Episode 1264 Scott Adams: All the News That’s Fit to Sip. Get in Here.

Date: 2021-01-26 | Duration: 1:10:23

Topics

Find my “extra” content on Locals: https://ScottAdams.Locals.com

Rough Transcript

This is an auto-generated transcript and may contain errors.

Transcript

---

• Twitter’s new Birdwatch feature

• Israel will attack Iran if Biden/Iran nuclear deal

• Will Biden clash with teachers unions?

• Impeaching George Washington over slavery

• Critical Ethnic Studies in California high schools

• Aaron Rupar and cannibal dinner invites

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.
---
[0:05]

hey everybody come on in here it's time it's time for coffee with scott adams from across the world well i suppose it depends where you are i might be where you are could be you could be right next door i wouldn't even know it but i'm in french polynesia still for a little bit longer and oh by the way there's a i think there is one day that i know i won't be able to periscope coming up so if there's a day this week i think it might be uh thursday morning not sure about that either wednesday or thursday i'm not not going to be able to periscope so let me tell you about all the stuff that's happening all the all the news that's fit to sip as i like to say but before that isn't there something you're missing is there something you're missing yeah there is it's called the simultaneous sip
sip eric eric finnman good to see you

[1:08]

eric eric finnman good to see you and do you have your copper mug or glass eric i hope you do and i hope the rest of you do too because will i remember the entire toast let's see uh grab a copper mug and glass tank or chalice vessel of any kind fill it with your favorite liquid i like coffee and join me now for the unparalleled pleasure of the dopamine the other day the thing that makes everything better yeah everything better it's called the simultaneous symptom that happens now go
oh yes so there's a an awkwardness that i should just call out because i'm vacationing at a very nice place i hesitate to show it to people because if they can't vacation at a nice place it's just sort of gross to put it in people's face on the other

[2:10]

put it in people's face on the other hand i do like a little bit of transparency in my life and it would be no secret to anybody that especially for my honeymoon i can go to a nice place and so i didn't think i would need to hide that from any of you and i was hoping that some of you would enjoy the the tales from bora bora so last night christine and i were doing dinner on the beach you know the their tables there as part of the restaurant as part of the resort and there was this fire dancing group entertaining us and here's here's the funny thing there there are so few people at this resort i don't think i've seen more than 20 people all week and this is a place that would normally hold hundreds or a thousand or something but maybe 20 people i've seen in the entire resort and it's the same you know couples you see every time now i don't know what the actual number is i've only seen the same 20 people but so there are maybe 12 of us total

[3:11]

so there are maybe 12 of us total watching this show that's it just 12 people watching this fire dancing show so i thought well that's not nearly enough these guys put in a lot of work to do this yeah they're they're twirling these lit torches so i fired up periscope and i just started live streaming these fire dancers and i didn't know what to expect but i think already there have been over a hundred thousand views or two different videos so between the two of them a hundred thousand views now in terms of viewers probably there'll be a hundred thousand of them by the end of the day you know right now it's views but there'll probably be that many viewers and i thought to myself i wonder if these guys know that they just went international they literally were being streamed all over the planet with just this little thing in my in my hand and a good uh a good sell signal and that's it and and suddenly their show was worldwide and here's the funny part i don't think

[4:13]

and here's the funny part i don't think they know it so yesterday you know they gave a show to the entire planet tens of thousands of of audience members the only people who don't know it is the people who gave the show nobody told them so i just think that's an
an interesting little slice of life there all right interesting thing uh twitter is introducing a new feature which uh is getting mixed reviews before anybody even sees it that's the way things go uh and the the new feature is trying to get at these censorship problems um well not censorship so much as
as fake news it's more of a fake news solution or attempted solution now of course you know from my other periscopes that i'm always always in favor of testing a new solution so those of you who are saying my god it's the end of the world this new feature will just be bad like everything else in the world you might be right

[5:15]

world you might be right it's entirely possible that twitter would rule you know roll out a new feature and might make things worse anything could happen right it's a it's an interesting world but don't you have to first of all appreciate testing new stuff i think you got to give it to him for that right i mean you can criticize the social media platforms for a billion different things and that would be valid but you can't criticize them for testing solutions that part i like so let's keep that part now what could go wrong plenty right that's the problem what could go wrong with this new feature so the feature i don't know the details but
but in broad strokes it allows you to add context to other people's tweets so if i understand it correctly you'd be able to say uh here's another story that's the counterpoint to that or some some background that would make the story look different

[6:16]

the story look different now how is that bad now some people are saying well uh you know that we already have that it's called the comments you can already leave a comment but how often do you read the comments on a tweet i mean seriously how often do you dig into the comments of a tweet i do often but not as a percentage as a percentage of the time i usually just read read the tweets probably eighty percent of the time now i i see what you're saying that you that about that you often some of you often read the tweets so i would say 20 percent of the time i dig in and it depends on the tweet right if i think i understand the tweet and there's nothing to talk about i'm not going to dig into the comments and those are the dangerous ones the dangerous ones are the things are the ones that i think i know the story by reading the headline if i'm being honest half of the news i consume is just the headline because the rest of the story is unnecessary right

