Coffee With Scott Adams — Knowledge Archive May 24, 2026
Scott Adams Philosophy Archive
Search ideas
Episodes Episode #2732 Segments
MainContent Politics as Persuasion

Back to episode — Episode 2732 CWSA 01/27/25

Context —

some people could come back just not the Hamas fighters. And maybe you'd have to. It could be that it would just recreate the problem. So if we decided never to do that, not we but if they decided never to do that it wouldn't be unconscionable. It would just be a practical decision. All right so that's the question. We should tell Iran they have to take them because it's their problem not anybody…

← Previous segment →

ll the time every day. I use it several times and every time I'm impressed. It just it doesn't fail. It's just so good.

Anyway their valuation went from not much to 9 billion and I guess that gives them the confidence to put together a bid for TikTok. And their bid would do something to keep the existing stockholders in it somehow but would give the United States, the government of America, it would give them 50% of the benefit if it goes public I guess. So there could be several hundred billion dollars at stake here if it goes public and if it goes public under the new form. So it's more of a merger situation than a purchase I guess. They wouldn't purchase the algorithm so they'd have to invent their own algorithm. But again if it was anybody but Perplexity that said they were going to reinvent the algorithm that was so good you know you'd say huh can they do that? But once I've seen what they did with Perplexity they certainly have the skill. Whatever they're doing is really really right. So yeah maybe they can. So I don't know if this is going to work out but it's a complicated kind of proposal and they may have answered all the questions. You know that it's a long ways from it getting done. You know if I had to bet I'm not sure I'd bet for it but that's a real interesting offer. Real interesting offer.

Did you know how many children are born to illegal immigrants in the United States? According to Just the News Nicholas Bazy writes that in 2023 there were a quarter million children born to illegal immigrants to use their phrase. That's a lot.

Now of course the birthright citizenship thing is working through the courts, will probably end up in the Supreme Court. And here's what I have discovered in this two movies on one screen situation. If you're a Democrat the only thing that you've been told by your news is that it clearly says in the Constitution that birthright citizenship exists and if you're born here that's the end of the story. Would you agree that if you're a Democrat that's all you've heard? All you heard is it's in the Constitution. Done. What else is there to say?

But if you're a Republican you didn't hear that. If you're Republican you heard a completely different story in which the person who originally tweaked the language in the birthright citizenship part of the Constitution he said directly and in his own words it was not intended for aliens or non-citizens. It wasn't intended for them.

Now here's where it gets interesting. The Supreme Court has a lot of originalists on it, conservatives who want to interpret things the way they were originally meant to be interpreted. Lin

Context —

dsey Graham said that he thinks there's a good chance the Supreme Court will uphold the banning of illegal foreign people using it for let's say gaming the system. So I don't know if Lindsey Graham has a good handle on what the Supreme Court will do but he's a serious guy and there's a serious argument for it. The argument against it, well let me say this. If the only thing the court looked at wa…

Next segment → →