Back to episode — Episode 1785 Scott Adams - All Of The Best Jokes About Roe v Wade Decision From The Supreme Court
Context —
ncluding the ladies, and they're not going to be intimidated. So good for them. You know, at least in that narrow sense, I like the fact that the intimidation had no impact as far as we could tell. I'm sure it had an impact on them personally, which is why you give them credit. Keith Olbermann helpfully tweeted this. He said Samuel Alito, Amy Coney Barrett and Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, John…
← Previous segment →deas. But no, you knew they knew what they were going to do. You know what they were going to do and then they did it. I think the only ambiguity was whether they thought they could get away with it, and apparently they thought so.
Here's another little tip for you. When I was tweeting about this, Twitter user Robin DeLong said to me, and I quote his tweet, he said, "So it's fair game to ask nominees how they will rule during confirmation hearings." And I thought this is a useful lesson to the rest of us. And so I want to remind you that the most important word in the English language is—what's the most important word in the English language? That's correct. The word "so" at the beginning of a sentence.
Do you know why? Because if you see the word "so" at the beginning of a sentence in the context of any kind of debate about something, as soon as you see that little word "so" you don't have to read the rest of the sentence because whatever follows that is going to be nonsense. You can look for an exception. Good luck. You're not going to find one. "So" is actually how the person tells you that what is going to follow is going to be nonsense, but it's the best they could do.
So let me read it again. This was his comment to me: "So it's fair game to ask nominees how they will rule during confirmation hearings." No, and I didn't imply that. And it was just somebody's strawman argument. That's very useful to know. That word is useful.
Well, is it my imagination or is the Babylon Bee really on fire lately? I guess you have to see them on Instagram or other platforms. They're not on Twitter right now. But if you're not following the Babylon Bee on Instagram, they are really operating at full—you know, the left used to say the right wasn't funny, and then Gutfeld came along and showed that wasn't true. They're actually writing articles now about how funny and successful Gutfeld is and maybe they were wrong about this "conservatives aren't funny" stuff. And then the Babylon Bee comes along and they're like, okay, I guess they can be funny.
So here's something that the Babylon Bee had on Instagram and other places. It said, "January 6 hearings postponed until after the Democrat insurrection." And the headlines are great because the Democrats are having a consistency problem this week. Because apparently there was the Democrats stormed the Capitol building in Arizona and there was some rioting and stuff in D.C. And I'm thinking it's got to be really awkward when you're the January 6 people.
They say, all right, look—and this maybe this is months ago—and all the top Republican strategists got together and they said, we don't have anything. We've got nothing. We're literally going to have to make some up just to have a reason to get reelected. What do we got? Well, we could turn the protest against what we allegedly did. We can turn the protests into insurrections and we'll just hammer that and then we'll nail it on Trump and then people will have a reason to elect us because all of our policies are bad but they won't want insurrectionists. And so they're working on that.
And then this plan is working pretty well because—correct me if I'm wrong—but I think the Rasmussen poll actually narrowed the gap between a generic Republican and a generic Democrat in the midterms, meaning that Republicans became less popular in a general way as the January 6 hearings were going on. And I'd call that a victory. Maybe not enough to win the midterms, but definitely shows their strategy worked. I mean if those numbers held.
But there were a couple problems with the strategy. A week after the hearings the Rasmussen numbers went right back to almost where they were. Meaning that—here's my interpretation, right? You can't be sure this is true. This is an interpretation of the results. This is my interpretation. My interpretation is that a certain number of Republicans were convinced that when they saw the January 6 evidence it really would connect Trump and a bunch of insurrectionists to the protesters and you would see something pretty bad there. And people were sort of getting ahead of it and preemptively saying, you know, I can barely be a Republican anymore because I don't want to be on the same team as these people.
Except when the January 6 hearings were held—even without a defense, this is important. The Republicans don't get to talk. Basically there's no defense. It's just prosecution. And even with just prosecution it looks like what they proved is that President Trump couldn't even get Don Jr. on board. And we're done. That if I could explain the entire situation, the entire January 6 summary, just the whole th
Context —
ing, the whole thing—I'm just going to boil it into—and I could do this because I'm a trained cartoonist. Don't try this at home. You won't do it right. But I'm a professional. I can take complicated situations and boil them into their simplest form. What we learned primarily—we learned a lot, but there's one thing that captures all the rest. What we learned is that President Trump couldn't even…
Next segment → →