RFK Jr.

[ChiGoose]

38 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

RFK Jr. operates in a fashion consistent with the original liberals of the 1960's.  Most of them have sold out to the system and today's self-professed liberals are ideologically far removed from the original breed.  For today's "Liberals" fighting the establishment because it is evil has now become supporting the establishment because now, they are the establishment so therefore it is good.  Kennedy remains true to the cause while his critics are posers. 

 

Kennedy’s cause is anti-vaxx lunacy that will get people killed. 
 

That’s not being anti-establishment, it’s being stupid. 

[The Frankish Reich]

47 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

RFK Jr. operates in a fashion consistent with the original liberals of the 1960's.  Most of them have sold out to the system and today's self-professed liberals are ideologically far removed from the original breed.  For today's "Liberals" fighting the establishment because it is evil has now become supporting the establishment because now, they are the establishment so therefore it is good.  Kennedy remains true to the cause while his critics are posers. 

 

Well, I was a little kid in the 60s. But somehow I remember lining up at school to get jabbed with the polio vaccine, with the brand new German Measles/Rubella vaccine, etc. And hearing about how the original liberals of the 60s (including RFK Jr.'s uncle) were some of the hardest-ass cold warriors America has ever known.

RFK Jr. bears little resemblance to his uncle or even his father. They were tough-minded American patriots, not wackos.

[Wacka]

Well, the entire DNC has morphed into wackos over the last 50  years or so.

[All_Pro_Bills]

44 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:

Kennedy’s cause is anti-vaxx lunacy that will get people killed. 
 

That’s not being anti-establishment, it’s being stupid. 

He opposes all these senseless wars that have cost trillions and killed millions while displacing even more creating a refugee crisis.  For more or less nothing.  That's number one on my list.  Not only is it killing people but it's also hurting our nation's standing and effectiveness in the international community.  Reluctantly, many countries in Asia, Africa, the Middle East, South and Central America are turning to China if only for the fact they're first impulse is not to blow things up.  Lots of new economic arrangements while we're being left out of the deals.  It needs to stop.

Edited June 18, 2023 by All_Pro_Bills

[ChiGoose]

10 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

He opposes all these senseless wars that have cost trillions and killed millions while displacing even more creating a refugee crisis.  For more or less nothing.  That's number one on my list.  Not only is it killing people but it's also hurting our nation's standing and effectiveness in the international community.  Reluctantly, many countries in Asia, Africa, the Middle East, South and Central America are turning to China if only for the fact they're first impulse is not to blow things up.  Lots of new economic arrangements while we're being left out of the deals.  It needs to stop.

So if Ronald Reagan had a kid running in the GOP primary who believed that the Earth was flat and that Wifi caused cancer, but also said we should all live in peace with no wars, you’d view him as a legitimate anti-establishment candidate instead of a loon?

[Unforgiven]

20 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:

So if Ronald Reagan had a kid running in the GOP primary who believed that the Earth was flat and that Wifi caused cancer, but also said we should all live in peace with no wars, you’d view him as a legitimate anti-establishment candidate instead of a loon?

[Buffarukus]

4 hours ago, ChiGoose said:

I’m not so sure. You’re playing an asymmetrical game if you agree to this. You have to stick to the truth while they can just say whatever they want. What happens when they make an absurd claim you’re not prepared for? You can call is absurd, but they’ll just call you out for not being able to refute it (not because it’s true, it isn’t, but you don’t have the exact facts at the ready for it and unlike them, you’re not here to lie).

 

Additionally, accepting this validates the whole idea of idiots and bad faith actors trying to goad people into validating their beliefs by treating their falsehoods as an opinion equally as valid as fact. Like debating whether 1+1= Banana. Why have that debate? It’s stupid. 

 

What if a bunch of morons got together $1 million dollars to get a parent of Sandy Hook to debate their claim that their kid was just a crisis actor? “It’s for charity, it could show people they are wrong about this conspiracy.” Sure. But it also dignifies and validates the bad actors.

 

I don’t think we should blame someone for not taking up the dumb obligation placed on them by morons. 

 

this is such a narrow elitist viewpoint that shows there hasnt been alot learned from the last few years. a ton of damage that we could have avoided was a direct result of people with this line of thinking. the science is settled. anyone who refutes it should be dismissed. saying lockdowns masks and vax dont work = banana. to YOU. forget a weed smoking comedian was able to put out more rational correct info in that timeframe then the cabal of state approved science. he is a forever a horse paste antivax lunatic by people who probably dont listen to what he advocated. that's scary.

