« Coffee With Scott Adams

Episode 8: About Roseanne, North Korea, and CNN

2018-03-29 | 🔗

Roseanne TV show review

North Korea


The post Episode 8: About Roseanne, North Korea, and CNN appeared first on Dilbert Blog.

This is an unofficial transcript meant for reference. Accuracy is not guaranteed.
to do to try again this again new microphone new equipment when the trolls come on and told me that my sound is now working i will be ignoring them are blocking them there is actually a real problem with some of the browsers that are not working with periscope well so there are some people who are having sound problems but its own specific browsers apparently yeah i know so it's like my rose in so i watch roseanne last night as you know the the news was that she was going to be a trump supporter and i didn't have high expectations because i didn't think that the
standards sicker model was still relevant and twenty eighteen so i went into it with low expectations by thinking well i have to watch it because everybody is going to be talking about it i'll tell you what it was really really good like startlingly good the writing was extraordinary the the chemistry of the team of course was good it's the same chemistry that made it a great show before and it looks like they start the chemistry what they ve added on top of great writing perfect comedic actors and gray chemistry there they found a whole new level with this adding the trump supporter and then her sister j he is the thea
pussy her wearing liberal just it just takes her to another level it takes to hold another level that makes you think about it the next day so that i laughed till i cried during the show then a day later i'm thinking about certain themes in the way they approach things that's just a home run so congratulations to rosa him i have to say the bar was so high but you cleared it easily so it was it was his brilliant so i hope they can keep up their quality but to have you first to chose out of the box less strong is unusual but very impressive north korea so
we ve got this good news coming end all over the place about north korea all the indications are in place that something good can happen there here's how here so cnn is handling the great gray north korea news that year ok go wrong but right now everything whether we know that is great so how to cnn report the great news well let's look see what their headline is on cnn about a great great news and president trumps success santorum walks back his cpr remark though they just now replace their story about stormy daniels lawyer but i'm sure there's north korea stories somewhere the top centre walking back is remark is at the top but the sea something about second amendment
schools guns guns okay so or about tax levels down nothing about north korea but i know it's there another some north korea start here no stormy daniels stormy daniel still we daniels centre our pio disney star present find the lawyer some advice for the president's marriage and cooper tint you call me in the town hall ok oh here it is here it is the twenty seventh item on cnn roughly is north korea kim visits china leader and then re below it china throws trump a curveball china throws trump curveball that's how their reporting that china and north korea
at a very important summit the obviously the lead up to you nuclear station by here here's other reporting the curveball so the curb oh is that kim and she are being cosy therefore the theory is that that would be how can we protect himself from the u s aggression should we asked them to give up his news another word cnn is reporting that is worth it's going in the wrong direction man that is such a reach such a right she's gonna work pretty hard to make this look like bad news but they did it they did it here's how you probably should see the visits by kim too she let me put us in perspective too how would it look
to president she who is vital to this whole process how would it looked at him if he were not the first leader that kim visited think about that is there anyway the king could have a car global meeting with president trump had he not done the first step which is paid this respect two presidency an end demonstrate in a physical away by actually travelling there that primary relationship is with china i'm pretty sure china wanted to make that point as well so to report that the obvious step for meeting with president trump has been take in exactly the right time and in the right way how to turn into bad news where you going pretty hard so
there was no there was no way they can should have and by the way you wouldn't want him too you wouldn't want kim jong on to meet with trump higher to meeting with president she if china you wouldn't want that to happen that would not be the right order of things the correct order of things meets with china they get there situation straight china is respected as the big brother that they are in the neighborhood and then if you go on having conversation with trump so things proceeding exactly the way they should sound is off you get blocked some blocking the people who are telling me that my sound isn't working today scott when you have a discussion with north korea with michael malice
yes i would in fact i was thinking about doing exactly that so i think all contact him and and have him do that played back my interview where having had collars on my ass and i didn't like the sound too much on that we who watched last night was the sound ok mike belarus is expert on north korea so you be a to talk to doktor
not very good sound though yeah was tinny i'll have to figure out how to fix that might be a way to do that gordon jane would be great and he would be he would be the other big namely here about north korea i dont know i can get him on my periscope but i i've had contact with michael malice i think he might come on so some more tinny some were ok ok doesnt seem to you once again that the news cycle is getting a little slow you like we ve run out of we ve a man of good news not good
my interesting news because all russia thing is looking boring like the russia collusion didn't happen your lesson the people who were supporters were pretty it did about five g today really somebody says the idea report is coming soon we don't know that doing that's just speculation the whole stormy thing did nothing but raise raise trump approval wrecking oh replying versus vs harris my god yes that was the topic i was trying to remember to talk about some of you know that sam areas and i had a conversation on his podcast about trump
