Thing$ $till not going well for Joe Rogan, I $ee.

[Neonmoon 38127]

9 hours ago, 52-80 said:

That's the thing: noone has to care what he says.  He didn't seek out to build a podcast empire, he started shooting the shit with comedians and fighters and it organically grew.  His podcast has a large audience because people were drawn to the interviews and interview style -- the same reason you enjoyed his episodes. 

I've listened to a total of maybe 30 episodes out of his catalog of almost 2000, so far from me to be considered a historian or fan, but it's clear to me all the people hating on it have listened to nearly 0.  Lots of people criticizing something they don't or don't even try to understand.

 

AFAIK he never endorsed or promoted ivermectin.  His position is there should be more public emphasis on maintaining overall fitness vs full shutdown, and he shared a cocktail of what he was taking - one of was ivermectin - and taking umbrage of the fact that that was singled out and typecast pejoratively as 'horse dewormer'.  He broadcasts that every guest to his studio has to be tested before they enter.

So yeah, anybody who listens to that and is stupid enough to be swayed to take and exclusively take Ivermectin, that's on them, that's not on the podcast.

1. Are you arguing that people shouldn’t be responsible for telling stupid people to drink bleach? If you convince people to drink bleach to cure a disease, and they die, are you not responsible? 
 

2. I have listened to a shit ton of his podcasts. What do I not understand about his podcasts? He has a great podcast, up until the point he questions safe and effective vaccines. That’s the line of sand. It’s a very big and fucking obvious line in the sand. His “just asking questions” is fun until it undermines confidence in public health policy. Because there are answers to all his questions. Ready available answers. 
 

3. Yes, he promoted Ivermectin by taking it to cure his Covid. By telling his followers that’s what he took, that’s promoting it. 

 

[Gourmand 7774]

7 hours ago, Bama Chick said:

Rogan fan manbabies are the WORST.

they really are. i've hated this fuckin tool for a long time for the obvious reasons --being a dumb "both sides" fraud mfer who peddles right-wing nonsense but hides behind that one time he said he was a Bernie supporter (obvious bullshit), flexes about leaving Cali for Texas but moves to Austin of all places, MMA crap, etc...but I particularly scoff at all those Rogan manbabies who for as long as I can remember always defended his show because, "dude, it's long-form nobody else does that!!! 

GTFO with that. That is literally the dumbest defense of his show but it's also to be expected from those who consider themselves fans. He's no Terry Gross and he should take a lesson from her in how to be a good interviewer. 

[henrygandorf 29174]

11 hours ago, Ojo Rojo said:

Joe Rogan has no business discussing those topics.  He's unqualified and fairly ignorant. He's got no education, background or experience in those areas.  Why would I care one whit what he has to say?  He's just a guy with an opinion.

sounds like he's about ready to run for congress.

[Biff Tannen 45477]

38 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

sounds like he's about ready to run for congress.

That’s probably next. 

[wildcat09 29187]

1 hour ago, Neonmoon said:

1. Are you arguing that people shouldn’t be responsible for telling stupid people to drink bleach? If you convince people to drink bleach to cure a disease, and they die, are you not responsible?

 

I think he's arguing that we need to let Charles Manson out of prison.

[52-80 19066]

5 hours ago, Neonmoon said:

1. Are you arguing that people shouldn’t be responsible for telling stupid people to drink bleach? If you convince people to drink bleach to cure a disease, and they die, are you not responsible? 
 

2. I have listened to a shit ton of his podcasts. What do I not understand about his podcasts? He has a great podcast, up until the point he questions safe and effective vaccines. That’s the line of sand. It’s a very big and fucking obvious line in the sand. His “just asking questions” is fun until it undermines confidence in public health policy. Because there are answers to all his questions. Ready available answers. 
 

3. Yes, he promoted Ivermectin by taking it to cure his Covid. By telling his followers that’s what he took, that’s promoting it. 

 

You listen to who you want and take away from them what you want.  Nobody should infantilize you or remove your personal agency. 

JR is a lifelong martial artist who does cryotherapy in between sessions of bow hunting and sensory deprivation chamber. His lifestyle is relatable to…absolutely nobody here. So he takes a cocktail of stuff including an antiviral (and fucking DMT and HGH).  Thats his thing. 

If certain speech should be excoriated or censored on grounds of being unpopular or factually DUMB…most politicians wouldnt be in office and most of you wouldnt be allowed to post. 

[GW Hayduke 1950]

1 hour ago, 52-80 said:

If certain speech should be excoriated or censored on grounds of being unpopular or factually DUMB…most politicians wouldnt be in office and most of you wouldnt be allowed to post. 

