he walks in and it it's perfect all right

[25:40]

walks in and it it's perfect all right so I I just criticize the president for his handling of the border the Border stuff how he frames the Border problem but this he nailed and I usually don't I usually don't you know do the gotcha Sports you know I don't like it when somebody says Ah you hypocrite you did this and now we're doing this but this is so clever and so perfectly symmetrical meaning that it's it's a it's it's a perfect you know structure just like the attacks against the president for the past three years that it's too delicious not to talk about so the Democrats have have formed this circular firing squad and the president is sort of like the narrator you know just just imagine this that they so they've got this circular firing squad the Democrats do and and the president's like and they've lined up in the circular firing squad he's like the narrator and it looks like uh

[26:42]

like the narrator and it looks like uh they're loading their weapons well I shouldn't use weapons again let me take guns out of all my analogies I've got some kind of a gun analogy problem this morning but imagine I didn't say anything about any of that so the president's having a little bit of fun with this you have to assume uh and the people who bought into the the fine people hoax from Charlottesville you know the hoax where CNN and MSNBC and the anti-trumpers reported the fake news that the president had called the marching anti-semitic uh White nationalists the the fake news was that he called them fine people when in fact he was talking about people who were on both sides of the statue Confederate statue issue he wasn't talking about the racist in particular so uh so that hoax um is still out there and if you believe that hoax as probably 80% of the

[27:45]

believe that hoax as probably 80% of the country did if you fell for the fine people hoax the CNN and the others were serving up how do you explain that he's now tweeting against anti-Semitism like it how do you explain that Israel loves them how do you explain that his his grandchildren are Jewish you know how do you explain anything so the president is continuing to you know add you know add another I don't know uh let's see what would I say it's more like Jenga it's more like he's taking another block out of
of their of their fake news uh hallucination that he ever called the racist fine people just one by one he's like did I call the anti-semites in Charlesville fine people did you know my daughter is Jewish takes in a Jango block well not enough did you know my my son-in-law did you know my grandkids are

[28:46]

son-in-law did you know my grandkids are Jewish did you hear that Israel loves me and I move the our Embassy to Jerusalem still not good enough not good enough how about I condemn anti-semites in Congress and force them to to change their ways how about that take that one out still there getting a little wobbly little wobbly and then um you may have seen Joel poock uh tweeted today it's day nine since he called out in Breitbart in his article called out to fake news about the quote fine people that hoax and he's waiting for C then to run a correction but of course they won't not only will they not correct they will not address it it's this big long Cricut Fest chirp chirp chirp it's like it didn't even happen so so he and I and others are

[29:49]

happen so so he and I and others are calling the fine people thing a hoax and there's no push back because there can't be as soon as they push back it'll all fall apart because pushing back will draw attention to it and if if you put any attention to it at all it just falls apart all right so that's interesting um I was I had to look up the word Allegiance because wasn't that Omar's uh complaint that there were members of Congress who were showing quote allegiance to Israel and I actually had to look up the word because I wasn't sure I knew EX exactly what that meant so here's a definition Allegiance this is the first definition is a loyalty or obligation of loyalty as to a nation Sovereign or blah blah blah and and so I said okay Allegiance is loyalty to a to a nation for example which would be the case would it be true

[30:52]

which would be the case would it be true that American Congress people have a loyalty to Israel and I thought I better look up loyalty just to make sure right so you look up loyalty and the definition of feeling or attitude of devoted attachment and affection would it be true that American Congress people have a feeling toward Israel that could be described as a feeling or attitude of devoted
attachment and affection I would say yes wouldn't you I would say that we have that feeling against all of our allies not against we have that feeling about England you know Great Britain we have that feeling about Japan we have that feeling about South Korea we have that feeling about France we have that feeling about Germany we you know we have close

[31:52]

have close attachments uh we have attitudes of devoted attachment and affection and
and affection for all of our close allies is Israel a close Ally yeah sure so why wouldn't we have affection for Israel um but there is another definition of Allegiance and the other definition is where you treat them as your as your boss basically so one definition of Allegiance is essentially affection which I would say is fair another definition is is uh sort of fty to or obeying and that would be the second definition um and that one doesn't seem to apply in this case so uh do we have affection for the Saudis not as much I think that would be fair to say not as much all right uh now

[32:52]

fair to say not as much all right uh now Cala Harris had a quote about this and she said that here's the quote from Kamala Harris she said I am concerned that the spotlight being put on congresswoman Omar may put her at risk the spotlight on congresswoman Omar may put her at risk true or false I'd say true what did Cala Harris say about President Trump she quoted the fine people hoax and me at risk me personally I am personally at risk because of what Cala Harris says in public um in which he spreads the fine people hoax because since I say good things about President Trump on a regular basis I say I criticize as well as you saw in this Periscope already but mostly I say good things about his skill level because he has a good skill

