Episode 1822 Scott Adams - Most Of The News Today Is Fake And Kind Of Funny

well once again let me inform you I do not have monkey pox but if you want to know what a bad look bad luck looks like bad luck looks like injuring your lip uh during the monkey pox I know it looks like I put my lip in the wrong place doesn't it but no no just a burn all right you seem like you're in Texas somebody says huh good morning everybody how would you like to enjoy today's show more than any show you've ever enjoyed I know pretty good stuff coming and all you need is a cup of under a glass of canteen jungle or glass once hold on canteen jug or flask I'm gonna get this right I'm trying to remember my own stuff and all you need all you need is a copper marker a glass of canteen Dragon flask you can't take your Chelsea Stein a vessel of any kind fill it with your favorite liquid I like coffee and join me now for the unparalleled pleasure that dopamine the other day the thing that makes everything better it's called the simultaneous and it happens now go I apologize for my dainty cup this is no way to drink coffee no coffee does not go in a dainty cup unless you're visiting the queen and even then you should be drinking tea so there's no there's no right time for a little teacup well um I have a question about the Democrat strategy I feel as if the strategy is not to remove uh Biden from office for incompetence but rather to make him slowly disappear I feel like that's the the uh the strategy for example first first he got covered and then he had to quarantine so that was good but then he got out and then they said we're going to have to give him covet again so it gets covered back to back but what I'm expecting is somewhere around the end of this next quarantine period I think we're going to hear that he has something called serial covet serial code it just keeps coming back and he's probably got a comorbidity of TDS so if you had the comorbidity of TDS to the serial repeating covid well Joe Biden is just going to have to hide his basement forever now I'm not sure about this next part but does it seem to you he's getting thinner as anybody knows he seems to be getting thinner he was always he was always quite fit but he seems to be I think they're feeding him less yeah I think they're slowly trying to make him disappear like they'll feed him a little less and he'll just get a little smaller and one day you'll you'll see a video of him in his basement he'll be like 85 pounds and you know it's not until you get down to like 65 pounds so that you can you know say he's actually gone but I think that I think the cat is on the roof they're they're slowly trying to disappear him you know first these public Persona and then they'll shrink him with lack of food until he's a little ball about this big and they'll have you know just keep them alive with tubes and stuff I feel like that's the strategy I don't know I'm just guessing well what do you think would happen in a hypothetical matchup for president between Biden and Trump if it were to happen today what do you think of erasmussen poll showed let's see if you're smart who do you think would win as of today well according to Rasmussen uh if the election were held today 40 percent of likely voters would vote for Biden and 46 would vote for Trump but another 10 percent would choose some other candidate if it were just those two and somebody else 10 for another campaign so what do you think of uh Yang's new political party who is he going to take votes away from yeah I think I heard somebody say he would take votes away from Republicans but it was the Republicans who were going to vote for a Democrat anyway I don't know maybe Yang will yank votes uh yeah I don't it's hard to see how it's helpful but maybe you know if Yang can control 10 of the vote he's a king maker right so it's not a bad strategy if you know you've got all these sort of in-between confused people what if let's just do a what-if what if Yang's real play is to only try to control the sensible people because there aren't that many of them I'd say about 10 maybe if 10 percent of the country are identified with a political party but they're willing to listen to a better argument it's about 10 percent he could control the whole country like Joe manchin so everybody who says this Yang thing is just you know a sideshow and no importance is not a sideshow it's an insurrection legally but it's an Insurrection in Concept in the sense that if he succeeds he will be effectively the president just by having a third party that actually makes sense and here's something that I think Andrew Yang could do that so far nobody else was able to do be reasonable nobody tried that yet all right nobody really tried being reasonable yet there have been third party attempts but they always seemed you know sort of uh ideologically driven so what would happen if you had a third party where the only thing they're trying to do is figure out what makes sense you know follow the science what if you had all right how about this what if you had to follow the science party you know I guess the Democrats think they are that but evidence suggests maybe not so much I don't know there's so I think if you ignore this Yang situation you do it at your peril because if he gets just 10 of people on board and it's the reasonable people who could switch sides in a in a situation that's that's real power that's real power Define science yeah good question well how would you like a story about how I'm so right that's your favorite story isn't it no your favorite story is when I'm wrong and I admit it I know I know I know how you are you'd rather me be wrong but I'm sorry I'm as right as right can be because it turns out that there's new Harvard University study and they tried to look into the motivations of the uh capital rioters now they used an interesting term here rioters so I don't know if that excludes people that they thought were just protested so it's I have a little question about what they how they Define that but they found out that only eight percent of the people who they called rioters uh believed they were there for an Insurrection and 92 percent of them believed they were there to save the democracy it saved the Republic now is there anybody you know who said hey I think that j6 committee is making us think past the sale the sale is what did the people who were at the event believe because they started with they wanted Insurrection and then let's look at all the facts no you don't start with they want an insurrection that you have to demonstrate that and when the When anybody did well I guess this is probably the first one I don't think there's been another correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think there's been another study and certainly not from Harvard University which at least the left would be inclined to believe this says that basically 92 percent of their people believed Trump that there were some sketchiness to the election and that they were there to fix the sketchiness they were not there to overthrow the government they're there to fix it now what does the January 6 committee and all of the mainstream news do with the fact that the very Foundation the most important part of their narrative has collapsed and it was destroyed by their own side if you call anything coming out of Harvard left leaning and I think you could make that assumption now even the person involved in the study said uh he was quite surprised he was surprised and uh the results were that quote many believe they were defending democracy from quote imminent existential danger unquote unquote right um how does the news handle this the only way the mainstream news can handle this new information is by completely disappearing it it will be disappeared right in front of you do you think there's any way that if Harvard study if Harvard University did a study and it came out showing that 92 percent of the attendees wanted a literal Insurrection to to install a dictator suppose it had gone that way do you think the news would cover it I think so yeah I think they might I think they might cover it if the people said they were there for an instruction but what if the people say that they were not there for an Insurrection they were there to fix the Republic exactly what it looked like to me I mean that's exactly what it looked like to me is there anybody who even doubted that who's watching this is there anybody here who didn't have the same impression that they were there for good intentions even if they had bad information we don't know if they had bad information but if they did right so this is fascinating the the degree to which the fake news no longer needs to pretend it's sort of stubbing isn't it are you surprised that the fake news doesn't need to pretend anymore they're really not trying to hide this is not hidden at all well it's hidden in the sense that you'd have to go to Breitbart in this case so I found out about the Harvard study by looking at uh Joel Pollock's article in Breitbart and Jonathan turley's been on this point as well now let me ask you this who in the country of let's say a political public figure what political public figure has been telling you and I haven't heard I haven't heard one other person say it of political you know let's say public figures what other public figure told you that they were thinking past the sale and that the most important question is is this what were they thinking when they did it it was only me right I'm not wrong am I I I believe it was only me in the whole world I think it was only me that's why you watch me all right um and then I've got a second question about the eight percent who did think they were there for an insurrection do you think that if you really drilled down with the eight percent that you would find out that they really wanted an insurrection maybe yeah I know some of you saying the eight percent are feds that's funny um there might be some feds in that who knows I doubt that's who got uh interviewed but for the pole but what do you think they wanted do you think that if you had asked them they would said well our end goal is to destroy the country some might yeah they might be anarchists do you think they would have said their end goal is to install Trump as an actual dictator I doubt it I doubt it because he wouldn't want the job I mean I've not seen no indication that he would want to be the dictator I mean in the sense that it's impractical if it were practical maybe that's another conversation but given this so obviously impractical who did they think was going to be the dictator or were they going to overthrow it for some other form of democracy see if you drill down on the insurrectionist I think you would find out that they're either literally crazy or what they wanted was a little bit closer to fixing the Republic after all it's just they had a different view of what that looks like I feel like the insurrectionists were probably closer to the regular people than we think they just like to use more Hyperbole and you know maybe they're in militias and they just talk that way right and and the other thing that I've been saying forever that the Democrats don't seem to recognize is that there's a way that Republicans talk about overthrowing their government that is first of all very healthy because we're always yeah Republicans are always on the verge of don't push us don't push us that's a health that's a healthy tension but it's never that serious in my opinion they're not really that serious about overthrowing the government they're just making it clear that there's a line don't cross that line all right here's my next fake news story from Newsweek I'm not sure if this is yeah I'll call it fake news it's in the category of fake news so here's the title of the story tell me what you think the story would be about if you saw this headline in Newsweek fentanyl surge is started and peaked under Trump despite the GOP blaming Biden wow the fentanyl surge started under and peaked it was the highest under Trump wow so what do you think that story says do you think the story says is if you're coming in late is a burn I burned myself on twice heated soup and a piece of spinach that wouldn't leave my lip it was quite painful but no it's not monkey box or anything else um sorry for that diversion so the Newsweek story about fentanyl surge under Trump when you dig down into the story it says that Trump is seized more fentanyl coming across the border than Biden did just just let that sink in just let it let that sink in this is Newsweek it's Newsweek right they they are a discredited organization I give you that but not everybody knows it you know if you're 75 and you grew up reading Newsweek and you see a Newsweek headline do you think that Newsweek is a discredited news organization maybe you don't know that I mean those of us who are a little more you know sophisticated in our knowledge we know that but not everybody knows that so I think that when they see a fentanyl surge they're going to think it's a surge in overdose deaths don't you but in fact the overdose death rate is the highest under Biden so not only did Trump do a stronger job of seizing fentanyl at the border according to Newsweek but there were also more overdose deaths under Biden both of the facts in the story are pro-trump and they made them look like they were negative and and this is right in front of you because the title simply just doesn't match the content and they'll do this over and over again title doesn't match the content title doesn't match the content all right here's another fake news and of CNN so um I love learning who the uh opinion hit peace people are so there's this guy Dean obadyla I might be pronouncing wrong not intentionally um who does opinion pieces for CNN and he's often a trump attack dog you know he'll just attack Trump for anything and Republicans and CNN and all the fake news uh had a little trouble yesterday because their fake news was that the GOP doesn't like veterans and vetoed uh or didn't vote for a bill to protect them and their health from the so-called burn pits danger and of course uh because Jon Stewart was saying that the GOP voted against something that they had recently voted for it looked like it was all political and they were painting the GOP as a bunch of political pastors who didn't really care about veterans what do you think the real story was the real story of course was that the Democrats put a whole bunch of pork like 400 billion or some gigantic number I don't know what it was some big number of pork in the bill and the Republicans said I don't care how good the bill is you can't do that yeah it was a poison pill so do you think that Dean Obadiah who is there I would say he's among their lowest level attack dogs and by lowest level I mean I feel like I feel like he gets the assignment that you can't win unless you just lie like you can't make your case unless you're willing to stretch or lie or omit you know leave out context is the only way you can get it done so apparently there are some people who do opinion pieces for CNN who are consistently willing to let's say test the test the outer battery boundaries of fake news but uh Dean completely leaves out the context that's the only context that matters which is the Republicans didn't like all the pork in the bill am I to be a fact Jack I'm right about that right am I correct the only thing the Republicans didn't like was the extra stuff that got added on as a dirty trick basically so if you don't mention that you have so little respect for your readers so little respect it was uh and in fact Dean Obadiah characterized the gop's action as quote the GOP is trying to score political points by delaying this vital piece of legislation is that what they're doing they're trying to score political points by making themselves look bad but stopping pork it looks like it's exactly the opposite of that what this looks like is that politicians put their own benefit uh lower than the countries now it's hard to on it's hard to imagine anybody would do that so I'm not sure that we could read their minds and conclude that they were just operating out of principle but it looks like it it looks like it again I can't read their minds but if you're a Republican would you want to turn down something that was a veteran Health Bill a Republican what Republican thinks is good to vote against a veteran Health bill even if there's a reason that's technical has to do with the pork that never looks good that never looks good but a lot of Republicans did it apparently or or are going to do it or whatever uh I did it so are we map it are we mad at Republicans for standing on principle against their own self-interest because that's kind of looks like what happened I feel that they were not exactly pursuing their own self-interest good because here's what here's what would look good for the politician I voted for that bill because I like veterans by the time you got you know campaigning for re-election you could just say that and people would believe it I'm one of the few Republicans who voted for helping veterans nobody's going to look into that pork part of the problem okay yeah go read the bill somebody says so I floated the idea that every bill should have um a list of ingredients so you can see what's in the bill good and bad like the bad might be might raise taxes on some people the good might you the I don't know somebody to score that the OMB or something but the good would be here are the things we want to accomplish and then here's the price the price is this might cost more this might cause inflation this might raise that just just list the ingredients the good stuff and the bad stuff and then somebody else uh mentioned that there should be a requirement for a one-page executive summary I like it a requirement for a one-page executive summary now you might need you know a paragraph or two for each part of the bill and there might be lots of them so you know maybe really it's more like a paragraph for each component or something like that but it needs to be readable by the public and I would say that if the public if the average voter can't understand the bill then it should not be voted out in fact I'd love to see each bill be scored for let's say clarity scored for clarity give some independent group to say all right we we talked about this bill with let's say a group of volunteers and they they couldn't understand it so we score this you cannot vote on this I I think the Congress should be prevented from voting on anything the public doesn't understand you're by a majority anyway what do you think the the Congress wouldn't be allowed to vote for anything the public doesn't understand yeah if you're joining if you're joining late I'll just tell everybody this is a burn on my lip if you think it's more something more exciting I kind of wish it were but it's just a burn um a score for readability would be something that AI could do there you go artificial intelligence could write a summary of every bill how about that how about that this is pretty good ideas all right um here's a provocative idea that I don't think that I'm quite in favor of what I want to share with you it comes from a doctor all right so this is not for me this is from a doctor uh on on Twitter he goes by doc Anarchy he's got a sub stack you might be interested in as well has lots of interesting and uh provocative ideas that are not quite the normal the normal point of view that you see so it's worth seeing it even if you disagree with them I love seeing an actual medical doctor who's thinking through things critically so that alone that alone is worth doing right so if you want somebody to follow that you're not following follow uh at Dr.

