- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 7/2/21 at 8:01 am to jg8623
quote:
And this thread turned into a trainwreck
it did and i'm sorry for contributing to it.
i've never seen somebody make a claim that somebody doesn't really support more welfare or socialist policies, some people say "ehh.. that's not entirely true. here's some instances where he actually does support these things." and then the guy argue that we're saying he's left of stalin.
weird.
i'm hard right and i like Rogan. But I also like Taibi, Pool, Ball, Saager, Kyle K, etc.
there's disagreeing and arguing and being intellectually dishonest. i like listening to people i can disagree with, but are making good faith arguments.
Posted on 7/2/21 at 10:06 am to 1BamaRTR
quote:
different direction
No, I really do not. There's nothing to discuss, and knowing that info of you fitting that mold is most practically about future avoidance.
quote:
deduction
No. And you may have have forgot, but you said he actually "mentioned it" (your "claim"). So you've finally backed off that and you're now at a still erroneous point of deduction.
I knew you were making it up the whole time and I wanted to press you to admit it. But the thing about a person who would just make something up like that, they're unlikely to admit to it and retract the claim, which is the only reasonable and respectable thing to do.
I've actually been listening to Rogan's podcast since it started. I used to watch it on Vimeo when it would just be him and Redban sometimes. One critique I have from years of listening is that Joe will kind of repeat ideas from episode to episode and not really refine them over time. I've heard him talk about UBI many times, and I know he's not an in-depth policy guy like that. And he's especially not rigid on things like that. He's generally flexible and open to tradeoffs when it comes to moving forward in a positive direction as he sees it.
Posted on 7/2/21 at 10:26 am to inadaze
quote:
No, I really do not. There's nothing to discuss, and knowing that info of you fitting that mold is most practically about future avoidance.
You refuse to engage in any debate. So you want to go in a different direction with more personal insults. That seems that’s all you seem to know how to do. You know there’s nothing stopping you from avoidIng me without having any info, so I don’t buy that excuse.
quote:
No. And you may have have forgot, but you said he actually "mentioned it" (your "claim"). So you've finally backed off that and you're now at a still erroneous point of deduction.
There is a clip of him mentioning he is still for UBI, but also mentions UBI isn’t enough to combat all of society’s problems.
quote:
But the thing about a person who would just make something up like that, they're unlikely to admit to it and retract the claim, which is the only reasonable and respectable thing to do.
My logic is pretty simple. He supports UBI. He said he supports welfare programs. He admits UBI isn’t enough. So it’s reasonable to conclude he believes in both.
You’re acting like Rogan is somebody who hates the welfare state. In that case I would understand why you think that’s an offense to suggest he would approve of it alongside UBI. But he loves both.
quote:
He's generally flexible and open to tradeoffs when it comes to moving forward in a positive direction as he sees it.
In other words he would be fine with implementing UBI with other welfare programs because (as he himself stated) UBI isn’t enough to solve everything. Glad to see you’re coming around!
Posted on 7/2/21 at 8:05 pm to mizzoubuckeyeiowa
quote:
He rarely challenges any guest unless they're a political guest and right of center.
That’s not really true. I listened to his interview with David Lee Roth today and he disagreed and questioned his nonsense. He also disagrees with extreme liberals. I’m not a huge fan but I like his podcast enough to listen when I’m interested in the guests which isn’t all that often lately. I did enjoy the QT interview though.
Posted on 7/3/21 at 12:27 am to 1BamaRTR
There is no debate. You don't debate unfacts.
This is what I mean about avoidance, and it's why I declined to talk about this on the "folly overboard".
(By the way, Friedman calls the idea outlined in Capitalism and Freedom "essentially a minimum income" at the beginning of this video.)
The other guy that was hanging on to the unfact seems to be "conservative". And my run-ins with misrepresentations and unfacts are much more common among these types -- generally part of an "unfact culture" that's central to Don the Great Con phenomena, the Capitol riot, Q conspiracy, etc.
This was pervasive before, and you could see it the attacks on the Obamas. Conspiracies about Barack being a "secret Muslim" and being born in Kenya. Then the obsession with Michelle's gender.
Not all right-wingers are idiotic lunatics, but the disregard of facts is far too common.
It's like you have some kind of mangled mind that makes you mangle everything you see.
That is a very broad and vague idea. And I can guarantee you when Joe says things like that he is definitely not referring to government action only. I can give you a list of areas where Joe is in favor of less government, and he talks about all kinds of things that would be good for society in general that have nothing to do with government, like physical fitness, nutrition, various ways to improve relationships, on and on.
You're just dishonest. You keep trying to take broad statements and make them mean something they don't to fit your claim. It just doesn't work.
You quoted my sentence and tried to make it mean the exact opposite of what I meant. So you're doing it again...
This is what I mean about avoidance, and it's why I declined to talk about this on the "folly overboard".
(By the way, Friedman calls the idea outlined in Capitalism and Freedom "essentially a minimum income" at the beginning of this video.)