and a lot has been said about that in view in terms of who did the better job of presenting their side of things but supper from that so you know that salmon i said i have pre deep disagreements and the only talk on the only topics we ve talked about which is politics now i see that as recline from vocs as has been said harris calling sam a racist now what you need to know about this the sam is about as you say i want to say democrat but he says when it whatever is the opposite of a racist as was said heiresses but some areas is also intellectual and science loving guy
and he made these supreme mistake in my opinion this was a mistake though he did for the reason and i'm glad you did it but he interviewed charles murray charles murray he i think that's right it his paws now murray is one who wrote the book the bell curve and he has provoked things to say about iq and in particular the lightning rod part is that he says things about rachel differences in iq i'm not going to make the mistake the same harris murray both make wish just to them talk about that topic because that that's just a mistake doesn't matter if it's true it's a mistake sir
well let me give you my my opinion this on race and i like it's complicated ers of course there's always a component there's a environmental component but more importantly if you'd if you'd look at any team of people who are working effectively for a goal you quite often they have different i accuse i'm just talk about any rim random team of people working on the project but quite often who can do with the other one can do in other words somebody was real really to marketing but they're not really good with numbers and there's somebody who's real good with strategy but there are no good at all with making our boys lives etc so by observation is that i q are all over the place but capable they use tend to be silent and if
put together the right people with the right silos of capabilities you have a great team knower were kind of that point in history where people work in teams for most stuff either it's a real team or after work with a lot of people who have different skills so what really matters in my view of the world is your talent stack which is how you layer together the things you ve learned to be useful in that thus far more predictive then i q sorry working with the right people do have the right strategy to have a good talent stack and that will tell you a lot about the individual and beyond that whether or not there are differences with love you're populations whether or not there are differences male or female agnes is etc are some euro somewhat intellectually interesting but then
of any application to a decision making in the moment nothing somebody walks into your room if some watch your room and says i need a job you look at the person that person neither has the skills they need or doesn't lay the talents like this useful or not swallow it so i'm not on the side this says that there's something important about knowing iq differences in large groups it tell it as well the you think should be important like your carbon sensors i think this is important we should look at that i'm not sure it is i think that regional differences are avoided will block that user for being an idiot here's your words will be twisted yes they will so so samuel
probably one of the best defenders of liberal idea energy is being accused by another famous liberal of being a racist now because he because he entertained this intellectual conversation that is their true or false so is what when you talk about a scientific analysis of something these are true or false and we're gonna block all matters today and so before ezra to call one of his own a racist for simply looking at the air looking at the data was amazing and anyway my point about all this is that i think some harris is going to accidentally become a republican and
the conservative big cuz good experience what it's like to be a deplorable and what i mean is i've been watching for two years as perfectly turn racist conservatives are consistently being called racists because i just have different approaches to make them a better place now i'm watching sam harris who like good conservatives who are also now racists he's just i want to talk about data he's just trying to you surface a point of view that's unpopular and now he's been called the racist so he's getting a little taste of what the deplorable seven so called deplorable said then putting up with some areas has been called a racist for years because in his views on ism well there's another
for example is of gore not being a race anybody who thinks that doesn't matter if i can take you seriously islam is a way of thinking if there were a young if there were some religion whose only religious belief is that you should kill all christians and that's a massive as islam but if that if such religion existed like our religion is we should just kill all the other religions i think we'd wanna let that religion into the country it would matter what ethnicity they were there points of view which the country
he thinks is not consistent with the constitution well all right so i see i have triggered most of you too the question of citizenship question on the next census well was interesting about that is is hard for me to imagine a legitimate reason for not asking some citizenship since part of the point of these serve the census as i understand it is that
you're trying to figure out how many how many citizens live in each area because that determines your earlier determines what you're how many votes you get what what's its term many factors we hear the senses determines the voting districts cracked so assumes me that's a pretty fair question is whether whether you're a citizen who can legally vote how is that not fair it is the very if one of the very purposes of the senses to figure out voting districts so is it almost funny to see people arguing that point list an coulter somebody said so culture of course is criticising the president for not not building his wallace he promised
not money to build his wall i think she's one of the voices now who were saying that he can declare an emergency and say border is causing enemy combatants you m thirteen or whatever to come across there are selling their drugs that are killing us i think her point of view is that the president can just allocate funds based on national defence now she's the first lawyer that i've heard way and on whether that would be illegal and i our point of view is is it if you think the commander in chief captain commander in chief think then you're just crazy so let me say that again i think called this point of view on paraphrasing here is it do you believe the commander in chief doesn't have the power to secure our border against enemy combatants how