Anarchist for interesting points of view not not ones you're all going to agree with right so it's not about agreeing they're just interesting points of view all right here it is his interesting points of view nobody overdoses on prescription opioids I don't know if that's true completely this sounds like a little bit of an over claim but he's a doctor um so let's say it might be hyperbole but don't get too caught up on whether that's 100 True let's say it's 95 true it probably is it's probably closer to 95 true but but we'll we'll allow a little hyperbole okay and then he goes on eliminate the black market for opioids and you'll eliminate 99 of overdoses now remember he's a doctor he's a doctor so at least anecdotally and probably he's looked at the studies too that it's hard to overdose on a prescription Med because you would know what the overdose amount would be now don't be before before you question him you should do your research because the addicts themselves will tell you that the real danger is the fake stuff now again I'm operating purely anecdotally right here right but my own stepson told me in direct language that he wouldn't take counterfeit pills because they probably have fentanyl in them and you can't know what you're getting and then he died of a overdose so he probably did exactly what he said he wouldn't do the week before which is why I questioned whether this would work but anyway let's get to that um so if you eliminated the black market for opioids you wouldn't get the fake stuff um if you could give legal well-known entities to the addicts would they take these legal well-known things and not have overdose deaths now some of you are going to say um yeah we're talking about unintentional overdoses we're not talking about suicide um so can you compare this to the San Francisco outdoor drug thing that looked like a huge failure and Michael schellenberger talks about that a lot do you think what he's talking about is similar to this outdoor free drug clinics no no he didn't say that you're conflating two stories that's the problem here you're conflating the homeless problem which he's not even talking about that's not his topic giving free drugs to homeless people doesn't make them be less homeless so if you're trying to clean up San Francisco which is you know all the homeless people walking around and taking over the city giving them free drugs is not going to make them leave the streets or go away or anything so it doesn't do anything about homeless but what I don't know is if it reduced the number of uh overdoses I haven't heard one way or the other so I don't know but what uh doc doc Anarchy is talking about is really just a narrow point that if the only kind of opioid that was available and let's say there was some way to make that happen if the only kind of available was high quality control that that alone would eliminate 99 of Overdose deaths what do you think now let me be uh coldly analytical here what would happen if you stopped a hundred thousand addicts per year from dying all right now this is going to come back to me so don't don't think out do not think I'm exempting myself from the following point I'm not I'm in this point if you let a hundred thousand addicts live every year are you better off now I obviously would like my stepson to still be alive but are you better off I hate to say it but you're not better off I might have been better off because I love him right so I loved him so I might be better off because I would prefer it but would you be better off with my stepson back in society not even close sorry sorry if you want to be honest you would not be better off with him in society he was not adding he was just purely subtracting sorry people loved him I mean he was very he was popular and lovable and stuff but he wasn't going to help so you have to ask yourself if even if you could get what you wanted do you really want it because that's a fair question it's a fair question now I do think that some kind of ethical moral consideration suggests that keeping them alive would be the better alternative I mean that would be a reasonable point of view but you can't you can't ignore the fact that keeping alive a hundred thousand uh Liars has some impact because remember all addicts are liars you know that right if you see somebody who's lying about everything the first question you should ask yourself is what drugs are they on because often people who are lying about everything are recovering a drug a drug pattern so always look for that sometimes lying about everything means you're a narcissist and sometimes it means you have a drug problem and sometimes it means you're both um I made the point that insurance predicts all this is a point I've made a number of times that every time we're arguing in the political realm about what is or what isn't what's true what isn't that you can ignore all of that because that's all political and just look what the insurance companies do because the insurance companies don't have the option of being political they just have to look at the numbers and say well we've got a set of premiums based on this level of death um you know and we have to adjust it based on you know what changes right so the the insurance company is just coldly looking at data and the other thing that the insurance companies have that you don't have is their internal data so an insurance company in 2022 can tell you the following it can tell you which zip codes had the most vaccinations the highest vaccination rates and it can tell you where there was the biggest change in death rates now what the insurance industry is telling you is that where there were high levels of vaccinations the death rate did not go up nearly as much as where there was a low level of vaccination maybe there's some other factors involved but their data is very clear that vaccinations saved lives and so they're going to base base their premiums on that so if you're in a zip code where people are dying because they're unvaccidated maybe you pay more for insurance now where do you find the data they have their own data that's the key if you say to yourself why did the insurance companies believe that show me the data they're not going to do that because it's internal data it's their own customers who are dying right they're literally looking at their own customer base and they're saying the ones in this ZIP code are suddenly dying the ones that this ZIP code are also suddenly dying but at a smaller rate now a number of people said to me Scott Scott what you don't realize is that insurance companies are lying just like all companies and what they're doing is they're trying to be woke by telling you that vaccinations work is really just wokeness so they're they're not using data to make decisions they're not trying to make money they're trying to be woke because that's more important than profits do you know who says that sort of thing do you know who says that an insurance company favors wokeness over profits what kind of person says that yeah what what characterized somebody who would say that they might prefer wokeness over Prophets you're saying idiots but that's unkind I'm gonna I'm gonna give the kindest interpretation it's people with no experience in business whatsoever all right you don't have to say NPC you're stupid just say this people with no experience in business whatsoever I don't believe there are any experienced business people who would say that an insurance company is going to put itself out of business to serve wokeness um I don't think so now people said to me Buzz Scott but Scott Disney did exactly that they made a bad decision for walkness and hurt their profitability so what about that to which I say that's not what I'm talking about that's a completely different situation yes companies will make public PR statements that that are for wokeness but that doesn't mean they're intentionally destroying their the engine of their economic survival if an insurance company starts pricing things incorrectly they go into business they have to price correctly based on their data or they can't stay in business that is completely different staying in business versus saying some things in public you think will sound good but you hope it won't hurt you too much Disney made a gigantic mistake but they didn't do it intentionally they did not intentionally destroy their business or degrade it by doing something that like that I don't think they quite saw that De.