[33:54]

level because he has a good skill level it puts me at risk as a supporter when she goes on television and says that uh the president called racist fine people which simply didn't happen it's fake news so Cala I agree with your point Kamala Harris has a really really good point that the uh putting the emphasis on congresswoman Omar may put her at risk at physical risk it's a good good point she put me a risk she being Kamal Harris not Omar Kamal Harris put me a physical risk she's one of the reasons that I don't do public events and she continues that hoax and it's one of the most dangerous things in the country so I I take her point that it does put Omar at risk now

[34:59]

point that it does put Omar at risk now uh nobody wants anybody to be um physically touched certainly but Omar certainly has a political risk all
right now
now uh you may have seen uh some teasers on the internet for a new show um on the internet with Candace Owens so Candace Owens has um her own show uh I don't have the details of it but if you Google Candace owens's show I'm sure it'll come up and I saw a teaser that she's going to be talking to uh Hawk Nome you could not there's nothing you could do to stop me from watching that oh it's somebody says it's on Prager you I think that's right um oh my God I so want to watch that uh but they they had a little teaser and I want to talk about that for a

[35:59]

and I want to talk about that for a moment so in the teaser and it was edited so you don't know if you got the whole context but um Candace was talking about the importance of fathers and I assume the context was inner cities you know the African-American um situation and it looked like Candace was saying something that would be a typical Conservative Republican thing to say which is um we need to put more emphasis on father because that will help things Hawk it looked like he was pushing back and here we don't have the full context so let me not you know I hope I'm not misrepresenting either of them but I think this was in the Hawk's comment was in relationship to the same conversation and he talked about the uh his importance or his priority was uh food equality meaning that if African-American kids specifically I think is the is the idea if they had the

[37:01]

think is the is the idea if they had the same nourishment their performance and their behavior and everything would be different to the point where that would be the biggest lever that you could play with so you got hog Newsome saying fix food equality and you've got Candice saying we need you know more fathers fathers need to stay around these single mom families are you know having a problem and you for those of you who don't know my history I had been working with Hawke trying to get a constructive conversation going for for months and months but he sort of made a strategic pivot toward being a little more uh anti-white if I can just say it that way so when he was trying to to push for equality I was Allin and I wanted to help as much as I could but when it became sort of anti-white I said sorry Hawk we have to Parkways you know that's that's the end of the road for for us now I can't read Hawk's mind and I won't

[38:03]

now I can't read Hawk's mind and I won't try to I will point out that he may have to act strategically in terms of things he does to satisfy his base those are his decisions I don't I don't have an opinion on it right now I just couldn't work with him so it's not personal it's just he and I could not have a continued conversation once he became um overtly anti-white in the way he was framing things so I don't know what he's thinking I won't say he has personal thoughts like that but politically he was framing it that way so I was out Candice just so you have a full sense of my bias before I give you make my point Candace I'm a big fan of I met her in person when I did um Fox and Friends a few months ago uh she introduced herself gave me a big hug she makes the best first impression you've ever seen in a human being you know big smile comes over gives me a hug we exchange some compliments so I have a

[39:04]

exchange some compliments so I have a really positive feeling about her and I got a bit of an attitude about Hawk because he went in a direction that I can't support but on this point the one point about fathers the value of fathers and then the other view which is not contrary but it's another view Hawk's View the foodie equality might be the bigger lever I might be leaning toward Hawk I might be leaning toward Hawk and let me run through this for you so you can see now I will accept that uh a father a good father and a good mother is sort of an ideal situation for kids so I think that's just a given but let me say this historically you pretty much had to have two parents and one of them needed to be a dad to survive and and do okay because women couldn't earn as much money they weren't

[40:04]

couldn't earn as much money they weren't safe if a man wasn't around I'm talking about historically but time goes by right and now women can earn as much as men uh and you can hire a housekeeper and you can use door Dash to feed your kid and maybe you're maybe you're maybe the grandparents are watching the kid so today I would ask you this question in a generic sense if you had to choose between the these two choices and this is all you knew you could have a kid who has one good parent and I'm going to I'll Define good as somebody who has a a good income loves the kid and doesn't have any abuse problems or addictions or anything like that so that's a good parent they love the kid they do what they can they make a good income the kid is taken care of and maybe the grandparents are part of that too compare that that's a single parent situation with an average two parent situation and the the

[41:05]

average two parent situation and the the key word and the trick word is an average two parent situation which is better the good one parent who has a good income and means well and doesn't have any problems or an average two two parents because if you take the average of any two parents one of them's probably going to be bad one of them is going to be a jerk on average on average one of those two parents isn't going to know how to be a parent on average one of them might not have a job and bring down the income of the whole deal on average one might have an addiction on average one might be cheating on the other one on average one of them might be an abuser so on average one of them might be really dumb and not be able to teach the kid good lessons so I would argue that

[42:08]

kid good lessons so I would argue that historically and really historically all the way through maybe the 80s it was unambiguously true that a two parent situation is just just going to beat a one parent situation not 100% of the time but you could depend on it to be a pretty good rule of thumb and so it would be worth shooting for that as a standard in the past but today I would argue that one good parent if you knew one was going to be good is a better situation than two average parents because the average is one of them is going to be bad and that's a terrible situation to grow up in one bad parent is is a big big problem that affects everybody so I would say and let me let me end this a little bit because it's 2019 uh two women let's say two women who are married could they raise a kid as well as two