[7:17]

unnecessary right most of the time the headline is all you need to know there's nothing else beyond the headline that has any value at all usually now sometimes you're wrong sometimes there are lots of important nuggets in the story but
but we we're busy people and i have to decide when do i you know when do i dig into the comments and look for it and when do i just read the headline and move on so the practical reality of it is that we read the headlines and move on now wouldn't it be nice if instead of having to dig through some comment that could be in a in a string with hundreds or thousands of comments wouldn't it be nice if for every story that had a need for context it was just right there click this button to see the other side or click this button to see the top rated counterpoints something like that now i do think that there's some way to solve this

[8:18]

that there's some way to solve this problem i'll tell you a way that probably won't work and i saw jack posabic was tweeting an old tweet of mine in which you side by side you can see how wikipedia talks about the fine people hoax and then you can see the transcript the actual transcript from the event and you can see how different they are and
and i don't know the current situation of the
the wikipedia story about the find people oaks but i was involved with at least one of the editors who was trying to fix that some time ago and every time it got fixed to match the transcript that's it just just fixing it to match what the transcript says editors would would re-edit it and turn it back to the fake uh hoax to the the whole side of me and it would happen almost instantly as if somebody was just sitting on it waiting to change it back to the hoax now i don't know where it is now

[9:19]

now i don't know where it is now but at one point it was almost just where i would put it in other words it stated that the president said he wasn't talking about the neo-nazis etc
etc so once you say that clearly that debunks the hoax so what happens if this new twitter feature this bird watch is anything like wikipedia it's a problem right because this is a very specific observable example where wikipedia because of its business model if you can call it a business because of its model the public can distort the news now ideally they can't distort it forever because there will be enough people coming in to correct it that the correction will eventually overcome any errors and that normally is the way it works but i think in this narrow realm of politics the the trolls or the people who want to protect the incorrect story are just too

[10:20]

protect the incorrect story are just too strong there's just too many of them so this is the one realm on which wikipedia is difficult to self-correct because there's too much incentive to keep it incorrect which wouldn't apply to most of its content right but i don't think that bird watch is heading to the the wikipedia model the wikipedia model tries to get you one story that's correct i don't think twitter is trying to do that and it would be a mistake if they did
did i think they're trying to show you what people say if it's a reasonable counterpoint and you know it can be expressed that way so if if what twitter does is surface the points and the counterpoints in the context maybe they have something if what they're doing is looking for the one correct the one correct narrative that's worse can we agree on that if it turns into a wikipedia-like narrative-telling situation where

[11:21]

narrative-telling situation where there's one truth that comes out of it that's worse if it shows both sides and doesn't try to play favorites just hey here's the argument make up your own mind that's better because if somebody tweets something let's say they believe something they saw on cnn and i put a comment on it in our current model without this new feature who's going to see it right the people i want to persuade or inform not likely they're going to see it but what would happen if i made the best argument against the tweet that i thought was you know a wrong narrative or interpretation well if i make a really good counterpoint the odds of my counterpoint floating up to the top should improve right because it's a good counterpoint other people see it they say yeah that's what i would say he's saying this you know the way i would say it so i have uh i have some optimism for

[12:21]

so i have uh i have some optimism for this feature but i'll acknowledge there's a million ways it could go wrong all right um somebody somebody's building a face mask that has a covered test indicator built into the face mask so i think something would change color based on the droplets coming out of your mouth all day eventually they might build up to the point where it could measure them and i said to myself if we can do that shouldn't we have rapid tests already if you can build that technology into a mask you you can't just put it in a
a pack of gum and sell it to me over the counter and if the problem is that the mask would be let's say a lower lower sensitivity than a proper covert test then don't you have a problem with the fda
fda right the whole problem with the rapid tests is that they're lower by design they're lower sensitivity and that's the problem the fda doesn't

[13:22]

and that's the problem the fda doesn't want low sensitivity tests out there even if they would be more useful than high sensitivity tests because you could do them in volume so uh i don't think this this thing about the mask having the test built into it i don't think that can work unless rapid tests can work and i don't see how they they're going to get improved right away although the biden administration apparently is doing a better job on that approving that stuff
one of the one of the questions that i was asked here is to teach people how to know who to trust in the news which is a good question right how do you know who to trust all the pundits all the experts all the the news people you know what what uh rules do you use and there are lots of them but i'm going to put one of them out there somebody says trust no one trusting no

[14:23]

somebody says trust no one trusting no one is a really good that's a good starting point right trust no one is a good starting point i agree with that but there are some some situations that stand out more than others all right you're going to end up probably not trusting but let's say siding with a side you're probably going to do that so you'd like as much knowledge as you could about you know who's more credible here's a little tip don't trust anybody who has a brand consistency problem here's what i mean by that a brand consistency problem is you've you've built yourself into a kind of voice you're you you always have a kind of slant on things you're you're the person who's known for saying whatever as soon as you're the person who's known for saying whatever and you start monetizing that your credibility goes right out the door

[15:25]

your credibility goes right out the door because you sort of need to stay that person to be the brand that people are coming to
to and now what do you do because you need to be that person all right and i'm going to mention a specific person but i want to generalize the point right so it's not about a specific person so you've been watching alex berenson who's probably maybe the most notable or famous i would say skeptic would be the right word so when you see him appearing or writing and and he's all over the place with the coronavirus story i believe he worked at the new york times so he's he's a credible kind of person with a credible resume and he's been skeptical of a lot of the data science that's coming out of the chronovirus stuff now in the beginning of the pandemic is it useful to have a skeptic yeah it's really useful you really do want some strong voices to