Santis pushback coming so to imagine that it's similar that somebody accidentally hurts their business by saying thing they they think wouldn't hurt but it did that's completely different from an insurance company saying look we'd better make ourselves super unprofitable or else we won't look woke enough that's not happening that's not happening anywhere ever ever no insurance company behind the scenes is going to tell you well behind the scenes they're going to make money they wouldn't be talking out loud to help themselves in this case do you think yeah I feel it would just hurt them if you knew what they were doing they're just trying to make money period all right there is something called and I don't know too much about it some kind of uh the Q Park q-p-a-r-q framework for uh having rational discussions without all the crazy stuff that happens uh they saw Brett Weinstein talking about it and I think he invited Sam Harris to be part of it and the idea is there's this useful framework for debating and if you use the framework and I think there's some software that helps you work through it or something I don't know all the details but the idea is that you could use some third-party format to keep two people on a sane and reasonable uh debate what do you think of that suppose the technology works so let's take an assumption I don't know that that's true but let's say that technology Works will this change everything because now you'd have a way to for people in the debate getting rid of all the crazy parts so you could actually see the debate no it won't do you know what's wrong with this problem it it solves the non-existing problem because the reason that people uh the people say crazy things during debates is that they don't want to say the real thing the real thing doesn't help them the reason people lie is that the truth doesn't give them power or entertainment people want to watch the news to or interpret the news or get their preferred interpretation through the news they want to win debates because they want Power and we watch them because we want entertainment as soon as you imagine the people's main motivation is to guess something right you're completely lost nobody's main motivation is to get the right answer the main motivation is to be right and to get power now people think that if they had power they would do the right things in some way that's the right thing too but nobody cares about the logic of a debate so you're solving a problem that isn't a problem because debates are intentionally if anybody wanted to act wanted to debate in a reasonable way they don't they already know how to do it you know do you think that Brett Weinstein and Sam Harris don't have the intellectual tools to have a rational a rational uh discussion of course they do of course they do but would they do it I know those those might be two of the most famously rational people in our in the public discussions and I don't even think they could do it and I have very high opinion of both of them in terms of their intellectual academic credentials right I just don't know it's something people can do I I because you know I had I had a conversation with Sam Harris and it was not my opinion that logic was guiding his his uh opinion some of you saw it too right did you have a sense that he preferred um logic I I didn't I didn't get the sense that it was even a preference it felt like a strong preference to avoid uh being rational about Trump that's how it felt now again I can't read his mind I don't know what Sam Harris is thinking privately about anything so it's just it's just a reaction you know basically a reaction on my end it's not about him all right so um I love the fact that somebody's working on that trying to get our our conversations uh realistic but I think AI is going to solve this problem for us and here's how I think AI is going to take any story and add the context that is missing and it's going to rewrite it in simpler terms and make the misleading headlines go away it should not be hard for AI to dismantle fake news and and tell you what was fake about it just like I did basically so what I did was I I said hey this title doesn't match or it's misleading compared to the content I think hey I could do that most of the time and I think they could summarize better and I think they could basically solve fake news I mean they could come close foreign is Google the top AI I actually don't know that and I believe I uh credited the wrong person was saying that AI was conscious so I saw a follow-up uh I saw a follow-up saying that I may have accredited the top Google researcher for saying that AI was conscious but at least somebody who knows what they're talking about thinks I was crediting the wrong person because I think the actual Google head does not say that so some somebody who's somebody's high up in that world did say it um all right he was considered one of the four horsemen of atheism yet uh Cody the life maker all right just looking at your your comments well that's all I had to do to talk about today I noticed Greg Gutfeld was um trending today his his show has continued to be gigantically popular it was weird that weirdo hired a lawyer for the AI I don't know that story um oh let's talk about uh Pelosi going to Taiwan I don't know is that really a story I think it would be a story if Pelosi didn't go to Taiwan if you know she had wanted to and changed her mind or something but um I feel as though it's sort of a nothing yeah it's absolutely a story because we'll talk about it but what do you think China's going to do do you think China is going to punish the United States in some way for an American citizen uh who is a free citizen going to another free country to visit you think they're going to punish us for that I hope so I hope so boy do I hope China tries to punish us for Pelosi visiting Taiwan yeah I hope so because it yeah we definitely need to be murdering their uh fentanyl dealers uh in China so if there if there's something they're doing to us let let's let's uh ratchet it up on our side too let's let's go kill their fentanyl dealers where they stand um did you see that there's a um I tweeted this but I forgot to put it in my notes there's a candidate for Arizona attorney general let me find his name so I can give him a little shout out here uh probably didn't write it down damn me for not writing that down somebody somebody will give me the name here in the comments but there's a candidate for attorney general in um in Arizona who says we should uh at least that Arizona should treat the or label the cartels as terrorist organizations so the if the federal government will not label uh the cartels as terrorist organizations Arizona might do it if they elect this attorney general and if he gets his way and apparently there's some constitutional allowance I'd never heard this before but if you heard this states can create their own National I guess State guard not a National Guard have you heard the states can form their own armies basically apparently that's a thing yeah so the Arizona uh potential AG guy running as a republican um will somebody give me his name he deserves a shout out just Google that for me and give me a shout out in the comments because I don't want to not mention his name he's too strong Evergreen no Hamida hamide so his last name is h-a-m-a-d-e-e-h hamide so he's Republican and uh Abe hamide okay he is Republican and he's uh tough on the cartels and um I like him I like him I like him for that I don't know what else he does oh Garfield's still trending let's see why there's a July 25th Glenn Greenwald tweet about the Gutfeld show how it's basically mopping up the competition now uh so it's fun to it's fun to watch him succeed I hope you I hope you're enjoying it as much as I do um all right uh here's uh huh all right here's a uh a little information on Fentanyl and the Dr.

