Redux

4 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

Have you had problems with your eyesight?  Asking for a friend.

I did, but warm washrag seemed to take care of it.

2 minutes ago, ZRod said:

Because you touch yourself at night.

You don't?  No wonder you're such a buzzkill

So if we gave people new "safe smoking kits"......would that exempt them from being arrested on paraphernalia and or drug charges?  Asking for a friend.

Quote

In a first-of-its-kind federal grant to be distributed by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, a branch of HHS, dozens of organizations across the country would be able to spend the money over three years on a preapproved list of resources, including referrals to treatment, infectious-disease testing kits, condoms, and vaccinations for hepatitis A and B.

Also on the list: “safe smoking kits.” Typically, such kits include a rubber mouthpiece to prevent cuts and burns, brass screens to filter contaminants and disinfectant wipes, according to Harm Reduction International.

This sounds insane on paper 

I'm all for prevention......but I'm a bit gobsmacked by this not being a BabylonBee article

Kinda like offering the homeless Makers Mark so they don't have to huff feces

9 minutes ago, ZRod said:

Why do you always do this s#!t? No one is giving away free crack pipes and syringes.

Why don't you have a sense of humor

Free crack pipes AND syringes????????  WTF. Did drugs win the war on drugs and nobody told us???

12 hours ago, Enhance said:

I'll have to agree to disagree with the bolded, but again, this is very much based on lived experience. Saying that word in the places I've lived and grown up... unacceptable, if not downright dangerous. Perhaps the consequences have become more severe overall, but as @knapplc said, it has never been an acceptable term to use in any context for the majority of our lives at least. The perception of anyone who uses that word has been poor in the public eye for decades now. Is there an example of someone saying it publicly in the last 30 years (and by publicly... I mean in a large format of diverse, free thinking people) and NOT being heavily criticized?

 

The list is extensive. Ivermectin, general vaccine propaganda, "mass-formation hypnosis," microchips from the vaccine... or when he said the vaccines were gene therapy, which they are literally not.

So it's not just about Rogan talking about these things. It's the manner in which they're shared and discussed. If somebody says some crazy s#!t on his podcast and his response boils down to "wow that's some crazy s#!t..." without any substantial fact checking or validation... then a lot of people are going to believe it. It's irresponsible.

 

But again, Rogan himself has admitted his n-word commentary was 100% wrong. He has also admitted that he needs to do a better job as far as covid and vaccine conversations go. He has admitted that he's not doing good enough job. He's not a victim of anything other than poor decision making. And this is a problem with "cancel culture" discussions, something I have been guilty of myself. "Cancel culture" sometimes goes too far, but too many people's first reaction is get frustrated with the 'canceling' as opposed to reflecting on why it's happening in the first place. We would all be better served to focus on the 'why,' IMO, even if we disagree with the cancel culturey nature of the public reaction.

I'm not going to get into an argument about possible covid treatments or vaccines.  I'm pretty sure you haven't listened to most of his discussions about these things, and I know I haven't  heard them all, so this would be pointless.  So I'll assume you're assuming and leave it at that.

It was wrong, therefore he admitted it was wrong.  It was the right thing to do.  And he probably saw it coming, he's not as dumb as he pretends to be.

As to the bolded, it sounds a lot like what Ulty was implying.  Literally everyone makes mistakes, bad decisions, poor judgment etc.  Rogan just has a massive audience, so he can actually be canceled.  And I'm sorry but you seem to be looking at it backwards to how I am.  I am looking at this as WHY is he being canceled and it stems from unpopular opinion sharing, not old insensitive slur usage.  He said things people don't agree with, so people dug up racist looking s#!t.  That's the why.  That doesn't make him innocent, but sharing unpopular opinions and ideas shouldn't turn into racism, as it does too often because it's an easy thing to point to to get someone silenced.

Free.......crack pipes?  Am....am I hearing this right?

28 minutes ago, Ulty said:

Not much to explain...usually when people are complaining about cancel culture, they are often just mad that someone might have to face social consequences for being an a$shole, instead of actually reflecting upon their behavior. 

 

Pleeeeease don't use this to start arguing about cancel culture. The last couple pages of this thread have been a pretty good dialogue about the use of the n-word. 

I mean, if you don't want someone to slightly disagree with something you say I guess don't post it?  But I'm one of the last people that should say that.

I think what you're saying is painting with a pretty broad brush.  In the case of Rogan, he's the type of person we need more of in terms of acceptance and willingness to understand.  Most everything he says and does comes from a place of care.  There are few celebrities you can listen to speak and feel like they are genuine.