[16:26]

you really do want some strong voices to say
say you say that that makes sense scientifically but where's your data and then you show the data and then you still want somebody to say yeah but i don't think that data says what you think it's going to say so a skeptic with credentials you know at least journalistic credentials like alex berenson very very valuable you you want as many of those as you can get smart people right you don't want dumb skeptics you want a smart legitimately professional person who's an actual skeptic so from that point of view he's a national treasure right i always appreciate skeptics they're national treasures if especially if they go against the grain and it's going to cost them something professionally it probably did he probably took a hit professionally but i think he was starting out doubting uh and maybe still does i don't know his exact position on masks and uh social distancing and and lockdowns now is it reasonable to be a skeptic on

[17:28]

now is it reasonable to be a skeptic on masks social distancing and lockdowns yeah yeah it's reasonable completely reasonable is it right i don't know right i don't know because we don't have data we can trust which would be the point of a skeptic right the whole point of a skeptic is hey this data you're selling us it's not reliable so when you see somebody like behrenson say your data is not reliable on mass social distancing whatever else i feel like using pretty solid ground most of the time like i think that most of the time that data is not reliable meaning it's not it's not really nailed down that these are these facts are telling you what you think they're telling you but as time goes by those things which you should be properly skeptical about you get a little more clarity over time i believe that the consensus of science

[18:29]

i believe that the consensus of science and even maybe skeptics is that that masks surely must make some difference so uh not so much protecting you from virus but from the ones that you might be giving off but now now we have vaccinations would you take the same level of skepticism for mass and lockdowns and stuff and take that to vaccinations you should because skepticism everywhere is
is is always a valuable uh asset right even if it's wrong you want that point and counterpoint you always want that so uh alex berenson was uh tweeting i think the other day yesterday that the israel has not yet shown any effect from their vaccinations and they seem to be the most uh the most complete in getting people vaccinated over 65 at least and i saw that and i thought i don't know is this where you want to put the

[19:30]

is this where you want to put the skepticism i would have waited a little bit but almost five minutes after he tweeted that israel is not showing any any difference joel pollock and other people who were also following it said no actually the data is really clear here's the graph three weeks after the vaccination started you see the hospitalizations not every other measure but just hospitalizations just plummeted so who is right is alex berenson's chart and data that didn't seem to show anything uh obvious happening there is that right or
or are the other people who said no here's the current information on hospitalizations and there are actual stories based on news reports are they right i don't know the problem is they're just because you see a data in a news story it doesn't mean it's right anymore

[20:31]

it's right anymore it used to it used to make me think it was probably right but not anymore you can't really trust anything anymore but if i had to bet i would bet they're working and i would bet that the graphs showing uh lower hospitalizations i would bet that's accurate i would bet the things are going the right direction so to my first question who should you trust alex berenson has the problem which is not necessarily his fault right this is not a criticism but once you become the skeptic guy it's hard to get out of that right once you're the skeptic guy that's why you get asked to be on the show it's why a publisher will will publish your book and it would be easy to overdo the skepticism all right so uh bringing you back to the

[21:32]

all right so uh bringing you back to the specific personality is alex berenson a credible person yes yes he's a very credible person but if you take the most credible person in the world and put them in a situation where they've got a brand compatibility issue that credibility you have to mentally adjust it right so that would be one tip for knowing who to trust it doesn't matter how credible or smart or well informed the person is if they have a brand issue and that's what you want to look for now am i suggesting that alex berenson would intentionally say something that was wrong for his brand no no i have no reason to believe he would do anything intentionally i'm just saying that you should not make any assumptions about people's internal thoughts and if they have a brand issue factor that in here's a dog that's not barking what is the biden administration

[22:32]

what is the biden administration approach to north korea why are we hearing anything about that did north korea suddenly become no problem because if it is no problem isn't that trump and if it is a problem what's he doing about it what's the what's the biden administration take on north korea
would you like to know that's going to be a fun one assuming the world doesn't blow up it's going to be really fun to see how biden handles north korea because he doesn't have that same relationship etc so i just wonder why we're not hearing anything about it i guess kim jong-un would have to do something provocative to
to to make that happen so we're already seeing that china is they did some uh flexing their muscle did some flyover over uh taiwanese airspace and uh i think they're really gonna start

[23:32]

uh i think they're really gonna start flexing on biden we'll see if we'll see what he does so biden did sign some kind of a buy american uh legislation but it only applies to government stuff and when i heard that i said to myself wait what joe biden had to pass some kind of a law or exam must have been an executive order he had to i think it was executive order he had to change something to make the government of the united states prefer american products and i thought we didn't already do that i mean i get why you wouldn't necessarily do it with the public but the government i feel as if the government should be buying from american producers if there's any product that meets the need so and i also ask myself trump didn't do that are you telling me that joe biden had to do the thing that was trump's brand which is by american