Anarchy comment um I don't want to attribute this yet but let's just say it's from another doctor and uh doc Anarchy I've been a reader to myself before I read it out loud uh um oh okay so it's hard to overdose on uh oral opiates so I think that's what doc Anarchy was saying it's hard to it's sort of rare to overdose on prescription pills but if you mix it if you have a second medication called uh benzodiazepine it becomes very easy oh and ninety percent of prescription opiate overdoses include that drug benzodiazepine oh wow so uh that's a special case but I don't think that um I don't think that takes away from Doc Anarchy's point because you know the people who are not uh taking this other drug at the same time would get a lot of benefit all right so this is good uh good context all right um all right and that um that is what I had to talk about today yeah Carrie lake is tough on the cartels as well also running what is she running for governor of Arizona yes it is a great show it is a great show you know the the larger point is that I'm right about everything today all right how did I determine that the Democrats put a poison bill in the pack to bill um look we'll Google it and you should find that the bill includes uh things that are off point and that the Republicans um cared about that I feel like there was a story I skipped here that I really wanted to do let's check um yeah did you affect the De.

Santis ESG move I did not I mean I don't think I did uh okay uh what's my prediction for China's response I don't know I I think it's going to be symbolic um I don't think China's response will affect you as a citizen of the United States I feel like they might do something like move some warships around or you know uh talk differently I don't know I just don't think it's going to be anything they have to push back uh the famine coming I'm going to vote against the famine based on the Adam's law of slow-moving disasters now I know this one's special because you can't grow food very quickly so if the food you grew doesn't produce that's not really a quick turnaround fix I get that but I'm going to vote against Mass famine now I don't know that I'm right so I'm not going to put 100 on this one yeah I usually don't but I'd say I'm going to put a 90 odds of no famine and the reason is that humans are just really really good at responding to a known problem with enough time to respond and one way or another I feel like we might be able to you know get by now I don't think the famine is for the First World countries it's going to be for who can't afford to pay massive prices to get the limited food but I feel like we'll figure out how to keep them alive long enough to get the next crop going that's what I feel but we'll see yeah Africa could be tough in Africa don't I don't want to minimize the risk but I'm confident we'll figure it out micro lessons on how to make a killer tweet I can do that I feel like maybe I have um all right and Israeli a topic I didn't cover that you just desperately need me to ah uh where where am I I'm at a secret writer's Retreat location are you able to smoke while on vacation no comment MTG was acquitted of what I don't even know there was anything going on market index is the market up or down make the Sun bigger um well I could probably tell you now what makes a killer a tweet you want your killer tweet to be short and something that people would want to say to their friends so they could remember it easily so has to be short and clever has to be on a something that's in the headlines or people are really thinking about right now uh I burned my lip it's not it's not a it's not a monkey pox or a weird disease it's just a burn all right um and uh you should always be clever and provocative and ideally say something that's not quite true if you say something that's provocative and sort of almost true but not quite you're going to get more energy because people want to you know argue about how true it is yeah all right let's how about less about me maybe let's talk less about me uh for a while all right um talk about Trump's misspelled tweets I think the misspelled tweets are not intentional but I think he leaves them intentionally which is different you know there's been a number of times that I've had a typo and a tweet and I've decided to leave it because it was getting attention so I think that's all that's happening is Japan safe probably give us the women's version of the men's secret lesson I don't know if I could uh I think cafi was probably just a pocket dial no hints all right um what was your inspiration for writing God's debris if you don't know I wrote a book called God's debris key Mountain came out about the same time the Twin Towers were falling I think but uh these many years later my book God's debris is still the thing that people talk about the most when I'm out in public uh these days though they're more I guess they're more often mention coffee with Scott Adams but um God's debris has really made a big impact on people and the answer of how I came up with it is I was in the shower and one day all of the things I'd been thinking about for decades I realize we're all connected and that if I put it in a book it would blow your mind because it was blowing my mind when I thought about it so I thought well if it's blowing my mind maybe it'll blow somebody else's mind so I put it in a book and when you find out how all these things come together you might enjoy it yeah blew your mind good good it is designed to blow your mind and the uh the context of that is that I used hypnosis technique in the writing uh if you use hypnosis technique in the writing you can get some powerful results so that's what I did um that's my balcony that's not a fence all right 2001 Space Odyssey terrible movie 2001 Space Odyssey is one of the all-time worst movies I would like to reenact a scene from the movie 2001 Space Odyssey now don't get bored don't get bored uh this is pretty interesting so far isn't it uh uh don't you like how the plot is moving forward uh uh wow look at that ship still uh uh is anybody gonna talk in this movie uh when do we stop looking at this thing we've looked at the same thing now for 10 minutes uh that's my description of 2001 literally one of the worst movies ever made the other worst movie was uh uh Titanic if you if you recommend somebody uh watch Titanic you're an because no matter how much you like Titanic it's way too long and it doesn't have a good ending and not only does it not have a good ending it has a it has an ending that will give you PTSD why are you going to spend three hours to give yourself a lifetime of PTSD dumb don't do it Titanic terrible idea for a movie you know what's worse Schindler's List oh my god Schindler's List there's a specific scene in there and I'm not going to mention it that traumatized me for years and still I was actually traumatized now I get that we should all know how bad it was you know you should you should know the Holocaust was bad and and making it emotional and bringing you into it definitely has some some um utility but don't watch that for entertainment if you want to give yourself brain damage watch that movie I got brain damage that's not a joke actual brain damage because it created something in my mind that was unpleasant and didn't go away if somebody put something in your mind that stays there it stays unpleasant and it never goes away that's brain damage I had a brain that didn't have that and now it does it's brain damage that movie gave me brain damage and that's not hyperbole literal brain damage and and people like given an award why do you give an award to something that gives you brain damage come on I mean well I know why but yeah Serenity is excellent I agree what about Stephen King the only thing I can say about Stephen King is that when you when you see him tweet you wonder how he could write a book anybody else have that feeling he he tweets like he's somebody who used to know how to write a book but something terrible has happened in the meantime like maybe maybe drugs some kind of mental decline of some type because if he's always been like this is that smart enough to write a book I don't know it looks like see the problem is that even his criticisms don't seem smart there are lots of people I disagree with but they don't look actually stupid they look like just people you know maybe they're confused or whatever but they don't look stupid you know if Jake Tapper says something I don't like he never sounds stupid because he's not right but Stephen King actually sounds stupid when he tweets maybe he's just a bad Tweeter but it's hard for me to reconcile the tweeting with the fact that he wrote all these popular books um maybe Joshua lisac could explain it to us because I already know the answer but maybe maybe Joshua could explain that to you but why is it he's writing all these good books still and yet he seems like he could be capable of that huh what could possibly be the explanation of that um that's one explanation I don't know if it's the only explanation but it's certainly one of them yeah all right that's enough for now no I don't have monkey box I burned my lip I hope that's the last time I have to say that today um and I'll talk to you tomorrow