Sure, there are people who are just mad about cancel culture.  And that's a completely legitimate gripe considering that at it's core, this is a witch hunt with the intent to shut someone up.  But Rogan has owned up to everything he has said in the past and he's going about his business trying to move on from it.  He asked Spotify to take down episodes, not the other way around.  And to their credit, they aren't overreacting to this.  So far, this has been a positive step towards actually dealing with things like this.  Again, sure there are people who just want to defend Rogan and there are people who just want to defend free speech.  But there are also a ton of people who don't care about the context, what was said or the truth about any other controversial thing concerning Rogan who just want him gone and they have no clue who he is or what he does.

12 minutes ago, Ulty said:

But more likely, a lot of @ssholes will probably just complain about cancel culture and not even try to learn anything. 

I agree with most of the rest of the post, can you expand on this?

7 minutes ago, Enhance said:

So, is the issue more than the usage of the word but how the consequences have changed?

 

- Madonna used the word in 2014 and immediately said "there's no way to defend the use of the word." That was 8 years ago. Maybe her career didn't get obliterated, but even then, it was a no-no.

- Charlie Sheen said it in a voicemail in 2008 and immediately apologized after facing hefty criticism.

- The Hilton sisters said it in 2007 and profusely apologized then as well, admitting they should never have said it

 

It seems pretty clear to me that going back for at least the last 15 years... people have known they should not say the word at all. So I think it is wildly inaccurate to claim it's level of offensiveness has changed 100%. Seems like it's been incredibly offensive for a long time and that the consequences have changed. Which, I guess someone could have the argument about the pros/cons of the consequences changing... but that doesn't make the usage of the word any worse or better right?

I'd argue the public perception of someone who uses the word today is vastly different than it was a decade or two ago.  The usage of the word now is perceived much differently than it used to be.  The implications of using it as a racial slur haven't changed at all.  But using it in quotes or in any non racist descriptive discussion based manner has changed.

11 minutes ago, Enhance said:

I think two things can be true here.

 

Yes, Rogan is a health and fitness nut, and he's right that living a healthy lifestyle puts you at much less risk of illness, disease and negative side effects to those diseases in general, whether it's COVID or diabetes.

 

And yes, Rogan has also shared some dumb hot takes that have found a breeding ground within right wing nut job circles.

 

Listen - the guy isn't perfect. I don't necessarily think he's a racist or a nut job. I just think he occasionally says and does dumb things, but their impact and notoriety are exponentially greater than the average persons. His mistakes are amplified ten fold. But, he's also not a victim here. He has said and done these things, things he probably know better than to do and has admitted he knew better than to do.

Hot takes such as what exactly?  Are we talking about the Ivermectin?  Because if so, it's pretty widely known now that the horse medicine narrative was another smear tactic to paint him as an idiot.  I guess it worked if that's what were talking about.

He says dumb things with the precursor he's not an expert.  All the apologies he's put out and his handling of the controversy has been better than most in his situation.  His actually felt genuine and he wants to be better.  People make mistakes, again that's kind of the whole format of the show, growing/learning/seeing other perspectives.

1 minute ago, Enhance said:

I guess I have a fundamentally different lived experience than this. I'm not disregarding your perspective Redux, but it is no way relatable to me which is why I'm pretty dumbfounded by Rogan's remarks. And it's not like Omaha has been some cancel culture hot bed for 30 years.

 

For my teenage to now adult life, that word was an absolute no-no. I don't remember anything about it from being a kid. I probably didn't know the word. But, it didn't matter where I was or who I was with. If you said that to a black person, even in the colloquial form, you were getting your a$$ beat. If you said it at work, you were getting fired. If you said it in casual conversation with friends, you were going to get weird looks.

 

My wife's grandpa used to let it slip in conversation, but he was an objective racist. Even my cousin (who for some reason has used that word for a lot of his life) knows to never say it in public and never has.

 

I guess I can see the perspective that some people might use it behind closed doors for some weird reason. But, in my lived experience for 32 years, I've never known a time where it was just "frowned upon" to use that word. Just very, very bizarre to me.

 

It goes beyond rural and metro midwest though, look at media over the last several decades.  Hell Vince McMahon dropped it with an "A" at the end during a live broadcast in 2005.  Joe Biden used it in congress quoting others.  Chunk of TYT has a worse compilation video than Rogan floating around now.

13 minutes ago, Lorewarn said:

This is all true and honestly who cares? It's entertainment.

It's not just entertainment.  He likes to challenge the guests he has on, which makes sense because he's not just looking for someone to shill themselves.  He's looking to be educated, and you can't be educated by simply listening and nodding.  You have to ask questions if something doesn't sound right or you don't agree fully.

