Vaccine

Hüsker Dü said:
Is Whoopi’s opinion killing people?
Click to expand...
Nope, just killing people's brain cells. Are Rogan's guests' opinions killing people? No more than car salesmen are killing people I would suspect.

Whoopi's comments didn't offend me, I don't even think they were that racist. Ignorant and stupid, 100% yes. How about we just let these talking heads say whatever they want instead of holding them to a particular narrative and cancelling them if they go astray. Let the public decide to turn the channel. I think that's what we call free speech.

Why, as a society do we have always have to be outraged about what someone said?
 
watfly said:
Nope, just killing people's brain cells. Are Rogan's guests' opinions killing people? No more than car salesmen are killing people I would suspect.

Whoopi's comments didn't offend me, I don't even think they were that racist. Ignorant and stupid, 100% yes. How about we just let these talking heads say whatever they want instead of holding them to a particular narrative and cancelling them if they go astray. Let the public decide to turn the channel. I think that's what we call free speech.
Click to expand...
Are you saying Covid misinformation is harmless?
 
Grace T. said:
It's making light of the worst massacre in human history where millions of people lost their loved ones and which unlike COVID was entirely avoidable. What are you some kind of Nazi??? Do you hate Jewish people??? You a racist????? You seriously saying the holocaust was no big deal???????????
Click to expand...
My sarcasm detector just went off!

Are you saying Covid misinformation is harmless?

. . . but antisemitism is harmful? You ever go to a trump rally?
 
Now while people bitch about Rogan...

Here is a story about a top Wash Post reporter.

She has been reporting on the FBI, matters related to the Clintons, etc.

All while her husband works for the FBI and has dealing with the Clintons.

So partisan reporting going on. The post knew about it, but did nothing.

Happens all the time.

But Rogan.....!!!!

www.realclearinvestigations.com

Conflict of Interest: New Washington Post National Editor Recused From FBI Coverage

The Washington Post has recused its new national editor, Matea Gold, from the news organization’s coverage of the FBI and Justice Department over a personal conflict of interest. A month before
www.realclearinvestigations.com www.realclearinvestigations.com
 
Grace T. said:
Dad4's position was a host can and should be held accountable for the statement of his guests because the host is acting as an editor.

Whoopi Goldberg has not (yet....though we should probably start a pool) been held accountable for comments which are far worse which she herself has made. Neither has Colbert....who allowed Whoopi on the show where such statements were also uttered.

Makes some of us think that the thing some of you mean is that, according to my handy dandy Orwellian translator, "people who disagree with me or who allow others on their show that disagree with me should be punished because they are fringe, but people who agree with me or who allow others on their show that agree with me should be excused if they utter a mea culpa because they are on the side of truth and justice"

Otherwise:
1. Do you believe that Rogan's content needs to be policed better?
2. If so, no doubt Whoopi Goldberg needs to be punished (by at least a suspension if she gives a true apology, otherwise a dismissal)?
and 3. No doubt Colbert needs to be subjected to the same punishment for not exercising editorial discretion and allowing her to utter the same on his show?
Click to expand...

The way you argue is so incredibly strange. What makes you think @dad4 is willing to give Whoopi a free pass? You do this regularly. You deflect the conversation with the hopes that that deflection will somehow sow seeds of doubt in the original discussion. It's just a really weird way to argue things. Whoopi has nothing to do with Joe Rogan. If you want to discuss Whoopi, bring it up separately. I for one would stop watching The View if I did and hope that she would be held accountable. I'm sure the pressure will continue to come her way and we will eventually see a faux public apology. I mean Rogan would've never apologized or put out that video had it not been for the pressure put on Spotify.
 
Hüsker Dü said:
My sarcasm detector just went off!

Are you saying Covid misinformation is harmless?

. . . but antisemitism is harmful? You ever go to a trump rally?
Click to expand...

Aren't you all the ones that are always saying racism is the worst and most evil thing ever?

Does that mean now that cloth masks have been proven to be worthless (I believe the words used being bandied about are "facial decorations") we can throw dad4 in the gulag for having spread COVID misinformation?

All I'm saying is that you got to treat it all the same. Either it's all o.k. or none of it is. Whoopi spread outright Holocaust misinformation. Colbert let her. Either you hold the 2 to the same standard and we can have a rational discussion about whether these standards are even warranted, or you can shut your hypocritical cakehole because you've undermined your entire credibility about having a rational discussion about it.

p.s. I'm sure there are examples of antisemitic conduct at Trump rallies (again, not a Trump fan). I do point out Ivanka and Jared (also not my favorite people) are Jewish.
 