well once again let me inform you I do

not have monkey pox

but if you want to know what a bad look

bad luck looks like bad luck looks like

injuring your lip

uh during the monkey pox

I know it looks like I put my lip in the

wrong place doesn't it but no no just a

burn

all right

you seem like you're in Texas somebody

says huh

good morning everybody

how would you like to enjoy today's show

more than any show you've ever enjoyed

I know pretty good stuff coming and all

you need is a cup of under a glass of

canteen jungle or glass once

hold on canteen jug or

flask

I'm gonna get this right I'm trying to

remember my own stuff

and all you need

all you need is a copper marker a glass

of canteen Dragon flask you can't take

your Chelsea Stein a vessel of any kind

fill it with your favorite liquid I like

coffee

and join me now for the unparalleled

pleasure that dopamine the other day the

thing that makes everything better it's

called the simultaneous and it happens

now

go

I apologize for my dainty cup

this is no way to drink coffee

no coffee does not go in a dainty cup

unless you're visiting the queen

and even then you should be drinking tea

so there's no there's no right time for

a little teacup

well

um I have a question about the Democrat

strategy I feel as if

the strategy is not to remove uh Biden

from office for incompetence but rather

to make him slowly disappear

I feel like that's the the uh the

strategy for example

first first he got covered and then he

had to quarantine so that was good but

then he got out

and then they said we're going to have

to give him covet again so it gets

covered back to back

but what I'm expecting is somewhere

around the end of this next quarantine

period

I think we're going to hear that he has

something called serial covet serial

code it just keeps coming back

and he's probably got a comorbidity of

TDS

so if you had the comorbidity of TDS to

the serial repeating covid well Joe

Biden is just going to have to hide his

basement forever

now I'm not sure about this next part

but does it seem to you he's getting

thinner

as anybody knows he seems to be getting

thinner he was always he was always

quite fit but he seems to be I think

they're feeding him less

yeah I think they're slowly trying to

make him disappear like they'll feed him

a little less and he'll just get a

little smaller and one day you'll you'll

see a video of him in his basement

he'll be like 85 pounds

and you know it's not until you get down

to like 65 pounds so that you can you

know say he's actually gone but I think

that I think the cat is on the roof

they're they're slowly trying to

disappear him you know first these

public Persona and then they'll shrink

him with lack of food until he's a

little ball about this big and they'll

have you know just keep them alive with

tubes and stuff I feel like that's the

strategy I don't know I'm just guessing

well what do you think would happen in a

hypothetical matchup for president

between Biden and Trump if it were to

happen today

what do you think of erasmussen poll

showed let's see if you're smart

who do you think would win

as of today

well according to Rasmussen uh if the

election were held today 40 percent of

likely voters would vote for Biden and

46 would vote for Trump

but another 10 percent would choose some

other candidate if it were just those

two and somebody else 10 for another

campaign

so what do you think of uh Yang's new

political party

who is he going to take votes away from

yeah I think I heard somebody say

he would take votes away from

Republicans but it was the Republicans

who were going to vote for a Democrat

anyway

I don't know maybe

Yang will yank votes

uh yeah I don't it's hard to see how

it's helpful but maybe

you know if Yang can control 10 of the

vote

he's a king maker right so it's not a

bad strategy if you know you've got all

these sort of in-between confused people

what if let's just do a what-if

what if

Yang's real play is to only try to

control the sensible people

because there aren't that many of them

I'd say about 10 maybe if 10 percent of

the country

are identified with a political party

but they're willing to listen to a

better argument

it's about 10 percent

he could control the whole country like

Joe manchin so everybody who says this

Yang thing is just you know a sideshow

and no importance is not a sideshow it's

an insurrection

legally but it's an Insurrection in

Concept in the sense that if he succeeds

he will be effectively the president

just by having a third party that

actually makes sense and here's

something that I think Andrew Yang could

do

that so far nobody else was able to do

be reasonable

nobody tried that yet all right nobody

really tried being reasonable yet

there have been third party attempts but

they always seemed you know sort of uh

ideologically driven

so what would happen

if you had a third party where the only

thing they're trying to do is figure out

what makes sense

you know follow the science what if you

had all right how about this what if you

had to follow the science party

you know I guess the Democrats think

they are that but evidence suggests

maybe not so much

I don't know there's so I think if you

ignore this Yang situation you do it at

your peril because if he gets just 10 of

people on board and it's the reasonable

people who could switch sides in a in a

situation

that's that's real power

that's real power Define science yeah

good question

well how would you like a story about

how I'm so right

that's your favorite story isn't it

no your favorite story is when I'm wrong

and I admit it I know I know I know how

you are you'd rather me be wrong but I'm

sorry I'm as right as right can be

because it turns out that there's new

Harvard University study

and they tried to look into the

motivations of the uh capital rioters

now they used an interesting term here

rioters

so I don't know if that excludes people

that they thought were just protested so

it's I have a little question about what

they how they Define that but they found

out that only eight percent of the

people who they called rioters

uh believed they were there for an

Insurrection and 92 percent of them

believed they were there to save

the democracy

it saved the Republic

now is there anybody you know

who said hey I think that j6 committee

is making us think past the sale

the sale is what did the people who were

at the event believe

because they started with they wanted

Insurrection and then let's look at all

the facts no you don't start with they

want an insurrection

that you have to demonstrate that and

when the When anybody did well I guess

this is probably the first one I don't

think there's been another

correct me if I'm wrong but I don't

think there's been another study and

certainly not from Harvard University

which at least the left would be

inclined to believe

this says that basically 92 percent of

their people believed Trump

that there were some sketchiness to the

election and that they were there to fix

the sketchiness they were not there to

overthrow the government they're there

to fix it

now what does the January 6 committee

and all of the mainstream news do with

the fact that the very Foundation the

most important part of their narrative

has collapsed and it was destroyed by

their own side

if you call anything coming out of

Harvard left leaning and I think you

could make that assumption now even the

person involved in the study said uh he

was quite surprised

he was surprised

and uh the results were that quote many

believe they were defending democracy

from quote imminent existential danger

unquote unquote

right

um

how does the news handle this

the only way the mainstream news can

handle this new information is by

completely disappearing it

it will be disappeared right in front of

you

do you think there's any way that if

Harvard study if Harvard University did

a study and it came out showing that 92

percent of the attendees wanted a

literal Insurrection to to install a

dictator

suppose it had gone that way

do you think the news would cover it

I think so

yeah I think they might I think they

might cover it if the people said they

were there for an instruction but what

if the people say that they were not

there for an Insurrection they were

there to fix the Republic exactly what

it looked like

to me I mean that's exactly what it

looked like to me is there anybody who

even doubted that who's watching this

is there anybody here who didn't have

the same impression that they were there

for good intentions even if they had bad

information we don't know if they had

bad information but if they did

right

so this is fascinating the the degree to

which the fake news no longer needs to

pretend

it's sort of stubbing isn't it

are you surprised that the fake news

doesn't need to pretend anymore they're

really not trying to hide this

is not hidden at all well it's hidden in

the sense that you'd have to go to

Breitbart in this case so I found out

about the Harvard study by looking at uh

Joel Pollock's article in Breitbart

and Jonathan turley's been on this point

as well now let me ask you this

who in the country

of let's say a political public figure

what political public figure has been

telling you

and I haven't heard I haven't heard one

other person say it of political you

know let's say public figures

what other public figure told you that

they were thinking past the sale and

that the most important question is is

this what were they thinking when they

did it it was only me

right I'm not wrong am I I

I believe it was only me in the whole

world I think it was only me

that's why you watch me

all right

um and then I've got a second question

about the eight percent who did think

they were there for an insurrection

do you think that if you really drilled

down with the eight percent that you

would find out that they really wanted

an insurrection

maybe yeah I know some of you saying the

eight percent are feds that's funny

um there might be some feds in that who

knows I doubt that's who got uh

interviewed but

for the pole

but what do you think they wanted do you

think that if you had asked them they

would said well our end goal is to

destroy the country

some might yeah they might be anarchists

do you think they would have said their

end goal is to install Trump as an

actual dictator

I doubt it

I doubt it because he wouldn't want the

job I mean

I've not seen no indication that he

would want to be the dictator I mean in

the sense that it's impractical

if it were practical maybe that's

another conversation but given this so

obviously impractical

who did they think was going to be the

dictator

or were they going to overthrow it for

some other form of democracy see if you

drill down on the insurrectionist I

think you would find out that they're

either literally crazy

or what they wanted was a little bit

closer to fixing the Republic after all

it's just they had a different view of

what that looks like

I feel like the insurrectionists were

probably closer to the regular people

than we think they just like to use more

Hyperbole and you know maybe they're in

militias and they just talk that way

right

and and the other thing that I've been

saying forever that the Democrats don't

seem to recognize is that there's a way

that Republicans talk about overthrowing

their government

that is first of all very healthy

because we're always yeah Republicans

are always on the verge of don't push us

