MainContent
her of them thought to take out their phone and snap a picture or take a video.
My advice is don't take seriously any sightings of UFOs that don't come with video. And secondly, don't take seriously any UFO sightings that have a very unclear video or photos. It's 2025 almost, people. If it's real, somebody's gonna have a good photo of it. Yeah. Well, I don't know if it could be a balloon because it was matching their speed. And even if it were attached to something, it seems like it would be a little fluttery or something. So I don't know what it was. It seems more likely it was an optical illusion of some type. I'm going to say optical illusion, but I don't think it showed up on radar, blah blah.
So this is a small story, but it shows you where things are going.
I guess Waymo has now been approved at least a little bit for driving on LA freeways. Now it had already been used in California on side streets, but allowing it on freeways, this is a pretty big change. Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but Waymo is a Google company. Is that true? Waymo is Google, right? And Google is so big and so connected and so powerful that I can't imagine in my wildest dreams that the state of California can block them from being fully autonomous as well as Tesla. I don't think California will be able to hold out for another year. So my guess is that 2026, sometime during the year, will be the year of autonomous self-driving cars that don't require you to pay attention.
So Waymo does not require you to pay attention but is limited to where it can go. Now it's not limited to where it can go, or at least they're testing it on the freeway. This is not approved fully. It's just being tested. And I would say every indication, including everything Elon Musk is doing and saying and then everything that Waymo is doing and saying, would suggest we're almost there. This is definitely the year.
Can you imagine how the world would be different with self-driving cars? You know, for a lot of people, especially people who commute, especially people who are living in LA traffic, this is such a game changer. If you told me, Scott, do you want to live in LA? Probably the first thing I would say is no, I can't handle the traffic. But if you said to me, well, the traffic will be bad but will rapidly become less bad as people start sharing auto cars, etc. And by the way, instead of being nailed to your driver's wheel, you could just do your own thing. In which case the commute would just be productive time.
If you said, Scott, bring your laptop. You have Wi-Fi presumably and you can just sit in that car and treat it like it's an office that happens to be moving. The commute is gone. It would be like the commute didn't exist. It would just be extra work done. So the way society is going to change in the next 12 months is really, really interesting. So most of you will be here for that.
So as I predicted in my mind but did not tell you, the Epstein files have turned into the trickle strategy. The trickle strategy is that they will continue releasing things that make us unhappy. That's not enough. That's not enough. I'm going to sue you. But wait, here are some more files. Oh, all right. I'll wait another day because you said you'd give me some more files. Wait a minute. They're redacted. Well, wait till tomorrow. All right, I can wait one more day. Uh oh, wait. We had to pause because we haven't redacted enough. Well,
Episode 3050 CWSA 12/22/25
MainContent
to start with a long windup so that you've got a context that will make this much more meaningful. You ready? All right.
So I mentioned a few of these things before, but I've never tied them together in the way you're going to see. One of them is I've always been, not always, but for years I've been a student of the Beatles, you know, the musical group The Beatles. And what I'm interested in is not just how much I liked them, especially when I was young, but their processes and the systems that they used and how did they get to be so great.
Because one of the things you would note about the Beatles is if you looked at any one of their skills, they have lots of skills across a variety of domains. None of them look like the best in the world. So they're not the best lyricists. In fact, a lot of their lyrics were random. They're not the best musicians in terms of playing their instruments, which they would even have told you themselves. You could argue that Ringo was actually world class, but you know, there'd be some debate on that.
But I was trying to count in my head after studying them for years how many skills they had combined because they had everything from the style to the sense of humor to the marketing, the business. They played multiple instruments like you said. They did their own lyrics. But on top of all that I think McCartney was the unsung genius of the group. You know everybody gets their credit. They were all amazing. But McCartney was sort of a systems over goals kind of a guy. He just didn't call it that. And I think he was also a talent stack kind of a guy because they were acquiring so many talents over time.
I'll just give you an example. I might have this wrong but the example still works. I believe it was McCartney who said they had a rule. Let's call it a system. If they started to write a song, they wouldn't end the night until they finished it. Now, presumably there were some exceptions to that, but one of the things that they're famous for is completing more, you know, writing more songs than anybody could even imagine.