[24:34]

trump's brand which is by american why didn't trump do that can we say that that was a plus for biden okay can we be objective oh by the way i'm
i'm you're you're watching me model the very thing i was talking about not doing one of the reasons that i i tell you from the start is that i'm left of bernie but i liked a lot of a lot of what trump did is it confuses you about what my brand is
is i do that intentionally and i do that to make sure i don't get it in a brand trap where there are some topics i just can't talk about because nobody would trust me they're like ah you're the you're the guy who always says that so part of my brand risk is that people who have not followed me closely they think that i always agree with trump no matter whatever trump does now those of you who follow me know that that's not even close and here's an example as far as i can tell just looking at it from you know you

[25:34]

just looking at it from you know you never know the details but it looks to me like this was a biden's success to require that our government only buys american that looks like abiding success and if trump had done it i would have said that's a trump success and it looks like it was something trump could have done and didn't do now if you dug into this story you might find out that there's nothing there it might be all smoke and mirrors which might be why trump didn't do it it could be that we'd be better off buying let's say a french generator if no american makes that product it could be that we already buy american whenever it's an option don't you think if you're if you if you're the procurement person for the government no matter what part of the government you're in and you have a choice of the lithuanian product or the american product and they both do the same thing for

[26:34]

and they both do the same thing for about the same price don't you think you were going to buy the american product anyway so i don't know if it makes any difference it may be entirely just for show but let me be consistent if trump had done this and even if it were just for show i would still say it's the right thing to do
do because it's part of a it's part of the let's say how you change minds about what is right and smart so even if it didn't make any practical difference to have the government you know required to buy american stuff because they probably were pretty close to doing that anyway it sends us a message and it's a good one
one you know that this is the direction we're going everywhere we can find an opportunity to buy american we're going to do it even if it's a small opportunity so that's abiding success in my opinion i'm going to give them that one um cnn being more entertainingly ridiculous

[27:37]

being more entertainingly ridiculous than ever uh had a chiron which is the name for the
the little message that appears at the bottom of the screen it's called the chiron c-h-y-r-o-n in case you wondered and so on cnn's reliable sources uh you you know that sorry the chiron was below a picture of biden's spokesperson jen pasaki and it said that pasaki promises to share accurate information and then in parentheses how refreshing
this is on so cnn their coverage their critical coverage of the biden presidency is that biden's spokesperson promises to share accurate information how refreshing oh my god uh glenn greenwald came in to uh to dunk on them in a tweet and
and greenwald says i once again humbly

[28:37]

greenwald says i once again humbly submit that this would be a bridge too far even for north korean state television which is usually a bit more subtle and discerning than this and i think he nailed it the cnn obviously wants access to government people because they can't report the worst thing would be to be cnn and have no access to you know interviews because you know they don't like you so apparently they're they're in the business of getting liked by the biden administration so they have access but it is actually it's literally funny to watch uh have forming there now somebody's saying it's like fox to trump and you're not wrong so i'm not going to defend i'm not going to defend anybody else on this but this is actually pretty funny i told you yesterday that if you saw vice president harris getting a portfolio like a special job

[29:40]

getting a portfolio like a special job for a vice president like al gore had a special job fixing the government's processes and mike pence has a special job with a crew or had with the coronavirus task force so if you see a vice president get a special portfolio that would be an indication that that person is going to stay a vice president for a while but i told you that if you see that harris does not get a portfolio it might mean that they're grooming her to be uh step in fairly soon and then the news within hours of me saying that then i saw an article and i don't know maybe the article came out even before i said that but i hadn't seen it i said according to the new york times harris has not been assigned a specific portfolio
the exact thing i said she's not been assigned a specific portfolio as of now she will serve as and listen to this phrasing from the new york times

[30:41]

phrasing from the new york times a governing partner to biden on his top priorities she's going to be a co-president she's going to be a governing partner now that's not exactly a co-president but
but feels like it doesn't have don't you feel that vibe now i don't expect my predictions to usually be that accurate that quickly and again i don't know if this information was out there before i even made that prediction which would which would make it not a prediction but uh that's what i was expecting so i expected that she would not get a portfolio and i do think that that indicates they're trying to the problem with giving the vice president a portfolio is that it diminishes them does that make sense if you get a portfolio it's sort of like oh
oh vice president a little patent ahead oh

[31:41]

vice president a little patent ahead oh what a cute vice president you could never be president but we'll give you a project here's a little project yeah yeah you little vice president that's what it feels like when you get a portfolio but when you become when you don't get one it makes you look like you're a governing partner right yeah so it clearly is she's being positioned to take over now that doesn't mean they have a specific date to do it i've heard people suggest they would do it after the midterms which would not surprise me
israel is saying that if the united states drops the sanctions with iran and gets back into some kind of a iranian nuclear deal that israel says it will attack iran now that's not an official pronouncement i guess this is just reports from people who are part of the government so it's not an official government statement but

[32:42]

statement but apparently they're saying it fairly directly now when they say attack they don't necessarily mean a full war they mean attack their nuclear facilities and when when israel says we will attack that doesn't mean maybe right is there is there ever been a case where israel said under these conditions we will attack and then they don't has that has that ever happened in the history of israel i don't know but i would certainly trust them if they said we're going to attack so what does biden do biden would guarantee war or at least some something that looks a little like a war between israel and iran based on the stated policy that he's pursuing and ira and israel is saying it's not maybe it's not maybe military action it's military action so