don't push us that's a health that's a

healthy tension

but it's never that serious in my

opinion they're not really that serious

about overthrowing the government

they're just making it clear that

there's a line

don't cross that line

all right here's my next fake news story

from Newsweek

I'm not sure if this is yeah I'll call

it fake news it's in the category of

fake news so here's the title of the

story tell me what you think the story

would be about if you saw this headline

in Newsweek

fentanyl surge is started and peaked

under Trump

despite the GOP blaming Biden wow the

fentanyl surge

started under and peaked it was the

highest under Trump wow

so what do you think that story says do

you think the story says is if you're

coming in late is a burn I burned myself

on twice heated soup and a piece of

spinach that wouldn't leave my lip it

was quite painful

but no it's not monkey box or anything

else

um

sorry for that diversion so the Newsweek

story about fentanyl surge under Trump

when you dig down into the story it says

that Trump is seized more fentanyl

coming across the border than Biden did

just just let that sink in

just let it

let that sink in this is Newsweek

it's Newsweek right they they are a

discredited organization I give you that

but not everybody knows it you know if

you're 75 and you grew up reading

Newsweek and you see a Newsweek headline

do you think that Newsweek is a

discredited news organization

maybe you don't know that I mean those

of us who are a little more you know

sophisticated in our knowledge we know

that but not everybody knows that

so I think that when they see a fentanyl

surge they're going to think it's a

surge in overdose deaths don't you

but in fact the overdose death rate is

the highest under Biden so not only did

Trump do a stronger job of seizing

fentanyl at the border according to

Newsweek

but there were also more overdose deaths

under Biden both of the facts in the

story are pro-trump

and they made them look like they were

negative

and and this is right in front of you

because the title simply just doesn't

match the content and they'll do this

over and over again title doesn't match

the content title doesn't match the

content

all right here's another fake news and

of CNN so

um I love learning who the uh opinion

hit peace people are

so there's this guy Dean obadyla I might

be pronouncing wrong not intentionally

um who does opinion pieces for CNN and

he's often a trump

attack dog you know he'll just attack

Trump for anything and Republicans

and CNN and all the fake news uh had a

little trouble yesterday because their

fake news was that the GOP doesn't like

veterans and vetoed uh or didn't vote

for a bill to protect them and their

health from the so-called burn pits

danger and of course uh because Jon

Stewart

was saying that the GOP voted against

something that they had recently voted

for it looked like it was all political

and they were painting the GOP as a

bunch of political pastors who didn't

really care about veterans

what do you think the real story was

the real story of course was that the

Democrats put a whole bunch of pork like

400 billion or some gigantic number I

don't know what it was some big number

of pork in the bill and the Republicans

said I don't care how good the bill is

you can't do that yeah it was a poison

pill

so do you think that Dean Obadiah

who is there I would say he's among

their lowest level attack dogs and by

lowest level I mean I feel like

I feel like he gets the assignment that

you can't win unless you just lie like

you can't make your case unless you're

willing to stretch or lie or omit you

know leave out context is the only way

you can get it done so apparently there

are some people who do opinion pieces

for CNN who are consistently willing to

let's say

test the test the outer battery

boundaries of fake news

but uh Dean completely leaves out the

context that's the only context that

matters which is the Republicans didn't

like all the pork in the bill am I to be

a fact Jack I'm right about that right

am I correct the only thing the

Republicans didn't like was the extra

stuff that got added on

as a dirty trick basically

so if you don't mention that

you have so little respect for your

readers so little respect

it was uh and in fact Dean Obadiah

characterized the gop's action as quote

the GOP is trying to score political

points by delaying this vital piece of

legislation

is that what they're doing they're

trying to score political points by

making themselves look bad

but stopping pork

it looks like it's exactly the opposite

of that what this looks like is that

politicians put their own benefit uh

lower than the countries

now it's hard to on it's hard to imagine

anybody would do that so I'm not sure

that we could read their minds and

conclude that they were just operating

out of principle

but it looks like it

it looks like it again I can't read

their minds but if you're a Republican

would you want to turn down something

that was a veteran Health Bill a

Republican

what Republican thinks is good to vote

against a veteran

Health bill

even if there's a reason that's

technical has to do with the pork that

never looks good that never looks good

but a lot of Republicans did it

apparently or or are going to do it or

whatever

uh I did it

so are we map it are we mad at

Republicans for standing on principle

against their own self-interest

because that's kind of looks like what

happened I feel that they were not

exactly pursuing their own self-interest

good because here's what here's what

would look good for the politician

I voted for that bill

because I like veterans by the time you

got you know campaigning for re-election

you could just say that and people would

believe it I'm one of the few

Republicans who voted for helping

veterans nobody's going to look into

that pork part of the problem

okay

yeah go read the bill somebody says

so I floated the idea that every bill

should have

um

a list of ingredients so you can see

what's in the bill good and bad like the

bad might be might raise taxes on some

people

the good might you the I don't know

somebody to score that the OMB or

something but the good would be here are

the things we want to accomplish

and then here's the price

the price is this might cost more this

might cause inflation this might raise

that

just just list the ingredients the good

stuff and the bad stuff

and then somebody else uh mentioned that

there should be a requirement for a

one-page executive summary

I like it a requirement for a one-page

executive summary now you might need you

know

a paragraph or two for each part of the

bill and there might be lots of them so

you know maybe really it's more like a

paragraph for each component or

something like that but it needs to be

readable by the public and I would say

that if the public if the average voter

can't understand the bill

then it should not be voted out

in fact I'd love to see each bill be

scored for let's say clarity

scored for clarity give some independent

group to say all right we

we talked about this bill with let's say

a group of volunteers and they they

couldn't understand it so we score this

you cannot vote on this

I I think the Congress should be

prevented from voting on anything the

public doesn't understand

you're by a majority anyway

what do you think the the Congress

wouldn't be allowed to vote for anything

the public doesn't understand

yeah if you're joining if you're joining

late I'll just tell everybody this is a

burn on my lip if you think it's more

something more exciting I kind of wish

it were but it's just a burn

um a score for readability

would be something that AI could do

there you go

artificial intelligence could write a

summary of every bill

how about that how about that this is

pretty good ideas

all right um

here's a provocative idea that I don't

think that I'm quite in favor of

what I want to share with you

it comes from a doctor all right so this

is not for me this is from a doctor

uh on on Twitter he goes by doc Anarchy

he's got a sub stack you might be

interested in as well has lots of

interesting and uh provocative ideas

that are not quite the normal the normal

point of view that you see so it's worth

seeing it even if you disagree with them

I love seeing an actual medical doctor

who's thinking through things critically

so that alone

that alone is worth doing right so if

you want somebody to follow that you're

not following follow uh at Dr Anarchist

for interesting points of view not not

ones you're all going to agree with

right so it's not about agreeing they're

just interesting points of view

all right here it is his interesting

points of view nobody overdoses on

prescription opioids I don't know if

that's true completely this sounds like

a little bit of an over claim but he's a

doctor

um so let's say it might be hyperbole

but don't get too caught up on whether

that's 100 True let's say it's 95 true

it probably is it's probably closer to

95 true but but we'll we'll allow a

little hyperbole okay and then he goes

on eliminate the black market for

opioids and you'll eliminate 99 of

overdoses

now remember he's a doctor

he's a doctor

so at least anecdotally and probably

he's looked at the studies too that it's

hard to overdose on a prescription Med

because you would know what the overdose

amount would be

now don't be before before you question

him you should do your research

because the addicts themselves will tell

you that the real danger is the fake

stuff

now again I'm operating purely

anecdotally right here right

but my own stepson

told me in direct language that he

wouldn't take counterfeit pills because

they probably have fentanyl in them and

you can't know what you're getting

and then he died of a overdose so he

probably did exactly what he said he

wouldn't do the week before which is why

I questioned whether this would work but

anyway let's get to that

um

so if you eliminated the black market

for opioids you wouldn't get the fake

stuff

um if you could give legal

well-known entities to the addicts would

they take these legal well-known things

and not have overdose deaths

now some of you are going to say

um

yeah we're talking about unintentional

overdoses we're not talking about

suicide

um

so

can you compare this to the San

Francisco outdoor drug thing that looked

like a huge failure and Michael

schellenberger talks about that a lot

do you think what he's talking about is

similar to this outdoor free drug

clinics

no no he didn't say that you're

conflating two stories that's the

problem here you're conflating the

homeless problem which he's not even

talking about that's not his topic

giving free drugs to homeless people

doesn't make them be less homeless

so if you're trying to clean up San

Francisco which is you know all the

homeless people walking around and

taking over the city giving them free

drugs is not going to make them

leave the streets or go away or anything

so it doesn't do anything about homeless

but what I don't know is if it reduced

the number of uh

overdoses

I haven't heard one way or the other so

I don't know but what uh doc doc Anarchy

is talking about is really just a narrow

point

that if the only kind of opioid that was

available and let's say there was some

way to make that happen if the only kind

of available was high quality control

that that alone would eliminate 99 of

Overdose deaths what do you think

now

let me be uh

coldly analytical here

