Ok I would but it dosns't make any difference to the conversation about the evolution of language if they are PC about it.

there are times when it is necessary to use it. The link to stewart Lee I posted link the other thread both contain it for very good reason.

Again if there misrepresenting going on then that's just helping the right. That's a different issue to the PC one which is nothing to with misrepresenting someone.

I agree btw that it's totally correct to point that it doesn't become PC or ok because a word is avoided. It's simple and good to avoid offensive words except in special context but if the replacement is used offensively then yes of course that doesn't make it PC.

If the racist thing doesn't work either they'll start finding women to claim he sexually harassed them.

Nope next is Anti Trans

He's also easily one of the most fit and healthy mid 50's males on the planet. He also has natural immunity and enough **** you money that he doesn't need a vaccine to work. I also believe he followed a pretty strict COVID testing routine while recording etc.

With the free space, that will give them bingo.

You are super confused be sure and stick to velcro shoes and laces can also be confusing

Rogan is 100% a white supremacist. Just think about it for a second. He has a 100 million dollar media empire and all he has to do to not **** it up is not use racial slurs. But he uses them anyway. That's about as clear as it can get that those racial epithets reflect his true beliefs. He's backtracking now to try to save his golden goose, but if he gets canceled off Spotify 100% he comes out as a card-carrying Nazi within 24 hours.

Like Whoopie Goldberg.

I think it's all a bunch of nonsense since none of these entertainers should be looked up to for their random opinions anyway.

But it's the world we live in. We fight endless wars and have a failed political system so why not fiddle while the empire burns ?

He's a self promoter doing what he does best. Make money off his private life.

If you want to say he's anti vaxx then fine. But unless he's telling people the vaccine doesn't work and that they shouldn't take it (has he ? I don't think so but I don't follow him) then so what ? Giving anti-vaxx a definition so wide it's meaningless doesn't really prove any particular point.

Try to be less re-tarded.

One of America's greatest-ever comedians and civil-rights activists was the recently-deceased Dick Gregory.#

He titled his autobiography N*****r.

# I think that's the first time I've ever used three hyphens in one sentence on 2+2

Source?

He said the following:

"If you're a healthy person, and you're exercising all the time, and you're young, and you're eating well...like, I don't think you need to worry about this."

and that was the advice he followed for himself as a young, healthy 54 year old at the time. Given he has so many people that listen to him and want to live like him (just look at some of the adoration in this thread) - the public choices he makes have an impact. Go to the derpy locked Covid thread and you will see it filled with middle aged dudes who talk about how healthy they are and their immune system and charts of numbers of their cohort as to why they will not get vaccinated. It is the same thing, and yes, that is an anti-vaxx approach. If you want to consider that a "wide" form of the definition then that is your option, but it is a fairly valid one. Feel free to offer your definition to show what you mean. After that you can blame the left for eating itself just before Lozen mutters something about Trudeau.

All the best.

I don't really know who you are so some of what you're saying escapes me.

But, if a middle aged man is listening to a talk show host instead of experts that's really not Rogan's fault.

There are plenty of dummies in my circle who think survival of the fittest is the way to go. They all change their mind the day they get a cancer diagnosis ofc. But you know, rugged individualists yada, yada, yada.

They are free to get vaxxed or not. As long as they don't try to tell me what I should do I really don't consider them pro or anti. But I guess we can censor people's thoughts. That will end well.

I am the person who gave you a specific quote that you can look up to verify when you asked for one. In the end who the human is that provides your specific answer is does not matter, much like who you are as a human does not matter in any regard.

Well, that is an easy escape clause you suggest, but I would counter that someone with as public a platform as his has some responsibility in the mix, because he (and everyone) know that people will listen to him. To ignore that as a part of the equation either means you are as naive as Lozen (who did not believe Rogan's show had a target market) or intentionally dishonest. You can choose.


That is a fun rando unrelated rant, but I gave you a specific quote and a specific definition of what I consider to be "anti-vaxx." I then asked you to share what your definition would be for that to show what you deem to be a proper one. You avoided doing that, which to be fair was what I expected, and by now you know that I (as someone you do not know) have that routine of asking people (often times derps) questions I know they will avoid answering. Still, as per what you said there - someone wearing placards on the streat stating that all vaccines are the devil's work and will kill people (as he yells at the clouds) is not is not anti-vaxx if that person does not make the specific effort to tell you to not get vaccinated. Heh, ok.

All the best.

Many people who would come on Rogan's show who had also been to the White House and CDC building said Rogan's show by far was doing the most extensive testing before you got in the building.

ONe thing most people would talk about was his extensive anti-bodies testing and data of everyone who came in the building. They had a map that showed vax'd and unvax'd, those who had already had covid, and those who had not. They recognized the Super Immune before I heard anyone else talk about it, as they tested certain people who were vaccinated and then got covid or had covid and then got vaccinted.

The data they collected indicated those who got covid first and then got vax'd after had the highest antibody counts and those who got the vaccine first and then got breakthru covid had a lesser response but still strong. That makes sense as the vax is common to both groups and you would assume those who had covid had more antibodies than those who had not.

But Joe specifically said in that podcast that getting covid first and then getting vax'd though meant rolling the dice with covid and hoping you had a survivable case.

So that entire exercise, which Joe almost obsessed on about how the covid vaccine impacted antibodies of IS a recognition of the efficacy of the vaccine.