 

you say its so easy to dismantle his antivax claims and then say he can be caught off guard. id think even if thats true the bulk of the debate will be beneficial to see debunked. your all ready biased in thinking that joe is setting up RFK to succeed and will allow blatant misinformation to be presented as factual. have you even seen a debate that joe rogan has hosted? do you know his stance on vax in general? do you know his stance on anything not filtered through hit pieces? again only one person has something to lose in this. rfk already went on his and many other shows. any disinformation he promotes is already out there. your not saving anyone at this point and advocating it all remains unchallenged. makes no sense.

 

if a bunch of morons put together 1M to debate? first, a parent has a highly emotional element so that's a hyperbolic comparison. I for example would be happy to take the morons money and destroy their bs in front of millions. how are you just deciding that one side is now validated because i do that? its the exact opposite.

 

this truley is a major problem in america today. when do YOU feel a topic is valid to be debated. do you ever think something you think is absurd to you personally should be platformed? whats the criteria that must be met if so. i mean you do know the history of science and how much of it was universally agreed on, until it wasn't. how much was universally agreed on then found to be created and propagated on corruption like "healthy" food choices, the amazing teflon. on and on and on. so maybe just a morsel of RFKs ideas are true and negativly effecting people. something easily changed but continued only due to cost cutting by the industry for example. is THAT worth being acknowledged? none of this would have seen the light of day with your outlook.

 

 

Edited June 18, 2023 by Buffarukus

[Doc]

11 hours ago, ChiGoose said:

This sums it up nicely:

 

 

 

4 hours ago, Orlando Tim said:

We have Biden, Feinstein, Harris and Fetterman as  the leaders of the Dems, who do you think thinks more? 

 

Beat me to it.

[ChiGoose]

22 minutes ago, Buffarukus said:

 

this is such a narrow elitist viewpoint that shows there hasnt been alot learned from the last few years. a ton of damage that we could have avoided was a direct result of people with this line of thinking. the science is settled. anyone who refutes it should be dismissed. saying lockdowns masks and vax dont work = banana. to YOU. forget a weed smoking comedian was able to put out more rational correct info in that timeframe then the cabal of state approved science. he is a forever a horse paste antivax lunatic by people who probably dont listen to what he advocated. that's scary.

 

you say its so easy to dismantle his antivax claims and then say he can be caught off guard. id think even if thats true the bulk of the debate will be beneficial to see debunked. your all ready biased in thinking that joe is setting up RFK to succeed and will allow blatant misinformation to be presented as factual. have you even seen a debate that joe rogan has hosted? do you know his stance on vax in general? do you know his stance on anything not filtered through hit pieces? again only one person has something to lose in this. rfk already went on his and many other shows. any disinformation he promotes is already out there. your not saving anyone at this point and advocating it all remains unchallenged. makes no sense.

 

if a bunch of morons put together 1M to debate? first, a parent has a highly emotional element so that's a hyperbolic comparison. I for example would be happy to take the morons money and destroy their bs in front of millions. how are you just deciding that one side is now validated because i do that? its the exact opposite.

 

this truley is a major problem in america today. when do YOU feel a topic is valid to be debated. do you ever think something you think is absurd to you personally should be platformed? whats the criteria that must be met if so. i mean you do know the history of science and how much of it was universally agreed on, until it wasn't. how much was universally agreed on then found to be created and propagated on corruption like "healthy" food choices, the amazing teflon. on and on and on. so maybe just a morsel of RFKs ideas are true and negativly effecting people. something easily changed but continued only due to cost cutting by the industry for example. is THAT worth being acknowledged? none of this would have seen the light of day with your outlook.

 

 

You’re entitled to your own opinion, not your own facts. 
 

It’s fair to debate the efficacy of different COVID prevention and mitigation policies, but what RFK Jr. is spewing is pure nonsense and debunked conspiracies. 
 

He’s a thread of some of the falsehoods he espouses, including that Wifi causes cancer:

This isn’t Teddy Kennedy running in a primary against Jimmy Carter. It’s a nutjob crank being given a platform solely because of his last name and because far right actors like Steve Bannon want to use him to damage Biden. 
 

[BillStime]

🎯

 

 

[Tommy Callahan]

The Dems are spitting mad at him.  Attacking him on every front.  

 

That alone is telling 

[Precision]

I remember the good old days (4 years ago) when Zatac the cool "purple pill" was being prescribed as safe.  Too bad GSK knew it caused cancer 40 years ago.  

