Back to episode — Episode 2256 Scott Adams - Coffee With Scott
Context —
dopamine of the day. The thing that makes everything better. It's called the simultaneous sip, and it happens now. Wow, that actually was delicious. Better than usual. Well, I would like to give you the reframe of the day. We'll of course talk about Israel and the hard news, but I like to warm up with some appetizers. Reframe of the day. I saw this. Now it comes from my new book, *Reframe Your…
← Previous segment →about the thing that you do. It's about the marketing of yourself. And that's your reframe. Your reframe is doing what you're told gets you a paycheck. Doing more than you're told might get you more than a paycheck.
Well, we learned a little bit more about the TikTok ban that's never going to be a ban. That seemed like it was going to happen for a while, and now it seems like there's no way it's going to happen. Laura Ingraham, she tweeted that it's because of Chinese money flooding Capitol Hill. I think that's obvious. What else could it be except Chinese money flooding the zone?
Well, Politico has an article, and that's why Laura Ingraham was commenting on it. And the Politico article, this is not an allegation. This is just an impression, right? So I don't know if it's true. I only know what impression I'm getting. The impression I'm getting is that China wrote this article. Now they didn't, obviously, but it's written like Chinese propaganda basically.
And here's Politico's long explanation for why the TikTok ban has not been implemented. Are you ready for this? It's rather detailed, but you know, you need to hear the other side. And it goes like this. So the reason that the TikTok ban has not been approved, even though it had bipartisan support. So this wasn't one of those partisan ones. This had bipartisan support, but it didn't happen. And there are good reasons for it. Let's see. The good reasons are things and processes. There's no law and a thing and a person, and then they talk to somebody who may have felt something about the constitutional legal standards. The president and the politics. And okay, there's no reason.
Let me summarize. Politico just did this big complicated thing to make you think there are reasons. There are no reasons except for what Laura said, which is it must be Chinese money. What else can it be? It is such word salad when you read it. Well, there's this law from 30 years ago that says you shouldn't ban information from foreign countries. To which I say never. Never. There's nothing that could have changed that would make that a different situation as in a weaponized app.
Do you think when they made the ruling about not banning information from other countries, do you think that they were thinking about a weaponized brainwashing app? No, no. What would it take for the commander-in-chief to ban something that was a military asset? Nothing. It's the commander-in-
Context —
chief. They just say this is dangerous to the country. I ban it, and then fight it out in court. But you ban it first. You don't fight it out first. It's a military asset. You ban it first and then you see if you followed the law. So now the country is not being run for the benefit of the country. Whatever is happening here, it's for the benefit of China. There is no feasible, conceivable argumen…
Next segment → →