NorCalDad said:
The way you argue is so incredibly strange. What makes you think @dad4 is willing to give Whoopi a free pass? You do this regularly. You deflect the conversation with the hopes that that deflection will somehow sow seeds of doubt in the original discussion. It's just a really weird way to argue things. Whoopi has nothing to do with Joe Rogan. If you want to discuss Whoopi, bring it up separately. I for one would stop watching The View if I did and hope that she would be held accountable. I'm sure the pressure will continue to come her way and we will eventually see a faux public apology. I mean Rogan would've never apologized or put out that video had it not been for the pressure put on Spotify.
Click to expand...
Me? You are the one that always bemoans a lack of balance and the partisanship?

I'm just calling for things to be treated equitably under the same standard. My preference would be for Whoopi/Colbert/Rogan to be allowed to do whatever they want in the open spirit of leaving it all out there and having people make up their own mind. But if you are going to go after one, you have to go against the other. You cannot in good conscience campaign to cancel Rogan, but leave Whoopi and Colbert off the hook, particularly if dad4's editorial standard is the one to be exercised.

Or as South Park so famously put it: "it's either all o.k., or none of it is."
 
Grace T. said:
Dad4's position was a host can and should be held accountable for the statement of his guests because the host is acting as an editor.

Whoopi Goldberg has not (yet....though we should probably start a pool) been held accountable for comments which are far worse which she herself has made. Neither has Colbert....who allowed Whoopi on the show where such statements were also uttered.

Makes some of us think that the thing some of you mean is that, according to my handy dandy Orwellian translator, "people who disagree with me or who allow others on their show that disagree with me should be punished because they are fringe, but people who agree with me or who allow others on their show that agree with me should be excused if they utter a mea culpa because they are on the side of truth and justice"

Otherwise:
1. Do you believe that Rogan's content needs to be policed better?
2. If so, no doubt Whoopi Goldberg needs to be punished (by at least a suspension if she gives a true apology, otherwise a dismissal)?
and 3. No doubt Colbert needs to be subjected to the same punishment for not exercising editorial discretion and allowing her to utter the same on his show?
Click to expand...
Nice to see that so many people are telling me what my opinion is.

Grace got it right. Part of the job of a host is to exercise editorial judgement when selecting guests. If you are the host, you are actively choosing which voices to raise.

If you fail to exercise that judgment, then you are not being a very good host. Both Rogan and Colbert deserve criticism on this.

Goldberg is in a completely different category. She is no longer fit to be the host of a show.
 
Grace T. said:
Aren't you all the ones that are always saying racism is the worst and most evil thing ever?

Does that mean now that cloth masks have been proven to be worthless (I believe the words used being bandied about are "facial decorations") we can throw dad4 in the gulag for having spread COVID misinformation?

All I'm saying is that you got to treat it all the same. Either it's all o.k. or none of it is. Whoopi spread outright Holocaust misinformation. Colbert let her. Either you hold the 2 to the same standard and we can have a rational discussion about whether these standards are even warranted, or you can shut your hypocritical cakehole because you've undermined your entire credibility about having a rational discussion about it.

p.s. I'm sure there are examples of antisemitic conduct at Trump rallies (again, not a Trump fan). I do point out Ivanka and Jared (also not my favorite people) are Jewish.
Click to expand...
So you roll right into what Norcaldad pointed out as your debate strategy? Lol! As if to exemplify it!

trump, although history shows otherwise, isn’t necessarily a racist, but uses it/them for his own devices. His adoring base basically ignores/disregards everything trump about trump and project upon him what they want him to be.
 
NorCalDad said:
The way you argue is so incredibly strange. What makes you think @dad4 is willing to give Whoopi a free pass? You do this regularly. You deflect the conversation with the hopes that that deflection will somehow sow seeds of doubt in the original discussion. It's just a really weird way to argue things. Whoopi has nothing to do with Joe Rogan. If you want to discuss Whoopi, bring it up separately. I for one would stop watching The View if I did and hope that she would be held accountable. I'm sure the pressure will continue to come her way and we will eventually see a faux public apology. I mean Rogan would've never apologized or put out that video had it not been for the pressure put on Spotify.
Click to expand...

p.s. under the editorial standard dad 4 laid out, it's not so much Whoopi (who by definition since she herself engaged in misinformation would be cancellable) who is the subject of controversy. By definition under his standard Whoopi, we should all agree, should be cancelled. The relevant person is Colbert, who allowed her to make such statements, and the View, assuming they don't punish Whoopi, given their editorial control.
 
dad4 said:
Nice to see that so many people are telling me what my opinion is.

Grace got it right. Part of the job of a host is to exercise editorial judgement when selecting guests. If you are the host, you are actively choosing which voices to raise.