defined well then you're crazy does he he or she very much as that and responsibility it doesn't matter what the budget is so commander in chief is gonna commander in chief with without a budget well i don't know if that's is cut and dried as she says here the other side i don't even know what the other side would be because that her arm themselves on the surface of it it sounds unassailable that if the present decided it was a national emergency defence emergency they could do in every wants to secure the border i think that much is true keep in mind that is a political decision is not just a legal decision question is how much could this president or any other
massage definition of what national defenses to do something that is not the standard so there is a precedent that gets that way you might not want the other side down when they are in power because it can't be hard to say things are national emergencies so the thing i worry about at the moment you say i are commander in chief can say everything's a national emergency and then all kinds of power to deal with it so i think you ought to be a little careful about handing out elsewhere power you can and want to keep the the the big war decisions with congress whenever you have time to do that and i think we have time in the case of the border
by just one way or another argument he already has it well we'll see what does deal think about trumps allocation of defence of the wall are those that climate change is a national emergency i very go there you go so i knew there was a good example i just can come up with it so somebody came up with a good example if trump says the border is a national emergency and he takes defence monday and puts it into the wall next time we have a democrat as president can i say
the climate science as a national emergency and we'd better person defence spending into real it now to me it sounds like a bad argument but the because guess the question is editor in chief get away with a bad argument because you give the commander in chief under our system lot of leeway you give the command achieve a lot of flexibility and we will to do that that's intentional intentional where we give the commander in chief alarm leeway even even reaching the constitutional well then if we need to that is the safest situation it's also these situation most right or abuse so cuts both ways so my understanding is this is interesting
were hearing a little bit about joe else ups trial about climate change no it isn't gonna be as much fun as we thought because apparently it's not being televised but the first part of the trial is the bull size are just educating the judge that's what we're hearing ports of is that both sides are educating the judge on climate zones my you're standing from a report i think i'd want to see confirmation of this measure i believe it is that the question of why i think that the judge asked why are ocean sea levels wire sea levels not not uniformly in other words if more water is in the ocean why isn't going up everywhere understanding is that the question when unanswered to which i said what
i'm pretty sure i can answer that one understanding is that the reason that the ceiling can go up in some places and not in others has to do with heat so the warmer the ocean the near the greater its volume so if you added warming in one part of the ocean and not another you could have situation where the ocean level went up and one part of the world and maybe went down or will not down but probably didn't change another now steve goddard says is land rising in different areas so there may be other factors like land rising etc but are you a little worried that experts the court room and did not have an immediate answer for why the sea levels are not rising uniformly because not enough burden i had half the answer that its
doesn't do with temperature somebody says it's not temperature how could it not be temperature i dont believe that somebody said it's not temperatures down explain why sea level is rising in some places there might not be all of the explanation but i don't think ex has an exception for heat making things expand so yes there is more warming in one part of the ocean that part of the oceans can expand right i don't know that there's no way that can happen is it
what arises where more ice is melting well that would make the ice that would make the water rise everywhere anyway my point is not that i know the answer but its shocking that there was a that there were experts in a room and the judged not give an answer to what i would consider one of the most basic questions if it's true the scientists can explain why the why the sea level is not going up uniformly i'm real worried about the state of the science cosmo maggie apparently there's a walmart is pulling cosmo off the off the shells because it there then it's contributing to the meat to culture that its pay a picture of women as such we'll beings and i guess inviting bad behaviour is the argument
now given that cosmo is entirely built around the idea of empowering women we can see now two examples of the left eating his own so if five stars eating cosmo magazine and the client is calling sam harris racist when probably ten years is probably the most famous non racist that i can think of these baseball is one more time criticising people who are racist then most people have but a few if he has dragged into a too what a world what a world
tell him the germans will scholar races to for what john paul stevens so i read the article there some exe the supreme court judge stevens wants to do away with the second amendment that sounds like this answer a non story second amount going on yes it does look like the golden age sneaking up on us so in predicting for some time that we would see the beginning of the golden age the things that i need to happen are north korea needs to be solved i think need to be working toward some kind better healthcare system or insurance