So if you took just McCartney's skill stack, I'll bet he had at least 20 skills that worked perfectly together. And the magic sauce that I write about and I talk about is not that he had a lot of skills because if he'd been, let's say, really good at badminton, well, that wouldn't really mix with anything else he was doing. But if you're really good at studio work plus drums plus guitar plus blah blah, every one of those works together, including the business end of it.
So if you combine the four Beatles and their skills, I think you would end up with something like 20 to 50 skills that are not random. They all work together. And I don't think we've ever seen anything like that.
Now, time goes by and here's some more context. And remember, I'm going to tie this all together. So just make a mental note that the Beatles were not the best in the world at anything, but they were probably above average at 20 to 50 different skills. And that's in my opinion the magic sauce.
So time goes by. We're going to change the context a little bit to my early career when I was a younger man. I had the idea that most people have, which is if you have a big problem in your life, could be career, could be personal, could be health, that what you would try to do is recover from the problem. And that makes sense, right? If you have a big problem, obviously you should set as your objective to get back to where you were.
Now, I'll give you an example where I tried that and learned it's a bad idea. So you've heard this story again, but I'm putting it in a different context. When I was in my 20s, worked for a bank. I had a cubicle job. It looked like I had potential for promotion. One day my boss called me in and said, "I don't know how to tell you this, but the word has come down from management that we can't promote white men." So that would be a big problem because I was young and ambitious and if they told me directly I couldn't be promoted. Well, I very quickly put my resume together and quit to take a better job, slightly better job. I would say it's more of a lateral move from the bank to a phone company, but it was really just another cubicle job.
So that was an example of not using the system I'm going to describe. But once that turned out the same way, the phone company eventually called me into my boss's office and said, "I don't know how to tell you this, but word has come down that we can't promote a white male." So you see what I did was I set my objective to get back to where I was, you know, working in the cubicle and maybe getting promoted. And I got right back to where I was. But where I was wasn't good.
So sometime around that point in my life, I came up with a different strategy. You could call it a system. And the system was that no matter how bad the problem was, I would set as my objective to take advantage of the problem to be way better, like way way better than wherever I was before the problem.
And you've also heard this story. Again, I'm going to put it in a different context that when I turned 49, I had a rare neurological problem that affected my vocal cords, and they would clench when I tried to form words. So I could make noise, but people couldn't understand what I was saying. So instead of talking the way you hear me now, I'd talk like that. And people would say, "What? What?" I couldn't use the telephone etc.
So it took me a few years to even find out that it had a name, spasmodic dysphonia, and the bad news was the experts told me it was incurable. So I had an incurable voice problem and half of my job was public speaking and doing interviews and I really kind of needed to be able to talk. Now, I was lucky that half of my job was cartooning because that didn't require the talking. But boy, did I need to get back to where I was.
However, by that time I had learned my new system, which is to set my goal as being way better, way better than wherever I was before I had the problem. Now, in this case, getting back to where I was would have been a rather poor voice. Because long before I had spasmodic dysphonia, I had a weak, nasally sounding voice that I hated to listen to. Most of you have that, right? When you listen to your own voice on recording, you go, "Ugh."
However, for those years where I was trying to find a solution to the speaking, I did an affirmation usually in my car. And you know, because I couldn't speak intelligently, but it didn't matter because I was just alone driving my car. I would do it out loud, but it would sound like nonsense to anybody else, but I knew what I was thinking and saying. And the affirmation went like this. I, Scott Adams, will speak perfectly.
Now, remember, I never spoke perfectly. And it's also a subjective standard, right? So what exactly is speaking perfectly? And I'm going to tell you in a minute what that means to me.
So again, time goes by and in 2013 or so I published a book called *How to Fail at Almost Everything and Still Win Big*. And that included my advice about building a talent stack. It included my advice about having a system over a goal. And it also talked about my strategy of setting my recovery to be way better, way better than what I started with.
So now that the scene is set, turns out that one of the people who read that book and absorbed a whole bunch of the skills that it described is an artist called Akira the Don. Akira the Don. And for the last several years, he has been using the techniques from the book. And by the way, he tells me this. I'm not guessing. So he told me this directly that he learned the whole talent stack, systems over goals, and a whole bunch of other advice. He absorbed it. He put it together and he added it to his existing skills of music. And he also runs the business of producing music. He's learned to obviously do video marketing, social media, and I would estimate that he has now compiled somewhere in the neighborhood of 20 different skills that like the Beatles, this is the magic part, like the Beatles, they're not 20 random skills. They're designed because they work together.
