s called—if you're mocking Fetterman because you say that his maybe temporary disability is preventing him from doing the job then you are against disabled people. To which I say there's still a Special Olympics, right? Has anybody pushed for these Special Olympics people to just be thrown in with the regular Olympics people? Is that happening? Or do people understand that your ability affects—and I know I'm going out on a limb here. This is not widely understood and I realize it's provocative—but it's possible that your ability has some kind of a correlation, maybe a causation, to your ability. Now I realize we haven't connected those traditionally because a lot of times people think your ability has nothing to do with your ability. And with Fetterman we've decided to disconnect those. So his ability—we can't talk about how his ability is related to his ability to do the job. Now if his ability was unrelated to his ability to do the specific job then I would say that would be unfair. Similar, the same with the Special Olympics. If these Special Olympics participants, if their ability was equal to the ability of the regular Olympics I would be in favor of them playing together.

All right and to me it's just amazing that this is even a conversation. Fetterman I guess came out and said he fully supports fracking and he loves fracking. He's fracking in love with fracking. Did—didn't we always think he was against it? He's just lying right? Isn't there video of him saying the opposite or am I imagining that because I got fooled by the media on one side? Yeah so he's just lying right? And apparently that works. How many Democrats do you think know he's lying about fracking? How many Democrats do you think know he's lying? Twenty-five percent? Yeah it works because they don't read the other media.

So a Democrat—let me give you this as a model. A Democrat can make any lie and be comfortable that their voters won't see the truth. Would you say that's true? Because the left does not read Fox News website at all. But the right tends to see both arguments because the mainstream argument is mainstream so they're more likely to see it. Yeah it's not really a fair fight. There's one side that knows both sides. We saw that clearly and we already talked about this. The MSNBC interview I guess you call it with a bunch of Trump supporters and where you saw that the ordinary Trump supporter, just the citizen, knew more than the professional political reporter and demonstrated it by correcting her twice on facts. And that was the perfect example of how the right sees both arguments and the left only sees one side. These are not similar things. They're not even a little bit similar.

All right Biden said in public quote almost everyone who will die from COVID this year will not be up to date on their shots. Put on your analytical caps. Give me two possible reasons why this could be a true statement. Give me two. One of them would be vaccinations protect you, right? But what's the other possible explanation for why this might actually be true? That almost everyone who dies from COVID will not be up to date on their shots. Could it be because most people will not be up to date? So most people in the world will not be up to date. Therefore doesn't it kind of make sense that most people who are also coincidentally dying would be dying for unrelated reasons unrelated to COVID? But I don't know. It's amazing that Biden can say that kind of stuff out loud.

But at the same time do you want to get into real cancellation territory here? Who's with me? Let's fly close to the sun. Ready son? Scott let's do it. There's a Twitter user I've mentioned before called Ethical Skeptic. How many of you are familiar with the Twitter account of Ethical Skeptic? Many of you on Twitter. It's very well exposed. And this is what the Ethical Skeptic says. This is not what I say all right. So I'm reporting what somebody said. I am not endorsing it and therefore I cannot be canceled. Do we all agree on that? I think we do. So Ethical Skeptic says—the same thing which I do not endorse nor do I rebuke so you will see no opinion from me yet—he says the latest variant to come on the block what they are calling BQ is seeking out vaccinated individuals three to one over unvaccinated and has a particular taste for those who were recently vaccinated as well.

So he's famous this user Twitter user for being an expert on data and for using public data sources and putting them together in ways that show different possible conclusions than the mainstream ones. I don't know if anything he does is real. Let me say it as clearly as I can. I cannot judge whether the Ethical Skeptic is a genius who's doing a service for the country because many people are looking at it that way and it might be it could be or if it's somebody who doesn't know what they're talking about but I can't tell the difference. I have no idea. I have no opinion on whether this is valid or invalid, smart or not smart, true or not true. I have no idea. I really don't. I'm not kidding. I'm not joking. I really can't tell and it's one of my mysteries I'm trying to solve.

But is there any other reason? First of all do you think it's true as a fact? You fact check this. Do you think it's true that the vaccine, the recently vaccinated are more likely to get COVID? Because remember the vaccinations don't prevent you from getting it. But what would the recently vaccinated have in common? Wouldn't they—well Democrats yes but wouldn't they also believe that they needed the booster? Wouldn't it be people whose self-assessed and probably their doctor as well said oh you're in a situation where you're either going to be around a lot of people or you might be extra weak. So it may be true that the vaccinated are more likely to get infected but there's nothing about the vaccinated that is common to the public. Or let me say that clearly. The people who are recently boosted are a special group of people and they're special in a variety of ways. So it doesn't tell you anything about the public at large, right?

So is Ethical Skeptic showing us something that is of the greatest national importance and we're all missing it or is it as simple as the population of people who got boosted is not like the rest of us? I don't know. I know and I would guess that if Ethical Skeptic were here he would say Scott Scott here's why what you're saying is wrong and it would probably make sense. Like I'