what would happen if you stopped a

hundred thousand addicts per year from

dying

all right now this is going to come back

to me so don't don't think out do not

think I'm exempting myself from the

following point I'm not I'm in this

point

if you let a hundred thousand addicts

live every year are you better off

now I obviously would like my stepson to

still be alive

but are you better off

I hate to say it but you're not better

off

I might have been better off because I

love him right so I loved him so I might

be better off because I would prefer it

but would you be better off with my

stepson back in society not even close

sorry

sorry if you want to be honest you would

not be better off with him in society he

was not adding he was just purely

subtracting sorry people loved him I

mean he was very he was popular and

lovable and stuff but he wasn't going to

help

so you have to ask yourself if even if

you could get what you wanted do you

really want it

because

that's a fair question

it's a fair question now I do think that

some kind of ethical moral consideration

suggests that keeping them alive would

be the better alternative I mean that

would be a reasonable point of view but

you can't you can't ignore the fact that

keeping alive a hundred thousand uh

Liars

has some impact because remember all

addicts are liars you know that right

if you see somebody who's lying about

everything

the first question you should ask

yourself is what drugs are they on

because often people who are lying about

everything are recovering a drug a drug

pattern

so always look for that sometimes lying

about everything means you're a

narcissist and sometimes it means you

have a drug problem and sometimes it

means you're both

um I made the point that insurance

predicts all

this is a point I've made a number of

times that every time we're arguing in

the political realm about what is or

what isn't what's true what isn't that

you can ignore all of that because

that's all political and just look what

the insurance companies do

because the insurance companies don't

have the option of being political

they just have to look at the numbers

and say well we've got a set of premiums

based on this level of death

um you know and we have to adjust it

based on you know what changes right so

the the insurance company is just coldly

looking at data and the other thing that

the insurance companies have

that you don't have is their internal

data

so an insurance company in 2022 can tell

you the following

it can tell you which zip codes had the

most vaccinations the highest

vaccination rates

and it can tell you where there was the

biggest change in death rates

now what the insurance industry is

telling you is that where there were

high levels of vaccinations the death

rate did not go up nearly as much as

where there was a low level of

vaccination

maybe there's some other factors

involved but their data is very clear

that vaccinations saved lives and so

they're going to base base their

premiums on that so if you're in a zip

code where people are dying because

they're unvaccidated maybe you pay more

for insurance

now where do you find the data

they have their own data that's the key

if you say to yourself why did the

insurance companies believe that show me

the data

they're not going to do that because

it's internal data it's their own

customers who are dying right they're

literally looking at their own customer

base and they're saying the ones in this

ZIP code are suddenly dying the ones

that this ZIP code are also suddenly

dying but at a smaller rate

now a number of people said to me Scott

Scott

what you don't realize is that insurance

companies are lying just like all

companies and what they're doing is

they're trying to be woke

by telling you that vaccinations work is

really just wokeness

so they're they're not using data to

make decisions they're not trying to

make money

they're trying to be woke because that's

more important than profits

do you know who says that sort of thing

do you know who says that an insurance

company favors wokeness over profits

what kind of person says that

yeah what what characterized somebody

who would say

that they might prefer wokeness over

Prophets

you're saying idiots but that's unkind

I'm gonna I'm gonna give the kindest

interpretation it's people with no

experience in business whatsoever

all right you don't have to say NPC

you're stupid just say this people with

no experience in business whatsoever I

don't believe there are any experienced

business people

who would say that an insurance company

is going to put itself out of business

to serve wokeness

um I don't think so

now people said to me Buzz Scott but

Scott

Disney did exactly that they made a bad

decision for walkness and hurt their

profitability so what about that

to which I say that's not what I'm

talking about that's a completely

different situation

yes companies will make public PR

statements

that that are for wokeness

but that doesn't mean they're

intentionally destroying their the

engine of their economic survival if an

insurance company starts pricing things

incorrectly

they go into business

they have to price correctly based on

their data or they can't stay in

business

that is completely different staying in

business versus saying some things in

public you think will sound good but you

hope it won't hurt you too much

Disney made a gigantic mistake

but they didn't do it intentionally

they did not intentionally destroy their

business or degrade it by doing

something that like that I don't think

they quite saw that DeSantis pushback

coming

so to imagine that it's similar that

somebody accidentally hurts their

business by saying thing they they think

wouldn't hurt but it did that's

completely different from an insurance

company saying look we'd better make

ourselves super unprofitable

or else we won't look woke enough

that's not happening

that's not happening anywhere ever

ever no insurance company behind the

scenes is going to tell you well behind

the scenes they're going to make money

they wouldn't be talking out loud to

help themselves in this case

do you think

yeah I feel it would just hurt them if

you knew what they were doing they're

just trying to make money

period all right

there is something called and I don't

know too much about it some kind of uh

the Q Park q-p-a-r-q

framework for uh having rational

discussions without all the crazy stuff

that happens

uh they saw Brett Weinstein talking

about it and I think he invited Sam

Harris to be part of it and the idea is

there's this useful framework

for debating and if you use the

framework and I think there's some

software that helps you work through it

or something I don't know all the

details but the idea is that you could

use some third-party format

to keep two people on a sane and

reasonable uh debate

what do you think of that suppose the

technology works so let's take an

assumption I don't know that that's true

but let's say that technology Works will

this change everything

because now you'd have a way to for

people in the debate getting rid of all

the crazy parts so you could actually

see the debate

no it won't do you know what's wrong

with this problem

it it solves the non-existing problem

because the reason that people uh

the people say crazy things during

debates is that they don't want to say

the real thing the real thing doesn't

help them

the reason people lie is that the truth

doesn't give them power or entertainment

people want to watch the news to or

interpret the news or get their

preferred interpretation through the

news they want to win debates because

they want Power

and we watch them because we want

entertainment

as soon as you imagine the people's main

motivation is to guess something right

you're completely lost

nobody's main motivation is to get the

right answer

the main motivation is to be right and

to get power now people think that if

they had power they would do the right

things in some way that's the right

thing too but nobody cares about the

logic of a debate

so you're solving a problem that isn't a

problem because debates are

intentionally

if anybody wanted to act wanted to

debate in a reasonable way they don't

they already know how to do it

you know do you think that Brett

Weinstein and Sam Harris don't have the

intellectual tools

to have a rational a rational uh

discussion of course they do of course

they do but would they do it

I know those those might be two of the

most famously rational people in our in

the public discussions

and I don't even think they could do it

and I have very high opinion of both of

them in terms of their intellectual

academic credentials right I just don't

know it's something people can do

I I because you know I had I had a

conversation with Sam Harris and it was

not my opinion that logic was guiding

his his uh opinion

some of you saw it too right did you

have a sense that he preferred

um logic

I I didn't I didn't get the sense that

it was even a preference

it felt like a strong preference to

avoid uh being rational about Trump

that's how it felt now again I can't

read his mind I don't know what Sam

Harris is thinking privately about

anything so it's just it's just a

reaction

you know basically a reaction on my end

it's not about him

all right

so

um I love the fact that somebody's

working on that trying to get our our

conversations uh realistic but I think

AI is going to solve this problem for us

and here's how I think AI is going to

take any story and add the context that

is missing

and it's going to rewrite it in simpler

terms and make the misleading headlines

go away

it should not be hard for AI to

dismantle fake news and and tell you

what was fake about it just like I did

basically so what I did was I I said hey

this title doesn't match or it's

misleading

compared to the content I think hey I

could do that most of the time

and I think they could summarize better

and I think they could basically solve

fake news I mean they could come close

foreign

is Google the top AI I actually don't

know that

and I believe I uh credited the wrong

person was saying that AI was conscious

so I saw a follow-up

uh

I saw a follow-up saying that I may have

accredited the top Google researcher for

saying that AI was conscious but at

least somebody who knows what they're

talking about thinks I was crediting the

wrong person because I think the actual

Google head does not say that

so some somebody who's

somebody's high up in that world did say

it

um

all right he was considered one of the

four horsemen of atheism yet

uh Cody the life maker all right just

looking at your

your comments well that's all I had to

do to talk about today I noticed Greg

Gutfeld was

um trending today

his his show has continued to be

gigantically popular

it was weird that weirdo hired a lawyer

for the AI

I don't know that story

um oh let's talk about uh Pelosi going

to Taiwan

I don't know is that really a story

I think it would be a story if Pelosi

didn't go to Taiwan if you know she had

wanted to and changed her mind or

something but

um

I feel as though

it's sort of a nothing

yeah it's absolutely a story because

we'll talk about it but what do you

think China's going to do do you think

China is going to punish the United

States in some way for an American

citizen uh who is a free citizen going

to another free country to visit you

think they're going to punish us for

that

I hope so

[Laughter]