So he's been cranking away at a new form of music, art, entertainment that most of you have seen by now that he calls Meaningwave, which combines a background beat in music with some kind of podcaster or some kind of philosopher who says interesting things that independently you would like to hear. For example, I think he did Alan Watts and Jordan Peterson and they combined their voices just talking with the music and oh my god is it powerful. But he also did it with me.
So he took clips from many of my podcasts and then this past week he, after all this practice and assembling of many talents, he dropped an album. It's an entire album. You can find it on YouTube or just go to the internet. You can search for it. Akira the Don plus my name. It'll pop right up. And he launches it last week. And last I checked it had 6 million views.
Now by the time the podcast clips were made, I had discovered a solution to my voice problem: surgery. And it took several years for me to get my voice back to strong enough that I could podcast. So by the time he took the clips, I had learned persuasion. I'd written books that were part of my talent stack on advice, affirmations, and I'd found a way to be persuasively verbal. So I wasn't trying to do any music because I have no musical talent whatsoever, but I was trying to make my voice as compelling and useful as possible.
Now, I'm going to expand the definition of my voice to include not just how it sounded, but what I said, because by then I'd learned to speak persuasively. And when you listen to it, you'll see that the persuasion part, the clips are really unusually well picked. So it's not everything I've ever said. Akira the Don was also talented in figuring out what clips would work well in the music, what would affect people, maybe what affected him, I'm not sure. And he puts it together.
And if you haven't heard it yet, you will be blown away because he's literally invented an entirely new form of entertainment. And I've never seen anything in a musical domain. And you could argue whether it's music or a whole new art form, but I've never seen anything with that. Nearly 100% of the people listen to it say, "My god, that's good." People put it on and play it all day. People use it to go to sleep.
So back to my definition and my system. Remember my system was not to get back to where I was because that would be a nasally unpleasant voice that even I would not want to listen to. But by that time I had learned to speak in a pleasant way. I had recovered the strength of my voice which took years. And the podcasting was part of that strategy to make sure that I talked for an hour a day at least. And the net result is that I produced without any effort on my own part. I guess I'll say Akira the Don produced with my clips an art form that's better than just about anything you've ever seen. Just unbelievably mind-blowingly innovative and just so good. So good.
So I would recommend that you at least give it a sample. At least give it a sample.
So now that's an example of both he and I using the same system. I was combining skills. He was reading about my suggestion to combine skills. I have a system. He had a system. Lots of systems. And it was just amazing.
Anyway, so here's my first shout-out. You're going to ask me because you're curious and it's a fair question. Am I sharing in the economics of this? The answer is no. No, I have no economic stake. Not directly, not indirectly. And that's exactly what I want to say publicly in case someday my estate decides to challenge it. I want my estate to know because I'm now saying it in public that it is not my wishes to share economically.
One of the reasons for that is that he has already rewarded me more than money. You know, money can't compensate. So the feeling that I got from watching my voice become not just serviceable but put it in context where it was way better than way better than it ever was that even when I listen to it I say to myself wow I really enjoy listening to me and that is rare.
So you could say that that is perfect because what would be more perfect than going from not being able to speak to being the featured vocalist in a special way just talking on a hugely successful and influential form of art that didn't exist before. If that's not perfect, well, I mean, you tell me what is.
So that's my first compliment and shout-out. Akira the Don. Give it a sample.
Second is somebody I've talked about a lot and you're going to say, "Scott, he's no artist." And I get it. I get it. But he does what he does so well that I think is elevated to art, right? You know, if somebody's just really good at what they do, then they're just really good at what they do. But some people can take that to such a level that you look at it and you go, "Wow, nobody could do that. Who else could do that? That's art." And the second person is Mike Benz, especially because of what he did the past week.
Now, if you don't know Mike Benz, you should follow him because I can't really reproduce what he talks about or says, and that's really the point. He is unreproducible because he's so artistically gifted. Now, he like Akira the Don has told me that I had some influence over his talent stack. Now I assume that means maybe just in the domain of persuasion. I don't know the details but I had some influence.