[33:45]

military action it's military action so that's quite a pressure on joe biden how will he manage this being the statesman that he is so keep an eye on that
here's a little uh crack in the democratic front so there's a reporter for cbs a white house reporter named catherine watson now it's important to the story that she works for cbs because you think a cbs is sort of left-leaning and here's what she says in a tweet she says teachers unions i'm sorry she said in her tweet she said if biden is really serious about getting kids back to school within 100 days is going to have to clash with teacher you teachers unions at some point so that's cbs saying that that if biden wants to get kids back to school he's going to go have to go up against the teachers unions interesting right because the teachers unions are really really powerful they really support the democrats

[34:46]

really support the democrats and biden is completely beholden to them but if he wants to keep the country intact he has to destroy them or at least push them aside temporarily is he the right president to do that nope he's not he's exactly the wrong president to do that i've told you a number of times there's no such thing as a good president or a bad president now that's an exaggeration of course you could have one that's bad but in general you have presidents that you either fit a situation or don't i thought that trump fit the north korean situation he fit the peace in the middle east situation he fit the isis situation he fit the china situation there's a whole bunch of stuff that trump is a perfect fit for health care maybe not so much right not the right fit did some good things in terms of reducing regulations and that cannot be ignored but it's the fit that matters

[35:48]

but it's the fit that matters who would have been a better fit to take on
on the teachers unions trump who did not get support from them or biden who does get support from them and is really really important the answer is trump trump for this situation getting kids back to school is unambiguously the better president unfortunately he's not the president so what does what does biden do does he let the teachers unions continue with their being the source of all systemic racism which they are and the argument there is that by preventing school choice they lock every poor community into remaining a poor community because those kids can't go to a better school there's just no choice they have one bad school and that's what you got so that of course makes systemic racism continue on in ways that it should not if everybody had a good job because of a good education you'd have a

[36:50]

because of a good education you'd have a lot less discrimination right uh but now they're actually hurting children because we know to children to be damaged by being kept out of the social school situation they're not learning as much they're not socializing right they're getting damaged it's real it's important but likewise the economy really depends on getting the kids back to school because you've got two parents that can't work at the same time necessarily if kids are there so the teachers unions have become the biggest problem in the country and we have a president who's the only one who can't do anything about it that's a bad bad situation he can't even talk about it right can't even talk about it that's a problem so keep an eye on that
on the plus side if you're following corey deangelis on twitter you see lots of reports and you

[37:51]

twitter you see lots of reports and you should by the way you should follow him corey deangelis you'll see him in my twitter feed if you're looking for him
he reports on various states and localities looking into funding students directly and apparently there's a lot of movement in that direction now i don't know exactly how well that's going to work but anything that looks like it's breaking the monopoly that the teachers unions have is worth looking at right it's worth looking at so directly funding students instead of funding the school gives the students who are directly funded at least the option to take their education somewhere else and then maybe the free market can fix things in a way the teachers unions cannot
i got a question for you is it too late to impeach george washington over slavery because i don't know about you but i am

[38:51]

because i don't know about you but i am opposed to slavery totally opposed not even any wiggle room i can't speak for the rest of you but just for me no slavery totally against it and george washington having been a slave owner i don't think we could let that slide can we now there was a time when i thought well what can you do about it he's dead it was hundreds of years ago yeah and thomas jefferson that that he's got to be impeached he's got to be impeached but now that i know you can impeach your president after the round of office i don't see any reason you can't impeach them when they're dead can you i'm not aware of anything in our constitution that would prevent congress from impeaching a dead president like george washington or thomas jefferson and they did some bad stuff slave owners that's about as bad as it gets right

[39:51]

that's about as bad as it gets right short of a holocaust owning slaves has got to be number two on the list of bad stuff you can do so i think we need to stop doing the business of the country by the way joe biden has acknowledged that impeaching trump will will damage the
the effectiveness of the congress so that while the impeachment of trump is going on
on the impeachment trial he acknowledges that they won't be able to do the work of the country as efficiently but he's okay with that because he says it's really really important to show to impeach trump it's very important because reasons it's very important to impeach trump because of uh that he's gonna run for office again i would think they would be very very happy to have him run for office again i would think that trump plus four years

[40:55]

i would think that trump plus four years of you know age i think they would be happy to have him run run for office because it would look like you know president harris for sure but i think the real reason they they say they want to do it is not that if you ask the democrats why are you doing it they won't say well we want to keep him out of office in the future because that would sound petty and also sound like not doing their job it would sound political so instead they say things like it's very important to send a message well if it's important to send a message let's send the message to all of those past presidents who've had some issues we don't like i feel as if most of our presidents could be impeached do you know what jfk did in the white house he defiled the white house a little bit just a little bit so let's just say he was doing a lot of defiling in that white house so impeach him for

[41:57]

in that white house so impeach him for that too and peach emol um i i've told you of course that i'm on a another platform uh called locals l-o-c-a-l-s you can find them uh just go to onlocals.com and uh apparently it's it's just taken off not apparently it's it's taken off like crazy so a lot of people who are looking for some kind of platform where the censorship is not going to be political or going there and i'm on there and you can subscribe to me and because it's a subscription service i don't get i just don't get trolls so i have a whole other experience on locals in which everybody who's there wants to be there they're paying they're literally paying a subscription fee to be there seven bucks a month or more if they want to message me and when people pay to be somewhere