The other guy that was hanging on to the unfact seems to be "conservative". And my run-ins with misrepresentations and unfacts are much more common among these types -- generally part of an "unfact culture" that's central to Don the Great Con phenomena, the Capitol riot, Q conspiracy, etc.
This was pervasive before, and you could see it the attacks on the Obamas. Conspiracies about Barack being a "secret Muslim" and being born in Kenya. Then the obsession with Michelle's gender.
Not all right-wingers are idiotic lunatics, but the disregard of facts is far too common.
quote:
UBI isn't enough to combat all of society's problems.
It's like you have some kind of mangled mind that makes you mangle everything you see.
That is a very broad and vague idea. And I can guarantee you when Joe says things like that he is definitely not referring to government action only. I can give you a list of areas where Joe is in favor of less government, and he talks about all kinds of things that would be good for society in general that have nothing to do with government, like physical fitness, nutrition, various ways to improve relationships, on and on.
You're just dishonest. You keep trying to take broad statements and make them mean something they don't to fit your claim. It just doesn't work.
quote:
Glad to see you're coming around!
You quoted my sentence and tried to make it mean the exact opposite of what I meant. So you're doing it again...
This post was edited on 7/3/21 at 12:30 am
Posted on 7/3/21 at 7:54 am to inadaze
quote:
This is what I mean about avoidance
Yet you keep coming back. You don’t want to debate because you can’t. You are all about how not categorizing people into ideologies and making assumptions. Yet you attempt to do the same to me. I don’t believe in any of that things you said
quote:
And I can guarantee you when Joe says things like that he is definitely not referring to government action only.
Who said it had to be only government action? It could additional governmental action plus other things. He mentions we need to stop spending on wars overseas but instead on here at home. But guy talks about socialist policies yet would not want them to combat for what he believes to be serious issues?
quote:He said he wanted a hybrid so I know he is
I can give you a list of areas where Joe is in favor of less government
quote:I’m not the one incapable of simple thinking here
You keep trying to take broad statements and make them mean something they don't to fit your claim.
quote:Trying to back tract from that now huh?
So you're doing it again...
So you’re telling me Rogan believes UBI would be enough from the government? That’s all he wants the them to do? No funding for education, healthcare, veterans, homeless, mentally ill, housing, etc? Even though he believes UBI won’t be nearly enough, he wants the government to do absolutely ZERO other funding?
Posted on 7/3/21 at 8:57 am to 1BamaRTR
Shut the frick up, man.
What do you want to debate?
You want to debate me about what the frick I said now? Start another thread for your made-up distortions.
I'm not going to keep going point by point to undo all the false things you say. It just continues to get worse to where you're now doubling down on trying to tell me what I said.
You're a fricking retard.
My next post will be back to the thread topic. If you want to debate something, start another thread, but I'm not going to spend a bunch of time undoing made-up fallacies and having you attempt to tell me what I mean. You can frick off with all that.
What do you want to debate?
You want to debate me about what the frick I said now? Start another thread for your made-up distortions.
I'm not going to keep going point by point to undo all the false things you say. It just continues to get worse to where you're now doubling down on trying to tell me what I said.
You're a fricking retard.
My next post will be back to the thread topic. If you want to debate something, start another thread, but I'm not going to spend a bunch of time undoing made-up fallacies and having you attempt to tell me what I mean. You can frick off with all that.
Posted on 7/3/21 at 9:02 am to inadaze
quote:
No. And you may have have forgot, but you said he actually "mentioned it" (your "claim"). So you've finally backed off that and you're now at a still erroneous point of deduction.
I knew you were making it up the whole time and I wanted to press you to admit it. But the thing about a person who would just make something up like that, they're unlikely to admit to it and retract the claim, which is the only reasonable and respectable thing to do.
I've actually been listening to Rogan's podcast since it started. I used to watch it on Vimeo when it would just be him and Redban sometimes. One critique I have from years of listening is that Joe will kind of repeat ideas from episode to episode and not really refine them over time. I've heard him talk about UBI many times, and I know he's not an in-depth policy guy like that. And he's especially not rigid on things like that. He's generally flexible and open to tradeoffs when it comes to moving forward in a positive direction as he sees it.
You're a Rogan fanboy. We get it. Congratulations?
Posted on 7/3/21 at 9:02 am to Jack Ruby
Joe should have pushed back against what Tarantino said and have Jamie look into it because the only person QT named to defend his portrayal of Bruce Lee was Matthew Polly.
Polly has said the portrayal of Lee in the movie is BS.
Polly has said the portrayal of Lee in the movie is BS.
This post was edited on 7/9/21 at 2:16 pm
Posted on 7/3/21 at 9:03 am to inadaze
quote:
Shut the frick up, man.
What do you want to debate?
You want to debate me about what the frick I said now? Start another thread for your made-up distortions.
I'm not going to keep going point by point to undo all the false things you say. It just continues to get worse to where you're now doubling down on trying to tell me what I said.
You're a fricking retard.