And what his special talent is that I've never seen anybody close is he has this insane encyclopedic memory and knowledge of the intelligence and government structures so that he knows exactly who is connected to whom, what organizations and people are connected, who's married to who, who used to work with who, where the money flowed. And he combines that incredible knowledge that I don't think honestly I don't think there's another person in the world who has his knowledge of just how things are fit together. But he combines that with just crazy pattern recognition.
And so he has this unique ability that has made a lot of MAGA people happy. I don't know if he would call himself MAGA, but he operates in that world more than the other. So he does a podcast and he's developed all these skills. You know, he's musical and he combines that. He plays a piano. So you can see that his brain is a certain structure. That's amazing.
So he's learned to podcast. He's got the business end of it. He's made lots of networking connections. But on top of that, if you add the encyclopedic memory, his knowledge of how everything is connected and now his pattern recognition, he was the first one to untangle in my mind the NGO badness because the theft that was massive, we'll talk about that later, seemed to be hidden in the complexity. So you needed someone who could look at this amazing complexity and pick out what mattered and what was noise. Nobody else can do that.
So first, and this is not what he did this week, he sort of demystified the whole NGO world and I think I would give him the most credit. Now obviously Elon Musk is a huge part of that and DOGE but it was Benz who kind of explained it all to me for the first time but you take that forward and this past week in my opinion he's the first one who completely explained the Epstein situation.
Now I can't reproduce his explanation but I'll give you the sort of idiot summary. The idiot summary is that while he was doing a podcast and he was starting to do some pattern recognition of everything we've learned so far, he realized that Epstein has been connected to at least four intelligence agencies. Again, this is because of his encyclopedic knowledge of who works with who, who was a roommate, who literally who was a roommate, who stayed with somebody for an extended period of time, things you would never know, but he does.
And I guess as he was doing the podcast, he suddenly put it all together. Now, if you haven't heard it, I would tell you to go listen to his version because you want to get the full thing. But the basic idea is that Epstein has clearly been associated with giant intelligence-related money laundering for several decades, starting
Episode 3049 CWSA 12/21/25
MainContent
le thinking about it differently. They're not as anti-nuclear. So we're going to take that nuclear asset and we're going to turn it into something valuable. Well, which one is it? Well, we got there a little late. Okay. Okay. But which one did you get? Well, as I said, a lot of the good ones were snatched up right away. Okay, you're not answering the question. Which one did you get? Three Mile Island. Three Mile Island. Yeah, Three Mile Island. Never go less.
All right. And this story made me laugh. So apparently there's a story about how Jeffrey Epstein was unhappy with Google's search engine optimization because it kept surfacing negative stories about him according to the Verge. Mia Sato was writing about this. Now, weren't we supposed to believe that Jeffrey Epstein was part of some giant running the entire world backdoor thing that he had all the power of all the intelligence agencies and he had unlimited money and he couldn't get his SEO to work and he didn't know who to call. He's like allegedly we're thinking he's the most powerful man in the world between his blackmail and his money and the contacts he has and the most powerful man in the world has exactly the same problem you do which is I don't think this search algorithm is right. Who do I call? There's nobody to call.
To me that's funny that even Jeffrey Epstein had nobody to call to fix this. Not that they would have fixed it, but this problem just like yours.
All right. And I guess now we know George Soros gave a quarter million dollars to some British group that was working to censor conservative news sites and kill Musk's X. Chuck Ross is writing about that. Well, yeah. Yeah. All right. Here's the last story in the news. There's nothing to say about that except George Soros is in fact trying to destroy free speech, but only yours. Yeah. Not his.
Chris Matthews was recently on NewsNation with Leland Vittert. NewsNation's doing a good job lately, by the way. And I saw it on a Jason Cohen post. And so what Chris Matthews says is that if the political left teams up with MSNBC, now they used to be MSNBC, but MS Now, that their audience will not be able to elect them in any important federal office. There's sort of a losing frame if they enter the far-left frame and they embrace the things that MS Now is embracing that they'll just lose and it will split the party and they'll all be in trouble. And he says Chris Matthews says this is a problem and I look at them lining up and when they make these statements I go that's for MSNBC that's not for the electorate and that's a problem.