[42:59]

and when people pay to be somewhere they act quite polite they're happy to be there so i have this whole other experience where the people are posting like interesting things because they came there you know because of some some intersection with my points of view and so the things they post tend to be extra interesting and uh apparently the locals is taking off and traffic wise it's just uh it's on a nice growth right now full disclosure i have a small amount of stock in locals just so you know that small amount not enough to change too much in my life all right according to the ieee spectrum uh the only way we're going to be successful in space and getting to mars in particular quick enough is if we use nuclear engines in our rockets now have i told you before that our domestic energy policy needs to have a robust

[44:01]

energy policy needs to have a robust nuclear energy component so that we're developing the right kind of skills to transfer to space because space is going to be nuclear all right probably they won't use nuclear engines to take off that might stay similar to how it is now but once you get into space you're going to um some serious energy right to stay up there for a while to go to mars and back that sort of thing you're gonna need a lot of energy and so the idea is nuclear thermal propulsion so it uses the
the the nuclear reaction to heat liquid to some god-awfully high number which causes the propellant to expand and shoots out the nozzles and whatever so if you use nuclear energy in rockets once they get to space not only could you get to mars is it two years they think maybe it's twice as fast but when you get there you've got a nuclear energy source

[45:01]

nuclear energy source so not only does the nuclear nuclear engine allow you to travel but should you try to colonize something you'd have a nuclear a nuclear energy source just plug in your plug in your devices to your spaceship i guess all right um so that's good and again i point that out because if if the united states doesn't dominate or at least be a major presence in space we don't have a future right whoever owns space that's who is going to control the future that's it so and without without nuclear that doesn't happen and without a robust civilian nuclear program you're not going to have the talent to do it in space so we have to pursue that now what would happen uh if we tried to find unity in this country what would that look like what would

[46:02]

what would that look like what would what would it look like if we tried to have unity well joe biden's call for unity involves impeaching trump so he just said again that he wants to do it even though it's bad for the country revenge i know so is that good for unity is impeaching trump at the expense of the business of the country for unity that's not much unity i was watching ellen dershowitz's podcast which is really good called the durst show one word as in the first part of dershow it's his name durst show and he had asked people for ideas and suggestions on how to build unity with the left political left and right and i tweeted yesterday a caller who called in to suggest that maybe the best way to get unity would be for joe biden to correct and apologize the

[47:03]

joe biden to correct and apologize the fine people hoax now i was a little bit concerned that alan dershowitz would say that's no hoax that's a real thing as most democrats would say right now remember ellen deschwitz identifies democrat he voted for hillary clinton has never has never wavered he's a democrat to the corps and as a democrat he said unambiguously that the fine people hoax is a hoax and went through the reasoning and
and said it as clearly as you could possibly say it and i felt really good about it because i've told you before that i'm never confident in my opinion until i hear dershowitz agree with it or where i hear him first and then i just agree with him because it's easier than it's he's easier than coming up with my own opinions because his are better than mine so i just just wait till dershowitz says something i go what do you say okay

[48:03]

i go what do you say okay that's my opinion now now i do think about it a little bit but he's so he's so damn logical that once he says his opinion i just look at it and go ah who else has an opinion that's going to top that i don't think so so i feel as if we should pick a thing and push it forever and i think the thing we meaning anybody who wants biden to pursue unity i think we should push the fine people hoax as the thing that needs to be corrected it's the thing in my life that most needs to be corrected i need the people on the left to know they were lied to about that in particular because it was so important they need to understand they were lied to about that that's that's a big change there's nothing else unity wise that i can think of
of nothing they would come close to that

[49:03]

nothing they would come close to that in terms of making the people on the right say okay okay that that sounds like unity right stop calling us racist that would be a start yeah there's the other hoaxes too the
the bleach drinking hoax etc um brendan straka apparently has been picked up by the fbi i don't know if he's arrested per se but he's in some trouble for being part of the allegedly part of the capital insurrection and by being part of it the reports which you should not treat as credible yet you know is is that he may have been inside the capitol and may or may not have been saying things inciting other people to go inside i have a real problem with somebody like him
him getting swept up in any legal problems on one hand i totally oppose the people who entered the capital

[50:05]

the people who entered the capital and caused any damage and threatened our government etc the legal system has to do with the legal system needs to do if laws were broken it has to be addressed i guess there's just no way around that even if you even if you have some empathy for the people who did it our system just doesn't let you commit crimes and get away with it unfortunately you just can't do that or fortunately you just can't do that and
and but the problem is i do think there is something about the idea of being swept up in something if everybody is doing something it doesn't look so wrong if you're in the crowd and somehow that has to matter right you can't let people get away with crimes but it has to matter how you got there and i think the legal system does take that into consideration at least for sentencing so i'd hate to see somebody like brandon stracka get any kind of uh you know a

