they didn't leave any trace but yet Putin was sure it was true, would he do a similar attack in which you couldn't tell if it was real or not? You couldn't tell who did it. It would be kind of perfect. Yeah there is a little of a perfect payback symmetry to it but I'm still thinking coincidence because you can read into these situations anything you want.

Well more climate catastrophe. It turns out that ABC News is worried that rising global temperatures could change where the majority of the world's wine is produced. So France for example might be less of a good wine growing place but maybe some other places would get better.

So let me put this in context. The climate alarm went from I think your cities will be underwater in 12 years to I don't want no Swedish wine. I feel like they're slowly backing out. It wasn't long ago everything was going to crash down on you. The water level would rise. It would be super hurricanes and you would fry in your sleep. But now I'm a little worried that I won't be able to call anything champagne because nothing will be grown in the Champagne region. What if I have to drink wine that came from Mongolia instead because it's so warm there? I feel like the cat's on the roof. That's what it feels like. It feels like the cat's on the roof and the predictions are not coming true at a level that would support the narrative. So maybe they need to back off the narrative too.

Well when I said super hurricanes I meant your chardonnay might taste different. See what I mean? It's going from really bad to I don't know you might have less access to poison. Just think about it. Alcohol is poison. And one of the big problems of global temperature rise if it's happening is that you might have to get your poison from a different source. That's your biggest problem right there. Well I don't know if I have to poison myself by putting a little extra work into it. That's no good anyway.

Mike Benz talking about the whole of government censorship effort. So did you know that the Department of Homeland Security censorship agency CISA, did you know Mike Benz reports that they put a Washington Post reporter on its taxpayer-funded domestic disinformation conference in 2020 where they formulated social media censorship strategies for the 2020 election? Just hold that in your mind. That the government created very expensive, well-funded, gigantic entities, if you count the entire web of connected people, for the specific purpose of censoring 2020 information. And one of the participants was the Washington Post, most famous for their CIA connection. So that's what you call, as Mike Benz says, a whole of government censorship effort. Yeah there were a lot of people in on that.

So do you still think that the Washington Post canceled me because of what I said? Does anybody think that I was canceled because of what I said or is it a coincidence that the Washington Post led the cancellation and we know the Washington Post is an intelligence agency that works closely with the Democrats? And listening to me talking in public has got to hurt them a little bit. Big coincidence. Not a single Republican complained about anything I said. I mean they were uncomfortable with it but once they heard the whole explanation they're like oh okay free speech. Yeah no everything's political. Everything's political.

All right I would like to say that not knowing how anything works is not a political opinion but we keep treating it like it is. We keep acting like there's a difference of political opinion on big topics. It's not really that. It's really stupid people who don't know how anything works trying to debate people who do know how things work and then we imagine that has something to do with politics. That's not politics. That's just some people know how to analyze things and some don't. That's all that is.

Let me give you some examples. Democrats don't know how free speech works. That being the prior story. If you have a strike force that the government put together to censor speech then you don't understand that censoring speech is the end of everything. Or maybe you do and you want everything to end. So it's like people who don't understand. How do you not understand that free speech means you don't censor people you disagree with? But they seem to think free speech allows you to censor people you disagree with which is the opposite. It's literally the opposite.

Now how do you have a political conversation with somebody who thinks that censoring is free speech? You can't. That's a smart person arguing with a dumb person. If you don't know how anything works you would think that limiting free speech could work out for you. Well if you do know how anything works you don't want to do that.

How about open borders? If you know how anything works you'd be against it. But if you don't know how anything works in the real world you'll be for it. You'd be for it. How about reparations? How about DEI? Yeah if you understood incentives and what it would do to the people who are not benefiting from the DEI and what kind of an obscenity it becomes when people try to hit those targets but they don't have enough supply of people to hire, it breaks everything. Who knew? Do that. Well people who understand how the real world works know that this is a disaster. If you don't know how the real world works you think it's a way to get equity.

How about New York Mayor Adams is talking about giving debit cards and free money to migrants, prepaid debit cards. What do you think will happen if you start paying people to come here illegally? Huh? Would there be more of it or less of it if you reward it? I don't know. I can't figure it out. Ever since I registered to be a Democrat I can't figure these things out.

Well you see my point. Arguing about free speech, open borders, DEI, reparations, and benefits to immigrants, those are not really differences of opinion. Those are differences of intelligence, period. Thos