And it made me think about where real power lies. Here's a little mental experiment, a thought experiment. You ready? Thought experiment. All right. What if the talent, you know, the on-air talent of MS Now was way better than it is? What would happen? Just regular talent. There's nothing magic or special. They're just way better at it. Well, their audience would zoom because they would be more entertaining and their power in terms of their influence over the electorate would go up probably in roughly the same ratio as their audience. So who's running the country? Who's running the country? If Rachel Maddow could do better work and that would cause a bigger audience and that would cause her to have more power and that would cause the MS Now point of view to get more weight. Who's running the country? The elected people or Rachel Maddow?
Right now let me take that to the other side. You know, as I've often said, that the producers for Fox News are so much better than the producers for the other shows that it just jumps off the page. Now you'd have to be in the business as I am to maybe even notice it, but they have such better producers. Now, how much power does that give to Rupert Murdoch or Fox News just because they're better at it? They can just put on a show that looks better, sounds better, and then more people will watch it. A lot. It gives them a lot of power. So even the producers, the people you've never heard of, even they have power more than you think.
But now here's where it gets interesting. If you're looking at Fox News, let's say prime time where everything important happens. And you're looking at Greg Gutfeld's on twice, you know, he's on The Five and then he's on Gutfeld. And Jesse Watters is on twice. I'm not sure where Dana is now, but I think she has a second show. I may have lost track of her other one. But you're talking about the best people, in my opinion, the best people in the business, and they all happen to be in the same network. How much power does that give Fox News simply because they have more talent in their host lineup? Probably a lot. Probably a lot.
And we don't really think of power that way, do we? We think of the people I'm talking about as people who are talking about the power. They're not the power, the people talking about it. Are they? Are they just the ones talking about it or are they the ones who decide by the quality of their actions how many people are going to watch? And then if a lot of people watch, don't they have power? Right.
I'm watching your comments. You get a little bit quiet when I venture into new territory. But yeah, talent I would say that talent is the invisible variable that people don't necessarily recognize and call out, but there's a specific theme within talent. Let's see if you can tell what it is. There's something that Fox News hosts have as a talent that I don't believe anybody on MSNBC has and maybe I'm thinking nobody on CNN. So there's a talent, a specific talent that you'll see on Fox News hosts, several of them. I'll name them in a minute, but you'll see none of it in the others. What's the talent? You tell me. What talent do the Fox News hosts have? It might be more than one, but there's one I'm thinking of.
The answer is humor. The answer is humor. If you have not discovered that Gutfeld and Watters are hilarious and you haven't discovered that if you throw in Kennedy and you throw in Dana and you throw in Emily Compagno that you have this whole humor kind of a structure that lives within the structure of the show and it travels not to every show but it does travel from show to show you know wherever one of those characters is you're going to see humor.
Now, am I wrong? As soon as you think about it, it changes how you see the whole thing, isn't it? The Fox News people, and again, none of this happens unless you've got the right producers. Because the producers are the ones who say, you know, do more of that, do less of that. At least until the host is so successful they don't have to take advice. Eventually that happens. But am I wrong? I'm not wrong. Right. So the humor talent that apparently Fox News either got by luck, I don't think it was luck, I think they got it by looking for it and then finding it and promoting it. Obviously if you look at the show Gutfeld, obviously they were thinking of humor. So it's not like it snuck up on them
Episode 3023 CWSA 11/19/25
MainContent
got good at grabbing their photos, it turns out we're now good at identifying cartel members. So when it says that the number of suspected terrorists is up 30-fold, it means we got really really good at spotting cartel members crossing the border. Trying to do it legally, but obviously we're spotting them. So what looks like bad news is actually extraordinary. Extraordinary that they had a 30-fold improvement in spotting cartel members coming across the border. How often do you get a 30-fold improvement in anything? That's pretty impressive.
So yeah, that's just sort of all good news. I would like to have fewer cartel members crossing my border. That'd be good too. But the fact that we can now spot them seems like a good idea.
Well, apparently there's going to be some protests against the Mexican president for not doing enough to go after the cartels. And the Mexican president, what do you think she did when the security risk got too high? That's right. She's building a wall around wherever the president lives. I don't know what it is in Mexico, but whatever their version of the presidential palace or whatever it is, they're building a big steel wall all around it. Build the wall. Build the wall.
And it's interesting that the public so clearly blames her as being basically a tool of the cartel. I'm pretty sure that Trump thinks of her the same way, but she's the only president they have. So he has to deal with her in the real world in some kind of real world productive way. So maybe he just has to pretend he knows less about the cartel connections than he does. But it could suggest that there's going to be a military move against the cartels by the US because you might expect that the president of Mexico would be very vulnerable to some kind of cartel attack if she didn't stop the US from attacking Mexico. So things could get a little wet and a little dark as soon as that fence is done. There's some specific protests coming up, but I'll bet they keep the fence up after that's over.