we're not doing that so i think this essential but good economy everything else going well and i think we're on the verge of just everything going well somebody says i started the golden age well the fund thing is you'll never know who started it but i think it's coming you know i ran maybe more solvable than we think because here something where the rain i ran doesn't really have a winning strategy in which they take over the world were i just don't see iran's winning strategy here they they were
going to deal looks a little bit it's nothing as to women in the world but they are willing to deal so which makes me think that their rational players and if if a ran are rational player i think they are we probably have more flexibility to get something done than we think you know i don't i dont fully understand the iranian leaderships position it's not clear to me do they really believes that taken get rid of israel at this point the or do they say their brand of islam will take over the world are they just right defending themselves against maybe being were thrown i don't exactly know water ran once remember when we originally talking about north korea
it wasn't the one thing that everybody who who claim to be an expert say about north korea is that they were if we get rid of their nuclear weapons because neutral your weapons or more apart of their national identity and their pride and everything else and what is kim jong on saying every time he speaks about the current situation always says its heart it's always been our plan to the nuclear eyes so the boast now we'll see if that's true its notable that he says it and he says it consistently and even says in his father and grandfather one or two de nuclear rise to that's a very strong message so the most based things we thought about kim jong on were he's era national now now we believe he is not just rational but very rational that's always been acting lately
and now we believe that they don't necessarily feel like they have to have nuclear weapons so everything we thought about north korea just one year ago completely wrong right so if you think about north korea was was always presented as a military problem and never was it was psychology problem let me say that again north it was never a military problem it was always a psychology problem and when we got a president trump the first president who understands psychology the level that it needs to be understood to get a good solution suddenly there's all kinds of movement of our assumptions have been shown to be false now take this same concept and same pattern to ran
what does it there is one thing that iran and north korea have in common listen my mind they did that is that the the common way with that the news of the experts talk about them didn't you'll like it made sense so the entire time that i have been listening to experts talk about north korea never it never worked for me the whole time i've been thinking i don't think so it is far more likely they want to stay alive rather than having nukes they would rather have a good economy and a good relationship and sure enough when when the opportunity to get those things came up looks like they might looks like they might go after it around i fully understand their motives like other know what they want and italy
you understand that we don't really know how to fix it but i'll tell you my gut feeling my gut feeling is that the problem with iran is identical the problem with north korea and what i mean was what i mean in both cases it look like a military problem when in fact it was the psychology problem so i think ran and in the united states work often sort of a psychological trap or we can quite see what rare wants it wants as then state they kick i see what we want what we're up to and so we act militarily because this on only causes us to both our defences up like aren't we don't know what you're up to work in it but we know we need the fence because we don't know what all this is about
one thing were sure of wood around the strong defence soil i think well let me give you an example the the base presumption about ran does that they were always want to destroy israel as long as that is the case nothing that can be done there there is no way to get to a better place where the ran if they have a rock solid have destroy israel no question about it but ask yourself why do they have to destroy israel why does a ran want to do that this again is a psychology problem israel does not threaten militarily iran's existence accepted the extent
but they think around might threaten their resistance so if if both countries simply decided that they didn't need to be a war with each other than they wouldn't be right there fighting over scares me forces that sort of thing so around the issue of psychology problem masquerading as a military problem now if you believe that iran's real motive is to take over the world with islam origin destroy israel at all costs for some religious reason then there's nothing can be done but i believe that they are rational actors who would take a better deal if they can find one they just don't know how to find one and that might be what president trump can bring to the situation though it might be that the only way
to get a good outcome is to squeeze them the way he squeezed north korea until their psychology changed can change their psychology by changing their their physical situation so i think ran could get real flexible real quickly if their situation changed oh somebody made a good point somebody said i thought no one was a rational actor salami x i do say the people in general are irrational but when you have you but we still make rational decisions about things that were cut and dried sober several of you said should we launch a nuclear weapon and destroy russia tomorrow that would be a rational but don't expect it way to do it because around no brains would keep us from doing that stuff
we act a whenever we have the luxury but it comes down to life and death you ve got enough people involved with a decision we usually are closer to rational so we you get closer to it it's not a perfect situation yeah ran does not fear israel well they problem fear it in the sense that they know is real we'll take a hard line to them and has as long as they feel threatened yeah so anyway we don't know what's gonna happen with iran but dont rule out the fact that it just the psychology problem that can be fixed with framing of the situation
yeah it's rationality based on survival let's go i just reading your comments renew i will check you know there's another time when there's more news moran but right now it's all we all the time that's ok get those sorted out and i'll talk to you later
Transcript generated on 2020-04-02.