[51:07]

stracka get any kind of uh you know a permanent problem in his life from the legal system for what i doubt he ever had any violent anything probably thought he was doing a free speech thing didn't think he was getting anybody with a club so he was just there for free speech i just have a real problem if he gets hit hard by the legal system so that's just a shout out to the legal system be smart about this right you got to be smart about this and this would be sort of a that's sort of a dividing line like he's he's an edge case where what you do with brendan's uh with brandon straca and other people who are in the same situation feel like how you treat that is going to make a big difference especially to unity
so joe biden has prioritized racial inequality as one of his top things to battle and here's my take on that of course racial racial equality is

[52:11]

of course racial racial equality is something i think we all want don't we is there anybody here who doesn't want racial equality so as a concept of course we all want that uh if you're if you're a good person you want that but my problem with it is it's the easiest con because talking about it does the least and it might even be you know in some cases might be counterproductive and so making it a priority but not doing anything about it it just feels like a con compare that to what trump did he didn't talk about it but he did things about it you know he did prison reform he worked on the economy which is good for everybody as i said earlier he didn't seem to be a a
a supporter of the teachers unions which are the biggest cause of racial inequality in the long run so trump was all action if you know he funded permanent not

[53:12]

if you know he funded permanent not permanently or he did a lot of funding for the historically black colleges he did opportunity zones with tim scott every part of that was action directly directly related to making the world a more equal place racially et cetera all action but what exactly is joe biden going to do having made it a priority i feel like that's about talking i feel like it's a con that it's a way to make people think something is happening but what's happening is talking and i feel bad honestly for black voters who thought they were getting more than that i don't know that they're getting more than that we'll see but looks like that's all they're getting speaking of that speaking of that priority here's a scariest thing that you'll see lately in the california high schools

[54:14]

the california high schools they're going to embrace the crt or critical uh now actually critical ethnic studies so i guess instead of critical race theory is critical ethnic studies and within that studies apparently reportedly they talk about who has a privileged position in society and what would be the point of saying that some group has a privileged place in society what would be the point of that now some of it is education and context etc
etc but wouldn't the express point be to discriminate against that group isn't that the point now when i say discriminate if you're discriminating against the group that's in power well that doesn't feel so bad does it you're discriminating against the strong what would be bad would be discriminating against the weak as a general concept right without

[55:15]

as a general concept right without getting into the the details generally speaking doing something against the strong not so bad doing something against the weak very very bad right as a general rule now even better don't do bad things to anybody can we agree on that best situation don't do bad things to anybody um but i think the critical ethnic studies and critical race theory essentially put white people as a privileged class which is very close to putting a target on their back hear what i'm saying if you if you mark somebody as the privileged people you have marked them as the ones who should have less and the future they're targeted now i don't mean targeted for violence i'm not talking about that about targeted for maybe you should have a little

[56:15]

a little less of this privilege thing in the future maybe other people should have more but the only way you get there is you have less so in the sense that it's the group targeted to have less relative to the other people they're targeted is that a fair statement that they would be targeted to have less in the future compared to other people to make things more fair as the theory goes but here's where they made a small little mistake something that maybe they could have seen coming and it goes like this they decided to throw jews into the category of privileged people
critical ethnic studies in california high schools are going to call out jews

[57:16]

are going to call out jews as targeted for privilege meaning that they should have less in the future relative to other people let me um there are some things which defy words so if you're only listening to this on the podcast i i'm going to have to do this with a physical expression that you won't be able to hear so when you don't hear me for a moment it's because i'm doing something hilarious and spot on to the people who are watching it and it goes like this
that's it what words could possibly express how bad this is right as a as a direction you're going anyway right unbelievable now i get the point

[58:19]

unbelievable now i get the point that there are certain groups who are economically doing better than others right and i'm guessing that that's where they're coming from but i think it has more to do with they've just decided let's let's throw the jewish americans in with everybody everybody else who's white call them all privilege boom and we're done i don't feel like that's a good path i feel like that's not going to work out so there's a little bit of a unity that needs some improving wouldn't you say we i think we can improve our unity on this question a little bit a little bit so um now i've told you that the obvious direction for wokeness is self-destruction because the whole walk this thing when you start breaking people into categories you can't stop there's no logical place to stop once you start categorizing people which is why you don't want to do it right either treat everybody the same or you categorize until you get

[59:22]

the same or you categorize until you get this kind of problem so this was the most predictable thing that could have possibly happened totally predictable
so that's we hope that there will be some force that pushes back on that all right um i think i had one other point i was going to say which is remind me did i talk about aaron rupar and vox and the drink bleach drinking hoax the the amazing thing about this hoax i think i did talk about it is that um i think people don't understand how communication works which is interesting for someone who's a professional writer that he doesn't understand how communication works let me let me explain to you how communication works it's very basic concept and apparently some people don't get this it goes like this you have to assume

[1:00:23]

it goes like this you have to assume what a speaker is thinking in order to understand what they're saying so you have to consider the source so if your best friend mocks you you say that's my best friend in in my best friend's mind they're not being mean to me they're just having fun so who says it and what they're thinking completely determines how you you accept it right so let me give you an example let's say i said to you hey
i'd like to invite you over to my house for dinner how would you interpret that if somebody said uh i'd like you to come over for dinner tonight what would be the logical assumption about what the person who said that was thinking you'd probably say to yourself well i think that what they're thinking is that they would like to entertain and they will make a meal and they will serve that meal and i will sit at the table with them and we'll eat that meal