I hope so

boy do I hope China tries to punish us

for Pelosi visiting Taiwan yeah I hope

so

because it yeah we definitely need to be

murdering their uh fentanyl dealers uh

in China so if there if there's

something they're doing to us let let's

let's uh ratchet it up on our side too

let's let's go kill their fentanyl

dealers where they stand

um did you see that there's a

um I tweeted this but I forgot to put it

in my notes

there's a

candidate for Arizona attorney general

let me find his name so I can give him a

little shout out here

uh probably didn't write it down

damn me for not writing that down

somebody somebody will give me the name

here in the comments

but there's a candidate for attorney

general in

um

in Arizona

who says we should uh at least that

Arizona should treat the or label the

cartels as terrorist organizations

so the if the federal government will

not label

uh the cartels as terrorist

organizations Arizona might do it if

they elect this attorney general and if

he gets his way

and apparently there's some

constitutional allowance I'd never heard

this before but if you heard this states

can create their own National I guess

State guard not a National Guard

have you heard the states can form their

own armies basically

apparently that's a thing yeah so the

Arizona uh potential AG guy running as a

republican

um will somebody give me his name

he deserves a shout out

just Google that for me and give me a

shout out in the comments because I

don't want to not mention his name he's

too strong Evergreen no Hamida hamide

so his last name is

h-a-m-a-d-e-e-h hamide

so he's Republican

and uh Abe hamide okay he is Republican

and he's uh tough on the cartels and

um I like him

I like him

I like him for that I don't know what

else he does oh Garfield's still

trending

let's see why

there's a July 25th Glenn Greenwald

tweet about the Gutfeld show how it's

basically mopping up the competition

now

uh

so it's fun to it's fun to watch him

succeed I hope you I hope you're

enjoying it as much as I do

um

all right

uh here's uh

huh

all right here's a uh a little

information on Fentanyl and the Dr

Anarchy comment

um I don't want to attribute this yet

but let's just say it's from another

doctor and uh doc Anarchy I've been a

reader to myself before I read it out

loud uh

um oh okay so it's hard to overdose on

uh oral opiates

so I think that's what doc Anarchy was

saying it's hard to it's sort of rare

to overdose on prescription pills

but if you mix it

if you have a second medication called

uh

benzodiazepine it becomes very easy oh

and ninety percent of prescription

opiate overdoses include that drug

benzodiazepine

oh wow

so uh that's a special case but I don't

think that um

I don't think that takes away from Doc

Anarchy's point

because you know the people who are not

uh taking this other drug at the same

time would get a lot of benefit

all right so this is good uh good

context

all right

um

all right and that

um

that

is what I had to talk about today

yeah Carrie lake is tough on the cartels

as well also running what is she running

for governor of Arizona

yes it is a great show it is a great

show

you know the the larger point is that

I'm right about everything

today

all right

how did I determine that the Democrats

put a poison bill in the pack to bill

um

look we'll Google it and you should find

that the bill includes uh things that

are off point

and that the Republicans

um cared about that

I feel like there was a story I skipped

here that I really wanted to do

let's check

um

yeah

did you affect the DeSantis ESG move I

did not I mean I don't think I did

uh

okay

uh what's my prediction for China's

response

I don't know I I think it's going to be

symbolic

um I don't think China's response will

affect you as a citizen of the United

States I feel like they might do

something like move some warships around

or you know uh

talk differently I don't know I just

don't think it's going to be anything

they have to push back

uh the famine coming I'm going to vote

against the famine

based on the Adam's law of slow-moving

disasters now I know this one's special

because you can't grow food very quickly

so if the food you grew doesn't produce

that's not really a quick turnaround fix

I get that

but I'm going to vote against Mass

famine

now I don't know that I'm right so I'm

not going to put 100 on this one yeah I

usually don't but I'd say I'm going to

put a 90 odds of no famine

and the reason is that

humans are just really really good at

responding to a known problem with

enough time to respond and one way or

another I feel like we might be able to

you know get by now I don't think the

famine is for the First World countries

it's going to be for who can't afford to

pay massive prices to get the limited

food but I feel like we'll figure out

how to keep them alive long enough to

get the next crop going

that's what I feel but we'll see yeah

Africa could be tough in Africa don't I

don't want to minimize the risk but I'm

confident we'll figure it out

micro lessons on how to make a killer

tweet I can do that I feel like maybe I

have

um

all right

and Israeli a topic I didn't cover that

you just desperately need me to

ah

uh where where am I I'm at a secret

writer's Retreat location

are you able to smoke while on vacation

no comment

MTG was acquitted of what I don't even

know there was anything going on

market index is the market up or down

make the Sun bigger

um

well I could probably tell you now what

makes a killer a tweet

you want your killer tweet to be short

and something that people would want to

say to their friends so they could

remember it easily so has to be short

and clever

has to be on a something that's in the

headlines or people are really thinking

about right now

uh I burned my lip it's not it's not a

it's not a monkey pox or a weird disease

it's just a burn

all right

um

and uh

you should always be clever and

provocative and ideally say something

that's not quite true

if you say something that's provocative

and sort of almost true but not quite

you're going to get more energy because

people want to you know argue about how

true it is

yeah all right let's how about less

about me

maybe let's talk less about me uh

for a while

all right

um

talk about Trump's misspelled tweets

I think the misspelled tweets are not

intentional

but I think he leaves them intentionally

which is different

you know there's been a number of times

that I've had a typo and a tweet

and I've decided to leave it because it

was getting attention

so I think that's all that's happening

is Japan safe probably

give us the women's version of the men's

secret lesson I don't know if I could

uh I think cafi was probably just a

pocket dial

no hints

all right

um what was your inspiration for writing

God's debris if you don't know I wrote a

book called God's debris key Mountain

came out about the same time the Twin

Towers were falling I think

but uh these many years later my book

God's debris is still the thing that

people talk about the most when I'm out

in public

uh these days though they're more I

guess they're more often mention coffee

with Scott Adams but

um God's debris has really made a big

impact on people and the answer of how I

came up with it is I was in the shower

and one day all of the things I'd been

thinking about for decades I realize

we're all connected

and that if I put it in a book it would

blow your mind

because it was blowing my mind when I

thought about it so I thought well if

it's blowing my mind maybe it'll blow

somebody else's mind so I put it in a

book

and when you find out how all these

things come together

you might enjoy it

yeah blew your mind good

good it is designed to blow your mind

and

the uh the context of that is that I

used hypnosis technique in the writing

uh if you use hypnosis technique in the

writing you can get some powerful

results so that's what I did

um

that's my balcony that's not a fence

all right

2001 Space Odyssey terrible movie

2001 Space Odyssey is one of the

all-time worst movies

I would like to reenact a scene from

the movie 2001 Space Odyssey now don't

get bored

don't get bored uh

this is pretty interesting so far isn't

it uh

uh don't you like how the plot is moving

forward uh uh wow look at that ship

still uh uh is anybody gonna talk in

this movie uh

when do we stop looking at this

thing we've looked at the same

thing now for 10 minutes uh

that's my

description of 2001 literally one of the

worst movies ever made

the other worst movie was uh uh Titanic

if you if you recommend somebody uh

watch Titanic you're an

because no matter how much you like

Titanic it's way too long

and it doesn't have a good ending and

not only does it not have a good ending

it has a it has an ending that will give

you PTSD

why are you going to spend three hours

to give yourself a lifetime of PTSD

dumb don't do it Titanic terrible idea

for a movie

you know what's worse Schindler's List

oh my god

Schindler's List there's a specific

scene in there and I'm not going to

mention it that traumatized me for years

and still I was actually traumatized now

I get that we should all know how bad it

was you know you should you should know

the Holocaust was bad and and making it

emotional and bringing you into it

definitely has some some

um utility

but don't watch that for entertainment

if you want to give yourself brain

damage watch that movie I got brain

damage

that's not a joke

actual brain damage because it created

something in my mind that was unpleasant

and didn't go away if somebody put

something in your mind that stays there

it stays unpleasant and it never goes

away that's brain damage I had a brain

that didn't have that and now it does

it's brain damage that movie

gave me brain damage and that's not

hyperbole literal brain damage

and and people like given an award

why do you give an award to something

that gives you brain damage come on

I mean well I know why but

yeah Serenity is excellent

I agree

what about Stephen King

the only thing I can say about Stephen

King is that when you when you see him

tweet

you wonder how he could write a book

anybody else have that feeling

he he tweets like he's somebody who used

to know how to write a book

but something terrible has happened in

the meantime

like maybe maybe drugs

some kind of mental decline of some type

because if he's always been like this

is that smart enough to write a book

I don't know it looks like see the

problem is that even his criticisms

don't seem smart

there are lots of people I disagree with

but they don't look actually stupid

they look like just people you know

maybe they're confused or whatever but

they don't look stupid

you know if Jake Tapper says something I

don't like

he never sounds stupid

because he's not right but Stephen King

actually sounds stupid when he tweets

maybe he's just a bad Tweeter but it's

hard for me to reconcile the tweeting

with the fact that he wrote all these

popular books

um

maybe Joshua lisac could explain it to

us

because I already know the answer but

maybe maybe Joshua could explain that to

you but why is it he's writing all these

good books still and yet he seems like

he could be capable of that huh

what could possibly be the explanation

of that

um

that's one explanation

I don't know if it's the only

explanation but it's certainly one of

them

yeah all right that's enough for now no

I don't have monkey box I burned my lip

I hope that's the last time I have to

say that today

um and I'll talk to you tomorrow