problems. My problems are real. Are yours real? Of course they are. So but who has preferred problems? Like why does somebody else's problem is preferred because of some historical argument about people that are not me? You know I get that you can stitch it all together and make the argument, but people, lots of people have problems. Just that the fact that yours is demonstrably true, that doesn't mean you get paid. Those are not connected concepts. It could be just bad luck and tragic just like everybody else's life but in different ways.

Anyway, speaking of racial bluntness, I've been telling you that there seems to be some kind of willingness on both the white and the black side and every other side I suppose to be more blunt about race. So Mike Cernovich posting, I think it was today, if we're going to have racial conversations, which the left insists on, then by all means we should be telling the truth about interracial crime. It ain't whites attacking blacks. People can scream at me. Don't care. People are dying.

So that would be a perfect example. I'm not asking you to agree with anybody's particular opinion. I'm just saying there's clearly a willingness to talk about things that would have gotten you canceled even for bringing them up. I'm pretty sure that the bluntness, let's call it honesty, is good for everybody. I don't think there's a loser in that. I think everybody's better off. It just hurts a little bit, you know like going to the dentist. But I don't think anybody means anything negative like it. It's all meant that if you know what a problem is and you're honest about it, you're more likely to find a solution. I think that's all it is.

If you'd like my take on it, since I'm on testosterone blockers for the cancer, I'll give you the low T take, and you can compare it to anything I might have said in the past. All right, here's the low T take. I would recommend that whenever you're in a situation that makes you feel uncomfortable for your safety or your success that you should at least consider relocating to a place where there's less of that risk. Does that sound like I used to sound or have I lost my edge? God, I hope I haven't lost my edge.

All right. So I've talked a number of times about an AI company called Anthropic, one of the big ones, and finding out today, the Washington Examiner is writing, Samantha Jo Roth, that their backers, Anthropic backers have given lots of money to Democrats and a lot of it happened before the federal government created an AI vendor list approval. In other words, allowed them to be selling their stuff to the federal government. So I guess the allegation is that maybe the donations to the Democrats gave them some inside path or something that doesn't look like