Scott Adams Creates the “Heckenlively Rule” for Public Debate…

It seems some of the fans of Scott Adams want him to interview me.

By Kent Heckenlively, JD

On his August 3, 2020 Periscope, right near the end, a listener asked why he didn’t interview Kent Heckenlively.

Scott gave his answer, which was essentially a recapitulation of what he’d said previously, roughly translated as, “I can’t figure out if what this guy is saying is true, and therefore I don’t want him on my show.”

I think this should be forever known as the “Heckenlively Rule.”

It’s an internally consistent position with impeccable logic, but unfortunately it flies in the face of five hundred years of western civilization, wiping out in a single stroke the principles of the Enlightenment, the Renaissance, and all scientific progress.

Here’s my philosophical position: I like to listen to the best people on all sides of a debate to figure out whose arguments are best in accord with the facts and my own internal logic.  I do not think this makes me a dangerous person.

Let me tell you all the controversies on which I’m still trying to figure out what I believe:

I don’t know whether global warming is man-made, if it’s as apocalyptic as some claim, and what might be our best course of action.  

I’m curious if veganism is a good life style choice, not just for our health, but that of the planet.

I’m not sure what the best immigration plan is, so I like to listen to all sides.

I want to know how to overcome the legacy of slavery in this country and assure a good life for all Americans, so I will listen to arguments from Black Lives Matter and other groups.

I like to think the ability to listen to all sides of an issue is a sign of a well-balanced and civilized mind.

And when I listen to Scott Adams it seems he shares these same values as well.  As an example of what is generally his fearless commentary, consider this Tweet about the poor science regarding hydroxy-chloroquine (HCQ) in the media from the same day, August 3, 2020, he declared his intention to NOT interview or talk to me.

“BREAKING: A new study says HCQ is ineffective against coronavirus if you spray the drug on a living porcupine and shove it up your ass while praying to the Sun God.  No other studies on HCQ are planned.”

That’s the kind of good, bracing commentary you’d expect from BolenReport, right?

I’m puzzled how to respond.  We should be friends, right?  (I mean, the fact that my latest book, PLAGUE OF CORRUPTION, sold three times more copies than his latest book, LOSER-THINK, should at least make him curious about the competition, right?)  Know your enemy, right?  Maybe they’re not what you think they are.

I like to fall back on the example of one of my heroes, Nelson Mandela, who peacefully liberated South Africa from apartheid.  

When Mandela was in jail and the country was protesting, the government didn’t know what to do with him.  They didn’t want to set him free and they didn’t want him to stay in jail.

They chose to move him to a nice house on the prison grounds, let him wear normal clothes, be free of supervision, but he was still technically a prisoner.

The government sent a delegation to speak with him, he welcomed them warmly to his house, made them tea, made sure they had the proper amount of milk and sugar they wanted, then sat down to talk.

At first they said they were willing to let him go free, but he would have to promise to refrain from politics.  He thought deeply for a moment, then looked up at them and said, “I’m sorry, gentleman, but my answer is no.  But thank you very much for coming.  It was most kind of you.”

The minsters came back again and the hospitality was just as warm.  “We have a new proposal for you, Mr Mandela.  You can go free, enter politics if you like, but the vote of each black person will only be a percentage of the vote of a white person.”

Mandela thought deeply for a moment, then looked up at them and said, “I’m sorry, gentleman, but my answer is no.  But thank you very much for coming.  It was most kind of you.”

The ministers left, and well, you know the rest of the story.

I want you to imagine that Scott Adams and I are in the middle of a similar dance. 

It was most kind of him to mention me twice on his show.  I thank him very much for it.

However, I will continue to point out the flaws in his decision NOT to interview me.  I want my millions of fans to be just as courteous as I am to Scott Adams.  If there’s even a hint of rudeness in your comments to him, I will IMMEDIATELY disavow such comments.

I am happy for you to continue to press my case with him in a courteous manner.  At the end of this I want us to be friends.  I want the powerful and influential Scott Adams audience to be favorably disposed to the arguments I make on behalf of my community.

The manner in which we fight is just as important as what we fight for.

Every day Scott goes out in front of the public and does his act on a high-wire with no net.  I believe he is failing his own high standards, but if he falls from that high-wire, I will be the first to rush and break his fall.

Or maybe this is all part of Scott’s famous proclivity for practical jokes…

…like replacing the cotton balls his girlfriend used every night to take off her makeup until she finally turned to him one evening and said, “Scott, I don’t know why this container never runs out of cotton balls.”

Maybe Scott and I are already good friends.  Maybe we talk on the phone for hours, our wives are good friends, and when he goes to buy a new e-bike, who does he call to tag along?

Perhaps this is all part of a plan Scott and I cooked up so we could have a very public dispute, only to be resolved when he FINALLY interviews me and we let everybody else in on the joke.

I mean seriously, which version of reality do you find to be more believable? 

The man who defended his right to talk with Alex Jones and anybody he damned well pleases, taking a pass on me because he didn’t know what was true? 

The man who publicly proclaims he wants to be cancelled, because the very act of saying provocative things that might get you cancelled, is exactly the moment when you’re saying what needs to be said?  I am the KING of being cancelled, and Scott Adams doesn’t even want a little bit of that?

Is that the Scott Adams his audience knows and loves?

Yes, Scott, I will ALWAYS be kind and courteous, but unlike Nelson Mandela, I like to make a little mischief as well.  Someday, we’ll laugh about it over dinner.  The wives will look over at us and say, “Guy humor,” then go back to the important conversations.

Opinion by Kent Heckenlively, JD

Be sure to order Kent Heckenlively’s new book with Dr. Judy Mikovits, PLAGUE OF CORRUPTION from Amazon which you can do RIGHT NOW!

The book was #1 for all books on Amazon and is a New York Times bestseller!
 
 
The book came out on April 14, 2020 and contains explosive new revelations about the corruption of our scientific bodies, as well as new directions to ensure we become the healthiest generation in history!

em>

 

plagueheckiKent’s book PLAGUE was released by Skyhorse Publishing, in 2014 and is now available in paperback with NEW material.

The book is co-authored with Judy Mikovits PhD. It is an indictment of the “Fake Science” we find so prevalent in the US.

7 thoughts on “Scott Adams Creates the “Heckenlively Rule” for Public Debate…”

  1. So I’m curious, would Scott Adams apply the Heckenlively Rule with RFK Jr. who also gets his fair share of snubs?

  2. Ha ha….great comment!!! I like Scott Adams; used to follow him years ago when he distributed his newsletter. Life intervened and I focused on other things. In recent years, I discovered that he was rather prominent with his commentary. I tuned into it. While I like some of what he says, there’s enough that has made me take a step back. Best wishes on a meeting of 2 fine minds.

  3. I don’t know Scott, Kent but maybe, if he’s somewhat leery of taking on such a hot potato, he’d like to interview me first as the warm-up act?
    Just a suggestion.

    Blessed be
    Karma Singh

  4. Maybe he’s just politely saying he doesn’t want to? Perhaps best not to logic this stuff too much. I tried to set up one of the most important authors (in my view) on pandemics for an interview with one of the most important alt-media reporters (in my view). The author was willing, the reporter wasn’t interested. Very sad, but can’t force it, that’s his choice, IMO.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.