32 minutes ago, RedDenver said:

Whole lot of giving Rogan the benefit of the doubt here, which is your perogative but not everyone agrees nor does that make them "terrified" of honest questions. Rogan is also asking ridiculous questions and having less knowledgeable and even charlatans on as well as knowledgeable people.

It's not benefit of the doubt, it's looking at it without a bunch of preconceived notions.  The appeal of Rogan is he is having the same conversations most people have in private, not the fake conversations people have online.  And he's doing it in front of an audience that eclipses the media.  That's what terrifies people, hence the smear campaign.

35 minutes ago, RedDenver said:

You really think people are trying to silence him because of his health and fitness lifestyle? I get that you like Rogan and want to defend him here, but that's a ridiculous claim.

I like Rogan, I'm not a die hard.  I listen to some of his podcasts, not all.  It's not a ridiculous thing to say, in fact it's verifiable.  When he got covid, and he promoted the idea of health and fitness and vitamins etc. as a much healthier way (long and short term) to battle not just covid but any ailment, that was taken and spun into him being anti vax.  It's not ridiculous, because it legitimately happened.  You can see for yourself, well you can if you want to.  And once he was labeled andtivax, then he was labeled a right wing nut/conspiracy theorist.  Now he's being labeled a racist.  He's none of those things.

Kaepernick wanted notoriety because he was never going to be an NFL superstar, he was serviceable.  So he turned his career into an agenda, and it worked.  I don't like the kneeling thing, but I've also gone on record to say if you want to do it go for it.  Better than rioting.  But let's not pretend Kaepernick was doing anything without his own interests as the top priority.

Rogan is doing the same thing he's always done, having honest conversations with people more knowledgeable than he is from both sides of the political spectrum.  And asking honest questions terrifies people.  The guy eat sleeps and breathes health and fitness, he promotes living a healthy lifestyle above all else.  And people are trying to silence him because of it by digging up anything they can from his past.

Context matters.  It should always matter.  Cherry picking quotes to slander someone is the same as nut shotting someone you can't beat in a fight.  And that's what's happening to Rogan.

12 hours ago, Enhance said:

I'm pretty confused by this quote from Rogan in 2017.

 

 

 

 

To the bolded, I feel like the word has been ridiculously charged my entire life. I'm 32. I've never known a point in time as a white person where it was OK to say that word... or really even for anyone to say that word. It's even a big issue within the black community despite the appearances from pop culture.

 

Those comments just seem wildly ill-informed.

Oh it has 100% changed in level of offensiveness, but not to the demographic that should actually be offended by it when someone uses it as a slur.  There was absolutely a time where it was simply frowned upon instead of an instant cancelation and it wasn't that long ago.  Also depends where you come from culturally, different areas changed at different times in terms of how acceptable it was to use in one context or any context.  I've never been a fan of using it at all, but you're disregarding a lot of the way our society has evolved if you honestly think it's never been acceptable (and I use the word acceptable NOT as a way to insinuate that it is or ever was something that should've been acceptable.  Again, it was frowned upon at one time, unlike now where white people don't care about the context if it's someone they want to deplatform)

2 hours ago, Guy Chamberlin said:

I'm seeing tons of stuff about Joe Rogan and Spotify. And just when I'm in the middle of defending Rogan as merely an anti-Vax dimwit, comes Joe's racial s#!t — the kind of disclosures that have historically derailed other celebrities careers. 

 

I'm still kinda stuck on the NFL, whose panicky response to the failure of its Rooney Rule is to give the Texans job to Lovie Smith, a HC retread coming off years of failure at the college and pro level, and the Dolphins job to Mike McDaniel, a deserving assistant coach that nobody knew was biracial until this hire. 

He quite literally was not being racist, but the usage of the word is abhorrent either way now.  At the time it was still pretty abhorrent and I was surprised the instances were as recent as they were, but taken out of context as they were, they look much more sinister than they actually were.  I don't believe any intention of his has ever had any racist undertone.

Kinda shocked nobody is talking about Joe Rogan and Spotify 

2 hours ago, Toe said:

Better late than never?

 

 

This is like breaking up with your sister to date your other sister's  sister, roll tide

12 hours ago, ZRod said:

No, but I'm also not one looking to be outraged by inconsequential things.

Trying to save another thread by projecting outrage?

God I hate that the easily woke crowd let an internet troll make this a real thing.  So stupid.  I'm actually more offended that Herbie is now giving the #1 symbol now when that's pretty clearly not been the case for 25yrs.  Just false advertising.

Raise the bench an inch or so and make the surface less concrete feeling.  Plus the extra width should help alleviate at least a little of the leg space issues.

I'd be curious if anyone with the actual numbers could calculate how big an impact removal of one seat per row would have on capacity.