[1:01:24]

that meal but that's not said right that's all just assumed in your head you're filling in all the the blanks stop getting ahead of me in the comments you damn smart people my clever point was just coming up and you beat me to it in the comments would you ever assume that if they said i'd like you to come over for dinner that their real intention was to eat you and that they are cannibals and if not why not why would you not make the assumption that they're cannibals because the words fit both meanings right how do you not assume they're cannibals what evidence do you have that they're not cannibals and the answer is because nobody does that nobody nobody invites you to their house to eat you no i'm not saying it's never been done jeffrey dahmer you know got close to

[1:02:24]

jeffrey dahmer you know got close to that i don't think he used those words but you have to make an assumption that the person speaking is not an absolute crazy insane monster unless obviously they are
so when aaron rupper was when i was questioning him and saying there's nothing about drinking bleach in president trump's statements when when that event happened he points me to the place where he says he sees it and i think how can you see the thing that isn't there and so i read the words and he says rupaul says quote in a tweet back to me he was clearly talking about household cleaning products when he refers to disinfectant now if you read the words exactly the way
way aaron rupar did could you interpret it to mean household cleaning products

[1:03:25]

to mean household cleaning products and the answer is yes yes you could you could interpret the exact words and specifically the word disinfectant you could interpret that to mean bleach right but should you is it completely reasonable to think that the president of the united states someone who had been you know handling the office fine seems to operate in public went to college is an actual operating adult in the real world is it reasonable to think that he was suggesting putting household defect household disinfectants directly into your body in what world do you make that assumption that the word disinfectant especially when it's in the context of talking about light is light light light light light disinfectant light light light as a

[1:04:27]

disinfectant light light light as a disinfectant disinfectant light light as a disinfectant disinfectant what logical reason would you pick that word disinfectant which is used you know a light is a disinfectant why would you just pick a word end of a sentence to say all those other times before and after it he was talking about light because he used the words specifically but this one time this one time right in the middle when he used the word disinfectant that was the time he meant let's put some bleach into your into your body that's why aaron rupar assumed the president was thinking he made the assumption that the president of the united states quite literally would stand in public and suggest ingesting bleach why would anybody be that dumb and i'm not talking about trump how could you be so dumb

[1:05:29]

how could you be so dumb that you think that the president would say that that that's even possible if you're making a list of all the things that could have happened would that even be on the list because it's just like somebody inviting you over for dinner you don't assume they mean cannibalism ever ever it's never the right assumption but a lot of people did just like aaron rhubart did he's not alone right there tens of millions of people made that same assumption why because the fake news had drawn such a caricature of trump that that seemed possible
in other words the fake news was so thoroughly convincing that if president trump had invited aaron rupar uh over for dinner aaron rupar could reasonably assume it was meant to eat him because that's

[1:06:29]

it was meant to eat him because that's how bad trump is that's the world we live in that somebody would assume that that was even something that the president would say out of his mouth and that it's even possible that that could have happened you've got to assume that wasn't possible if you're going to understand how language works right language doesn't work if you make the dumbest assumption about what the person is thinking it never works nothing would make sense if you made the dumbest assumption about what somebody's thinking so let me do that with uh joe biden uh joe biden uh his highest his highest priority is racial is getting rid of racial inequality therefore he wants to kill all the white people why would i assume that wouldn't that be stupid does anybody think that joe biden wants to kill all white people well it's right there in what he said he wants racial equal racial equality how else are you going

[1:07:31]

racial equality how else are you going to get it logical so watching democrats not know especially a professional writer i mean aaron rupar is a professional writer at a pretty big publication vox he knows how language works he knows how talking works he knows how communication works he's literally a high-end professional and even he thought that trump maybe suggested drinking bleach that's how bad the fake news is i mean that's bad that's as bad as you can get all right anything else we need to cover i don't think so somebody says it's intentional but you can't rule that out but honestly i don't get that vibe if you
you you know because i we had some back and forth and he did not he did not defend himself like somebody who knew he was wrong he defended himself exactly like

[1:08:33]

wrong he defended himself exactly like somebody who thought he was right now i can't read his mind so if you're going to say to yourself but you don't know he might have been you know acting yeah i guess that's possible i'm just giving you my my best judgment is that it looked genuine
um dds is real uh why did he say he was being sarcastic oh why did trump say he was being sarcastic again we can't read his mind but my guess is that he got so much heat for that he just wanted it to go away so he just said i was just playing around being sarcastic i think that's the best explanation but there's no chance that he sarcastically suggested drinking bleach there's no chance that he sarcastically asked about injecting household disinfectants into a body he did not sarcastically say that but he did he did say that he was

[1:09:35]

that but he did he did say that he was being sarcastic and we know that he sometimes he has a history of trying to make it an issue just go away so i think he just tried to make it go away
um what is up with newsome well it looks like the the number of signatures for the recall is getting up there and somebody smart pointed out i forget who it was so i can't give you credit that uh if newsom demands a uh that the signatures be uh audited the idea of auditing uh elections is gonna look good all right um i think that's all i got for now and i'm gonna go enjoy the day and i will talk to you