According to Interesting Engineering, there's some new technology that promises to turn ethanol plants that would be a place that turns things into ethanol but there's some CO2 waste that comes out of that and they could turn it into jet fuel for 80% less than the current cost of just jet fuel.
Now I'm not going to try to tell you that this is likely to happen, this specific technology, but all the times I've read to you, almost every day, there's always some breakthrough in either producing energy or converting CO2 into energy or reducing cost by 80% like in this case, I feel like the future is something like everything will cost 80% less and then 90% less. Like if you were going to look at the near-term and midterm, everything will look more expensive. But if you were to look at the long term, it looks like the cost of everything is just going to plummet because we'll keep finding these little ways to do stuff like this. It's like, oh, we'll just turn this into something. It'll reduce the cost by 80%. So jet fuel is one of the big polluters in the world.
All right, let me just finish up here. If you haven't seen the video yet of a giant bridge in China collapsing, it's sort of a newish bridge, but it was one of those big impressive ones, and they had some mudslide that just took out the whole bridge. Nobody died. The police did a good job, cleared it out in anticipation of the problem, and sure enough, there's video of a mudslide taking out the whole bridge.
So the reason I bring that up is I've been thinking lately that China is the only one who can make anything anymore, but it used to be that we thought that China didn't manufacture as well as
Episode 3016 CWSA 11/12/25
Tangent
t's probably partly why the stock market's up. He thinks that there's going to be a deal to reduce US tariffs on imports from China in exchange for here's the part I don't believe. China trying harder to block the fentanyl precursors.
As you know, China produces the precursors that go to Mexico and then the cartels turn that into fentanyl and then they kill tens of thousands of Americans every year. Trump's been working on this for what, eight years and gotten no results whatsoever because part of the problem is that China says, "Oh, we're working very hard on these precursors and we've banned them." And then five minutes later, we find out that they're new precursors. They're slightly different than the others, but you can also use them to make fentanyl. And then China will say, "Oh, those are not illegal yet. We would have to make those specific ones illegal." So we would say, why don't you do that? So then they do that, but nothing happens fast. And then they say, all right, we've clamped down on all of these precursors. And then we say, but why are they still coming in at exactly the same rate? Oh, well, those are slightly different again. Yet again, those bad guys have come up with a slightly different thing that's not technically illegal. We'll try to catch up with that.
Now, if you've lived in the real world for more than five minutes, this will sound to you like they're not really trying, not really trying to stop those precursors. They're trying to make us think that they're doing something so that they can get something, which is us easing off on trade. But I don't believe they'll do anything. If China has gone this far with doing absolutely nothing but claiming they're working on it and showing you some evidence that they're working on it, but not really stopping it, are we going to do our part? Are we going to give them the tariff relief that they want when there's no real chance they're going to give us what we want? Or does Trump have a new approach that somehow I don't know what that would be. We would have some more transparency or we'd have some more trust that China was actually trying to cut this down. I don't know if this is any deal at all. So I'll be optimistic and say if Trump thinks he can make this work that would be great. But I'm not going to hold my breath on fentanyl.
Remember yesterday I was telling you that Japan and the Japanese culture is not just good at gift giving, but they're sort of the champions. Like they can give a gift that will just be so special and so well thought out and so emotionally perfect. The Japanese are just good at it, the gift giving. So they gave Trump the putter that literally belonged to his friend Abe when he was the prime minister. Now that is a really good gift because they were golfing partners and you know it's a real thing and it was something that was probably very personally important to the prime minister, his putter because he golfed. If you're a golfer you sort of have a relationship with your putter. So that was an example of the best you could do in the gift giving compared to South Korea. And I'm not going to mock South Korea. I'm just making a contrast. What they gave him as a gift was the Grand Order of the Mugunghwa, the country's highest decoration. Now, I'm sure that that is a great honor. And if South Korea ever offered me the Grand Order of the Mugunghwa, I would be very appreciative and I would respect that totally. However, if it comes right after Abe's putter, it barely looks like they're
Episode 3003 CWSA 10/29/25