 

GSK was warned repeatedly about Zantac impurity but played down risks: Bloomberg

 

"..... the publication reported that over the span of multiple decades, GSK was warned by its own scientists and independent researchers about a potential cancer-causing impurity in the drug. The FDA considered the risks when it reviewed the drug, but the agency ultimately approved Zantac, or ranitidine, in 1983."

 

Don't worry folks, the medical community has said the vaccines are "extra safe".  I'm sure we can trust them this time......

[ChiGoose]

3 minutes ago, Chris farley said:

The Dems are spitting mad at him.  Attacking him on every front.  

 

That alone is telling 

And what does it tell you?

[BillStime]

22 minutes ago, Precision said:

I remember the good old days (4 years ago) when Zatac the cool "purple pill" was being prescribed as safe.  Too bad GSK knew it caused cancer 40 years ago.  

 

GSK was warned repeatedly about Zantac impurity but played down risks: Bloomberg

 

"..... the publication reported that over the span of multiple decades, GSK was warned by its own scientists and independent researchers about a potential cancer-causing impurity in the drug. The FDA considered the risks when it reviewed the drug, but the agency ultimately approved Zantac, or ranitidine, in 1983."

 

Don't worry folks, the medical community has said the vaccines are "extra safe".  I'm sure we can trust them this time......

Can you tell us about the prescription drugs you’re currently taking? 
 

We should thoroughly analyze them for you.

Let’s go.

 

[All_Pro_Bills]

1 hour ago, ChiGoose said:

So if Ronald Reagan had a kid running in the GOP primary who believed that the Earth was flat and that Wifi caused cancer, but also said we should all live in peace with no wars, you’d view him as a legitimate anti-establishment candidate instead of a loon?

I'm not sure how to respond to this hypothetical but Joe Rogan is offering $100K plus another $150K from Bill Ackerman for a total of $250K to debate the science of the vaccine efficacy and safety issues with RFK.  I claim no expert status as a research or science professional on the topic but you appear well versed.  I'm not the person to debate here.  Perhaps you can represent the counter argument and take Rogan up on the offer and tell the man, RFK, directly what is incorrect about his views?   So far none of his most ardent critics have accepted the challenge.  If he's so full of crap I expect providing proof should be easy. And an easy $250K.

[ChiGoose]

13 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

I'm not sure how to respond to this hypothetical but Joe Rogan is offering $100K plus another $150K from Bill Ackerman for a total of $250K to debate the science of the vaccine efficacy and safety issues with RFK.  I claim no expert status as a research or science professional on the topic but you appear well versed.  I'm not the person to debate here.  Perhaps you can represent the counter argument and take Rogan up on the offer and tell the man, RFK, directly what is incorrect about his views?   So far none of his most ardent critics have accepted the challenge.  If he's so full of crap I expect providing proof should be easy. And an easy $250K.

 

Agreeing to the challenge is accepting RFK Jr.s claims as worthy of debate and gives the impression that there is a valid reason to believe them. 
 

Putting money up is simply a ploy to make it harder to do the sensible thing: deny this grifter a platform and the legitimacy he desires. It also makes the person making the reasonable decision into the bad guy. It’s clever, but wholly in bad faith. 

[Doc]

18 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:

Agreeing to the challenge is accepting RFK Jr.s claims as worthy of debate and gives the impression that there is a valid reason to believe them. 
 

Putting money up is simply a ploy to make it harder to do the sensible thing: deny this grifter a platform and the legitimacy he desires. It also makes the person making the reasonable decision into the bad guy. It’s clever, but wholly in bad faith. 

 

Talk about a cop out. 

[SectionC3]

1 hour ago, BillStime said:

Can you tell us about the prescription drugs you’re currently taking? 
 

We should thoroughly analyze them for you.

Let’s go.

 

Probably HCQ and Ivermectin, if I know anything about our MAGA friends who post here. 

[The Frankish Reich]

2 hours ago, ChiGoose said:

including that Wifi causes cancer

I actually had to do a few searches to determine whether RFK Jr. actually suggested this. He did.

Loony Tunes. 

And this is one of the right wing "thought leaders" today, Joe Rogan. A guy who became semi-famous on a reality show where he made people eat bugs. Along with, from what I'm hearing, Russell Brand. An obnoxious drug addict comic who had to refashion himself as a political commentator to salvage a career. That's what the party of William F. Buckley has become ...

Edited June 18, 2023 by The Frankish Reich

[BillStime]

RFK = Kanye

 

No one but the cult takes them seriously.