So your position boils down to the idea that people (or maybe certain people) shouldn't have consequences for their speech?  Because when a politician says something dumb, they are usually excorticated for it.  When someone says something dumb here, they are often excoriated for it.  Why do you want JR to be immune to consequences - immune to ridicule? Is it because you perceive JR to have a unique/different lifestyle?  

[DigglerontheHoof 21022]

15 hours ago, 52-80 said:

He's the primary announcer of a sport worth more than Formula 1.  Has had a long TV career.  Has royalties from a catalog of standup media.  Has had the top n'th listened and monetized podcast for far, far before it was purchased by Spotify.

Money doesn't seem a concern.  The more likely explanation is he has the freedom to say what he wants, and you happen to not like what he says.  Which is fine. 

America with a 74% adult fully-vax rate, and his last 10 guests including General McMaster, Jim Gaffigan, Oliver Stone, and Carrot Top.... he has to intentionally peddle antivax disinformation... to get money?  Talk about a conspiracy....

Good points.

So that leaves that he's a highly functioning moron or pretty fucking evil.  /shoulder shrug/

[Al_4_ISU 12408]

You listen to who you want and take away from them what you want.  Nobody should infantilize you or remove your personal agency. 

JR is a lifelong martial artist who does cryotherapy in between sessions of bow hunting and sensory deprivation chamber. His lifestyle is relatable to…absolutely nobody here. So he takes a cocktail of stuff including an antiviral (and fucking DMT and HGH).  Thats his thing. 

If certain speech should be excoriated or censored on grounds of being unpopular or factually DUMB…most politicians wouldnt be in office and most of you wouldnt be allowed to post. 

People get excoriated for saying dumb shit on this board hourly.

[Sawbonz 27374]

Self ownage 

 

 

[52-80 19066]

14 minutes ago, GW Hayduke said:

So your position boils down to the idea that people (or maybe certain people) shouldn't have consequences for their speech? 

It seems, i dunno, more than trivially important, if you define in that sentence what exactly is the nature of speech people can or shouldn't be convicted for.

 

If he says "for my diet i swallow 8 whole eggs, eat exclusively elk meat, supplemented by Onnit brainfood", thats not your cue to follow.  certain not mine.

If he says "i got the covid, and my doctor prescribed me xx, yy, and zz", thats not your cue to follow either.

 

So what do you believe he said, in exact terms, that makes him responsible for "effectively kill[ing] thousands of people"?

Because if that was remotely provable, prosecutors would have his head on a spike in a court.  Instead, it's just a bunch of people getting really really angry over social media.

 

 

[GW Hayduke 1950]

11 minutes ago, 52-80 said:

It seems, i dunno, more than trivially important, if you define in that sentence what exactly is the nature of speech people can or shouldn't be convicted for.

 

If he says "for my diet i swallow 8 whole eggs, eat exclusively elk meat, supplemented by Onnit brainfood", thats not your cue to follow.  certain not mine.

If he says "i got the covid, and my doctor prescribed me xx, yy, and zz", thats not your cue to follow either.

 

So what do you believe he said, in exact terms, that makes him responsible for "effectively kill[ing] thousands of people"?

Because if that was remotely provable, prosecutors would have his head on a spike in a court.  Instead, it's just a bunch of people getting really really angry over social media.

 

 

So you are against a prosecutor bringing charges against him?  Ok.  Which prosecutor are referring to? Which one brought charges?  Do you think you are arguing against a strawman?  Have you considered whether you may have adopted a victimhood complex and applied it to JR because you share an identity with him?

[Captainant 27309]

41 minutes ago, 52-80 said:

It seems, i dunno, more than trivially important, if you define in that sentence what exactly is the nature of speech people can or shouldn't be convicted for.

 

If he says "for my diet i swallow 8 whole eggs, eat exclusively elk meat, supplemented by Onnit brainfood", thats not your cue to follow.  certain not mine.

If he says "i got the covid, and my doctor prescribed me xx, yy, and zz", thats not your cue to follow either.

 

So what do you believe he said, in exact terms, that makes him responsible for "effectively kill[ing] thousands of people"?

Because if that was remotely provable, prosecutors would have his head on a spike in a court.  Instead, it's just a bunch of people getting really really angry over social media.

 

 

No one is saying he should be prosecuted for murder, as you so hyperbolically put it. And he isn't being threatened with jail time or action by the state.

Is it your opinion that Spotify and his sponsors have zero agency or right to decide how and who to spend their money on? 

Since we're talking hypotheticals anyways, if it came out that Rogan was actually fucking kids and high fiving with prince andrew and epstein - it's your position that he should face no consequences or potential loss of revenue from his sponsors? Because something something free speech?