My next post will be back to the thread topic. If you want to debate something, start another thread, but I'm not going to spend a bunch of time undoing made-up fallacies and having you attempt to tell me what I mean. You can frick off with all that.
Quality melt. You probably actually believe that you're winning this debate.
Posted on 7/3/21 at 9:04 am to DaleGribble
I actually rarely listen to the show anymore. This was about a false claim. That's it.
Posted on 7/3/21 at 9:07 am to DaleGribble
What do you think the debate was?
This idiot is now trying to tell me that I said something that's the exact opposite of what I actually said.
Again, you don't debate unfacts.
This idiot is now trying to tell me that I said something that's the exact opposite of what I actually said.
Again, you don't debate unfacts.
Posted on 7/3/21 at 9:11 am to inadaze
quote:
Shut the frick up, man. You're a fricking retard.
It’s clear you’re taking this personally when there’s no reason too. Take a page from Rogan’s book. He doesn’t care what other people say about him.
quote:
undoing made-up fallacies
Ok guy
Posted on 7/3/21 at 9:25 am to 1BamaRTR
Oh yeah, haha. You're the expert on knowing that the secret meaning of what I say is the opposite of what I actually say. Haha, guy.
You've mangled every fricking thing we've talked about. Whether purposeful or accidental, it should be over in this thread.
Like I said, I'm trying to go back to the thread topic because I actually found interesting information on that controversy.
You've mangled every fricking thing we've talked about. Whether purposeful or accidental, it should be over in this thread.
Like I said, I'm trying to go back to the thread topic because I actually found interesting information on that controversy.
Posted on 7/3/21 at 9:28 am to inadaze
quote:
it should be over in this thread.
I’ve done no such thing. You’ve been the one that’s constantly getting off topic with your rants and insults
quote:
Like I said, I'm trying to go back to the thread topic b
You said that a while ago. It’s clear this whole thing has been taken very personally by you since the very first comment I made.
This post was edited on 7/3/21 at 9:30 am
Posted on 7/3/21 at 9:46 am to Jack Ruby
Polly told Esquire about the issues he had with QT's portrayal.
quote:
"Bruce was very famous for being very considerate of the people below him on film sets, particularly the stuntmen. He would often like buy them meals, or once he got famous, take them out to eat, or hand them a little extra cash, or look after their careers," says Polly. "So in this scene, Bruce Lee is essentially calling out a stuntman and getting him fired because he's the big star. And that's just not who Bruce Lee was as a person."
Posted on 7/3/21 at 9:51 am to Jack Ruby
quote:
In a guest column in the Hollywood Reporter, Shannon Lee wrote that she is “really f------ tired of white men in Hollywood trying to tell me who Bruce Lee was” after Tarantino said on the “Joe Rogan Experience” that while he understands her previous criticism, others who took issue with his interpretation of the legend can “suck a d---.” Tarantino’s depiction was slammed for showing Bruce Lee as an arrogant figure who lost a fight against aging stuntman Cliff Booth.
“While I am grateful that Mr. Tarantino has so generously acknowledged to Joe Rogan that I may have my feelings about his portrayal of my father, I am also grateful for the opportunity to express this: I’m really f------ tired of white men in Hollywood trying to tell me who Bruce Lee was,” Lee wrote.
She added: “I’m tired of hearing from white men in Hollywood that he was arrogant and an a-hole when they have no idea and cannot fathom what it might have taken to get work in 1960s and ’70s Hollywood as a Chinese man with (God forbid) an accent, or to try to express an opinion on a set as a perceived foreigner and person of color.”
LINK
Posted on 7/3/21 at 10:10 am to RLDSC FAN
quote:
I’m really f------ tired of white men in Hollywood trying to tell me who Bruce Lee was,” Lee wrote.
So she's tired of mostly unfettered adoration?
I mean Lee is shown in one fictional movie as not being a total badass and everyone gets their panties in a twist.
While his career was built on fictional movies showing him as a badass and as Rogan talked about, that stuff doesn't work in the ring and great wrestlers, strong men, Gene LeBell, as a stuntman would've just choked him out and he admitted to that.
Even one of his best friends Chuck Norris said, look, Bruce was great but he was a movie star, he didn't fight in competitions like I did.
Rogan loves Bruce Lee but he's also on many occasions said most Asian martial arts just don't work in the arena...Karate, Kung-Fu, Steven Seagal shite, etc.
Only Asian disciplines effective are grappling disciplines like Judo. The movie showed street fighting, not Crouching Tiger, and how a wrestler can take you out just like MMA.
This post was edited on 7/3/21 at 10:14 am
Posted on 7/3/21 at 10:16 am to mizzoubuckeyeiowa
Also people act like because it happens in a Tarantino movie it has to be fact. When he loves bending the truth to fit the story.
And isn’t the entire fight basically in a dream sequence that could also be exaggerated by the dreamer (cliff)?
And isn’t the entire fight basically in a dream sequence that could also be exaggerated by the dreamer (cliff)?
Page 6 of 7
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News