If you fail to exercise that judgment, then you are not being a very good host. Both Rogan and Colbert deserve criticism on this.

Goldberg is in a completely different category. She is no longer fit to be the host of a show.
Click to expand...

While I disagree with you on the outcome, I do appreciate and admire your consistency.
 
Hüsker Dü said:
So you roll right into what Norcaldad pointed out as your debate strategy? Lol! As if to exemplify it!

trump, although history shows otherwise, isn’t necessarily a racist, but uses it/them for his own devices. His adoring base basically ignores/disregards everything trump about trump and project upon him what they want him to be.
Click to expand...

Errr....it's a technique commonly used as part of the socratic method, which they rang me through the ringer in law school with, and which I myself employed when teaching.

As to your Trump critique, I'd say it's a fair point.
 
Grace T. said:
Errr....it's a technique commonly used as part of the socratic method, which they rang me through the ringer in law school with, and which I myself employed when teaching.

As to your Trump critique, I'd say it's a fair point.
Click to expand...
Typical Socratic argument:

Noob: You should make your own arguments, not just put words in other people’s mouths.
Plato: But the words stand on their own, do they not?
Noob: Why, yes Plato, thank you for showing me the errors of my ways.
Plato: And the words speak for themselves even better when I get to write both sides of the conversation, correct?
Noob: Well said, yet again.
 
Hüsker Dü said:
Are you saying Covid misinformation is harmless?
Click to expand...
Nope. But something that makes you uncomfortable isn't necessarily misinformation. We're subject to opinions, exaggeration, hyperbole, incomplete information, false statements, etc on a daily basis. That information comes from all sides regardless of political leanings, race, gender, age etc. It's your job to sort out that information and determine what you should believe.

Like Rogan said today's misinformation may be tomorrow's truth. Just because a majority, or the most vocal, believe something is true doesn't make it true, and when the majority gets to decide what is true that's called authoritarian control. (Look up the B.I.T.E. model).

Whether the misinformation is in an abundance of caution or potentially increases risk, makes no matter. I think the best thing that the "misinformers" could do would be to issue a retraction or correction. At least Rogan said he can do a better job of presenting both sides. Where are the corrections from all the talking heads that said you can't spread the virus if your vaccinated?
 
dad4 said:
Typical Socratic argument:

Noob: You should make your own arguments, not just put words in other people’s mouths.
Plato: But the words stand on their own, do they not?
Noob: Why, yes Plato, thank you for showing me the errors of my ways.
Plato: And the words speak for themselves even better when I get to write both sides of the conversation, correct?
Noob: Well said, yet again.
Click to expand...

The paperchase is probably the best representation of the socratic method (legally blonde is the cliff notes version of it).

Kingsfield said it best: "The study of law is something new and unfamiliar to most of you, unlike any schooling you’ve ever been through before. We use the Socratic Method here. I call on you, ask you a question and you answer it. Why don’t I just give you a lecture? Because through my questions you learn to teach yourselves. Through this method of questioning, answering, questioning, answering, we seek to develop in you the ability to analyse that vast complex of facts that constitute the relationships of members within a given society. Questioning and answering. At times you may feel that you have found the correct answer; I assure you that this is a total delusion on your part. You’ll never find the correct absolute and final answer. In my classroom there is always another question, another question to follow your answer. As you’re on a treadmill. My little questions spin the tumblers of your mind. You’re on an operating table. My little question are the fingers probing your brain. We do brain surgery here. You teach yourself the law, but I train your mind. You come here with a skull full of mush; and you leave thinking like a lawyer.”

Law school was practically worthless in my mind, except in teaching logic, reasoning and the ability to think on your own. I'd always go to the classes with teachers that taught that way. For everyone else, I spent a lot of time at the ihop after a late night parties at the div school.
 
espola said:
And you still don't know what a wringer is --

View attachment 12828
Click to expand...

"All that crap, you're putting it in the paper? It's all been denied. Katie Graham's gonna get her tit caught in a big fat wringer if that's published. Good Christ! That's the most sickening thing I ever heard."

Attorney General John Mitchell. 1972.

Socratic question -- what is there past tense of the verb "to wring"?
 
Grace T. said:
My preference would be for Whoopi/Colbert/Rogan to be allowed to do whatever they want in the open spirit of leaving it all out there and having people make up their own mind.
Click to expand...
My VERY BIG concern is that you are seeing major platforms such as youtube, twitter, etc shut down points of view they do not like.

Not a good trend in the least.

We do not want to live in a world where a gov or a major entity can shut down discussion they don't like.

Rather Orwellian.

Right now it is mainly entities run by leftists doing this. In the future it could be the right.

Under no circumstance should we allow it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top