Edited January 14, 2022 by Captainant

[HenryJames 65868]

48 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

People get excoriated for saying dumb shit on this board hourly.

It’s kind of our thing really.

[HenryJames 65868]

2 hours ago, 52-80 said:

JR is a lifelong martial artist who does cryotherapy in between sessions of bow hunting and sensory deprivation chamber.

[52-80 19066]

17 minutes ago, GW Hayduke said:

So you are against a prosecutor bringing charges against him?  Ok.  Which prosecutor are referring to? Which one brought charges?  Do you think you are arguing against a strawman?  Have you considered whether you may have adopted a victimhood complex and applied it to JR because you share an identity with him?

I would be highly entertained at the attempt to bring him to trial on the charges of wanton misinformation, or, more directly, being responsible for "effectively kill[ing] thousands of people".  That's not a straw anything.  That's an actual quote from 1 page back.

So my point is that accusation is utterly tenuous.  If it wasn't, it would be tried. 

That's a personal opinion - an idea that clearly by now is something that frightens you.  How do you cope with that?

[52-80 19066]

25 minutes ago, Captainant said:

No one is saying he should be prosecuted for murder, as you so hyperbolically put it.

Do you think he is responsible for thousands of deaths?  (others have written it this thread).  If no, then there's nothing here.  If yes, shouldnt he be prosecuted for it?

Didn't you scream murder against a teenager for shooting 3 people in video recorded instances of self-defense? 

Ya'll never fail to bring the funnys on a Friday.

[Captainant 27309]

Just now, 52-80 said:

Do you think he is responsible for thousands of deaths?  (others have written it this thread).  If no, then there's nothing here.  If yes, shouldnt he be prosecuted for it?

Didn't you scream murder against a teenager for shooting 3 people in video recorded instances of self-defense? 

Ya'll never fail to bring the funnys on a Friday.

I do think he shares some culpability for COVID deaths, yeah. As does any other person actively spreading disinformation. He's just got a louder megaphone and larger audience than most mainstream news outlets.

That doesn't make him legally liable though. And just because the government doesn't prosecute doesn't mean that nothing wrong or dangerous happened. 

And yeah, if you go 20+ miles from your home looking for a fight and then kill three people with a rifle obtained via lying on a form 4473 I'm inclined to call that murder. But this thread ain't shitinhouse, so stop deflecting from your thumb thumb friend

[52-80 19066]

6 minutes ago, Captainant said:

I do think he shares some culpability for COVID deaths, yeah. As does any other person actively spreading disinformation. He's just got a louder megaphone and larger audience than most mainstream news outlets.

That doesn't make him legally liable though. And just because the government doesn't prosecute doesn't mean that nothing wrong or dangerous happened.

Didn't ask factually if the government HAD prosecuted him.  Asking your opinion whether the government SHOULD prosecute him.  You realize there are varying charges commensurate with different levels of culpability, right?  You don't have to pull the trigger on the gun to be guilty.

So the guy with a loud megaphone and a significant audience who you believe shares responsibility for deaths (plural)... you also believe is not and should not be legally liable?

You're so close to admitting the flimsiness of your own accusation.  Just step over the finish line, bud, you can do it.

[Captainant 27309]

12 minutes ago, 52-80 said:

You're so close to admitting the flimsiness of your own accusation.  Just step over the finish line, bud, you can do it.

I'm not accusing rogan of anything. I'm saying he's an irresponsible and dangerous voice with a big fucking megaphone that's encouraging people to participate in riskier and more dangerous behavior. 

...what do you think I'm accusing him of? Or did you get lost in your hypotheticals again?

[wildcat09 29187]

1 hour ago, 52-80 said:

It seems, i dunno, more than trivially important, if you define in that sentence what exactly is the nature of speech people can or shouldn't be convicted for.

 

If he says "for my diet i swallow 8 whole eggs, eat exclusively elk meat, supplemented by Onnit brainfood", thats not your cue to follow.  certain not mine.

If he says "i got the covid, and my doctor prescribed me xx, yy, and zz", thats not your cue to follow either.

 

So what do you believe he said, in exact terms, that makes him responsible for "effectively kill[ing] thousands of people"?

Because if that was remotely provable, prosecutors would have his head on a spike in a court.  Instead, it's just a bunch of people getting really really angry over social media.

 

 

This is dumb as shit.

[52-80 19066]

13 minutes ago, Captainant said:

I'm not accusing rogan of anything. I'm saying he's an irresponsible and dangerous voice with a big fucking megaphone that's encouraging people to participate in riskier and more dangerous behavior. 

...what do you think I'm accusing him of?