He absolutely is not anti-vax in any undistorted meaning of the word.

I can provide him constantly saying the vaccines work and people should take them and that has always been his view.

His divergence (and sin) is that as the CDC went down the line and tried to determine the Risk/Benefit analysis of each and every group below Seniors, the Obese and the Vulnerable, and then into healthy 50 year olds, Healthy 30-50. Healthy 20-30 and healthy under 20, joe has diverged from the CDC on the risk/reward for certain buckets.

According to Chez the UK Health authority also diverged (and maybe still does) on under certain age brackets for kids getting it as compared to the US position.

So by some logic here (and Trolly said as much) the UK Health authority is anti-vax just as Rogan is.

Trolly even said upthread, that Rogan even apologized already for being mistaken prior on one issue, and corrected himself after he had in an expert to his show who challenged him with data and Joe conceded live on his show. Trolly said that apology 'proves he is anti-vax FFS, as he apologized for it'.

So make no mistake as that is the heart of the claim why he (and the UK health authority) are/were anti vax.

It should be noted that he didn't use that title in the sort of affectionate way that rap singers do.

I have never listened to Joe Rogan, and thus I don't have any informed views on where he falls on the political spectrum.

This is all very confusing. On the one hand, numerous people who I know to be right wing derpists who don't give a **** about free speech have rushed to Rogan's defense. On the other hand, you have people like Cuepee repeatedly vouching for Rogan as a bona fide leftist. I can only assume that many people involved in this national debate are not regular listeners to Joe Rogan.

My starting assumption for people like Rogan is that that they are motivated less by logic and more by a desire to acquire and maintain an audience. That mindset of course can lead someone like Rogan down all sorts of dumb rabbit holes.

But that's just a guess. As I said, I've never listened to him.

No what I said is he does not care about his target market and never has. He has never advertised on his podcast or marketed it. No question the folks that host him have used all that data to target at the folks that listen to him.

His list of diverse guests are just folks he finds interesting and has on for a lengthy un scripted conversation.

Joe Rogan will survive . My guess is the folks at CNN are in for a big surprise in the next 3 months as many of them will not as they rebrand and the Brian Stelter's and Don Lemond's will be gone

As for your intentionally dishonest provide an example?

https://www.insider.com/dave-chappel...ew-2021-11?amp

Probably the clearest incident. Dave Chappelle went back to his old high school. They were in the process of naming the auditorium after him and there were some complaints both in the media and from students because of some of his recent trans related material. He had a Q&A with 500 students to address their concerns but he got some criticism and ended up declaring that he was better at what he does than everyone there is at everything combined. “How dare these peasants criticize ME!!!” is obviously an underlying theme in much of the cancel culture whining.

"If you're a healthy person, and you're exercising all the time, and you're young, and you're eating well...like, I don't think you need to worry about this."

That's not an anti vaxx quote. You'll have to explain to me why you think it is.

I did answer you. Let me break it down :

Unless a person is telling me (and/or others) that I (we) should not take the vaccine then I don't consider that person anti-vaxx in any meaningful way.

So to reverse that for the logically impaired, you are anti-vaxx when you express the opinion that people should not get vaxxed.

For example, I don't smoke. I would be happy to tell people who are paying me to talk about my boring life why I don't smoke and why I think it's a bad idea in general. However, I'm not anti-smoking. I don't think it should be outlawed. I don't think middle aged men should be banned from doing it.
I just think it's a stupid and dangerous habit.

Sure we're splitting hairs but you're giving Rogan too much credit and you're not admitting how dumb the derps who listen to him are. If they weren't making bad decisions by listening to him, they'd be making bad decisions while doing something else.

Obviously...

I was kind of surprised at Trolly as I thought he was a scientist of some sort and would understand that the flow if data is dynamic and can change the analysis rapidly.

But yeah, I think the problem here in America is that Fauci lied about the face masks right out of the gate and gave us commoners no reason to trust the government during the biggest pandemic of our lifetime.

Then you get a guy like Rogan who will allow for differing opinions and voices and who happens to be a faux live off the land, macho type and he's public enemy number one now.

Pushing back against him is fine. Especially if he's wrong, but going full on cancel because omg, he said the n-word and I'm too immature to handle that.....give me a break.

Being afraid that others will take bad advice from someone you can't control is kind of school marmy. It's undignified and it doesn't work.

LOL the left doing it's thing. The world must still be spinning.

Actually you stated

Which made a bunch of people laugh quite a bit at the time, so, shrug, whatever.

Given you are wrong about everything, it is safe to assume both those guys (not familiar with the first one) will be there three months from now. If you want to do a wager for charity on that let me know!


All those guys you argued with in the derpy Covid thread in BFI for a year+ will be happy to know that you now believe they were all not anti-vaxx that whole time as they claimed! Unban that Vitamin D kid who said lock away the geezers and vaccinate them (see, he was pro-vax) so he can finally claim victory!


He is a mid 50s dude who very publicly refused to take the vaccine. That behavior choice (given how many followers he has that do what he says) matters. You keep ignoring his actual behavior as if it is a nothingburger. Again, according to your method if a public figure comes out and says "all vaccines are evil that will kill people, and that is why I will never take one, but I will not tell others what to do" - well that is definitely not an anti-vaxx message? How the real world behaves may disagree.

All the best.

Yes. Thanks for wasting my time on what I thought was a good faith question/discussion.