[43:10]

as two average you know man women combinations probably in most cases you get a great outcome so I would think that the the old rules of if you need a dad in the situation was definitely true from you know something like the 80s all the way back to the beginning of time it was as true as anything could be true but in 2019 you can be a single parent if you're a good one and you're going to get a pretty good result now I would add to this conversation that um over in Great Britain there are uh you know there have a situation where the kid reaches a certain age and they send them off to boarding school now the boarding school has neither a mother or a father just a boarding school now I haven't seen the statistics but I have to think that that situation does pretty well in raising a kid I mean they still have parents but they don't have much contact

[44:11]

parents but they don't have much contact with them when they're at school they're at boarding school and so I would say that we do have evidence that the the you have to have a dad in the family can be a real advantage and maybe even more often than not but I don't think it's the golden bullet it used to be so I'm going to give you this summary of that having a a good mother and a good father or two good Mothers or two good Fathers great situation the kid I think will Thrive as long as the two of them are good two is better than one right for income for caring for all kinds of reasons Two Is Better Than One I agree with that as a general rule but there problem lots of cases where one good parent is way better than one good one and one bad one better than two bad ones better than two average ones so there there are a growing number of situations where the one parent situation unfortunately you

[45:11]

one parent situation unfortunately you know nobody would prefer this maybe but unfortunately there are plenty of situations where that's the case now let's talk about um so so I'm going to agree in general with Candace's view that having a good dad and and a good mother or any two all extended this is my own I don't know what Candace would say but I think any two parents depending doesn't matter the gender would do a great job now let's talk about uh Hawk's idea which you don't often see which is if you fix nutrition you get a lot of big benefits I think he's right on that but here's the better part it's testable so Hawk has proposed a testable hypothesis that I think has enough scientific backing that is worth trying so I would love to see some philanthropist say Okay Hawk let's just test this we'll we'll pick a group of

[46:11]

test this we'll we'll pick a group of people we'll have a control group and we'll give um I the billionaire we'll make sure that this group of kids this family let's say they get good nutrition I I'll I'll just send them the food and they'll have good nutrition and then you just you just check their grades you check their performance you check you know their uh let's say uh legal issues what they have and you just track it you could probably track it for I'm no scientist but five years in five years would you have a pretty good idea if nutrition changed outcomes now whether that works or doesn't work I think Hawk has presented a testable hypothesis that has logic behind it it has you know experience suggests it's a smart thing to do and it also suggests uh that it's testable so I got to say I give an A+ to

[47:14]

testable so I got to say I give an A+ to Hawk's proposal it doesn't solve every problem but it's not meant to as a testable High leverage potentially High leverage thing that is very um accessible we could test that it's very very testable and and so to me it seems almost um irresponsible if we don't if if there's nobody testing that hypothesis I would find that irresponsible and I would back walk 100% on that proposal which is not to say that a great dad wouldn't be an advantage too yeah there's plenty plenty of evidence that um plenty of evidence that good nutrition changes outc comes plenty of evidence of that all right uh Hawk has a legal background somebody somebody asked what was his background he's a lawyer all right um I think we've covered all our points

[48:17]

um I think we've covered all our points uh I'll give you one little tease uh after I talk to you Dr Shiva on the topic of climate and I asked the question uh is there any kind of gold old standard any any one testable part of climate change where both the Skeptics and the climate scientists who say we have a big problem is there any one thing we could all look at where we would say okay if this happens then climate change is real and if it doesn't happen climate change is definitely not a problem is there one easily tested hypothesis because no matter what you look at there's always something else if you say hey we tested the ice cores somebody's going to say those ice cores are wrong and then you say well we check the thermometers and somebody will say those thermometers are wrong so it's kind of this whacka mole thing but is there any one thing and I will tease this to say that uh Dr Shiva called me yesterday and said he had an idea for

[49:19]

yesterday and said he had an idea for that one thing and I'm not going to tell you what it is yet because he's going to summarize that for me and then I'll um you know invite him on and we'll present it to you maybe I'm not sure if he needs to be on for that because it could be just one sentence but we'll see what he comes up with but what we talked about did in fact sound to me like a totally testable hypothesis that if it if it's not true and we could observe it if it's not true climate change is not a problem and if it is true climate change is definitely a problem and way till you see it and uh so you know you'll have your chance to weigh in as to whether it's a good idea or not but I was surprised I have to admit I was surprised to find out that there might be something objectively testable that everybody would agree with there might actually be that thing and so we'll we'll find out soon all

[50:22]

right um somebody said how could there be one thing we could test see that's the trick I'm teasing it but I don't want to tell you the answer there is a pretty good answer and it will surprise you because it surprised me it's not going to be as obvious as just measuring the temperature all right and I will talk to you all later