That's what I asked, and is entirely your prerogative to answer.

Is he responsible for thousands of death?  If so, why should or shouldn't he be formally charged?

If he merely an irresponsible and dangerous voice?  If so, boohoo. 

[TurkeyChew 383]

It sounds like this thread is a microcosm of the world in that Rogan is polarizing and popular and some folks think it’s a Capitalistic Good that he’s been able to build his platform on debatably entertaining bro-talk and others think he’s a public nuisance and/or harm and would like him censored .

Edited January 14, 2022 by TurkeyChew

[Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand 13537]

2 hours ago, Bravo said:

Stupid 1st amendment. 

Lol

 

[hpslugga 4039]

2 hours ago, Sawbonz said:

Self ownage 

 

 

“That’s not what I’ve read.”

When you deal almost exclusively in circular argumentation with the explicit intent to route back to an assumed conclusion, that tends to happen.

[956 Worldwide 34313]

Why the hell would anyone spend an ounce of mental energy defending or justifying Joe Rogan's horrible fucking takes on COVID-19 and other shit?  People can be indulged or forgiven for some shitty takes if they are on balance contributing something good to the world, like a World War II vet who has retrograde social attitudes.

Here is what Joe Rogan offers society in descending order of usefulness and goodness-- a mildly amusing and entertaining podcast, some questionable comedy, talking about different punching and kicking techniques, advice on taking performance enhancing drugs, and paying people to eat goat balls on TV. 

Nothing he offers comes even close to offsetting the potential harm he's causing with all his disinformation bullshit. 

 

Edited January 14, 2022 by 956 Worldwide

[hpslugga 4039]

23 hours ago, Chooky said:

They aren't being silenced.  Over a hundred times a day you'll see people saying these things into microphones on their huge podcast, on their nationally syndicated radio program, in congressional hearings and on national television.  Being challenged or hearing opposing arguments isn't being silenced.  They just simply don't like dissent.    

And that’s what this is really about. This isn’t about free speech; this is about “let me say what I want and don’t make me look stupid for saying what I say.” 

That’s a freedom none of us have; and we shouldn’t have it either because it’s completely antithetical to free speech, which is a two-way street. You have the right to say what you want; I have the right to call you a fucking idiot for saying it. If one can’t understand that, kindly remove oneself from political discussion because clearly, one ain’t about that life.

[Captainant 27309]

20 minutes ago, TurkeyChew said:

would like him censored

you fucking snowflake conservatives. Consequences from a private company for your shitty speech isn't censorship. Censorship is the state taking punitive action against you for your speech.

[Immaculate Vibes 114]

11 hours ago, Neonmoon said:

 

 

3. Yes, he promoted Ivermectin by taking it to cure his Covid. By telling his followers that’s what he took, that’s promoting it. 

 

He also took monoclonal antibodies and mentioned it in the same video. His detractors should’ve highlighted that admission, but instead the fact that he mentioned the I word scrambled all ability to process information. Pretty silly. 

[aggie08 21379]

2 hours ago, Bravo said:

Stupid 1st amendment. 

It never ceases to amaze me that people who only know two amendments still fuck up the first one so royally.

[SizzleChest 8275]

4 minutes ago, Immaculate Vibes said:

He also took monoclonal antibodies and mentioned it in the same video. His detractors should’ve highlighted that admission, but instead the fact that he mentioned the I word scrambled all ability to process information. Pretty silly. 

So, he has self-preservation instincts?  Noted.

[956 Worldwide 34313]

4 hours ago, 52-80 said:

You listen to who you want and take away from them what you want.  Nobody should infantilize you. 

Nothing is more infantilizing than demanding the right to say stupid shit and be wrong and never have anyone tell you directly that you are stupid and wrong while forgiving your destructive behavior.  

That's literally the way grownups interact with dumbass infants. 

Edited January 14, 2022 by 956 Worldwide

[wildcat09 29187]

It's hilarious how one second these IDW fans are all in on the "the system is so corrupt that there's a global conspiracy to kill as many people as possible!" and the next are like "well if pushing disinformation killed people they would absolutely be convicted!" Just absolutely broken-brained babies.

[52-80 19066]

49 minutes ago, TurkeyChew said:

It sounds like this thread is a microcosm of the world in that Rogan is polarizing and popular and some folks think it’s a Capitalistic Good that he’s been able to build his platform on debatably entertaining bro-talk and others think he’s a public nuisance and/or harm and would like him censored .

A buncha people thinking they're the only adults grown enough to dictate permissibility for others.  See:

 

15 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

Nothing is more infantilizing than demanding the right to say stupid shit and be wrong and never have anyone tell you directly that you are stupid and wrong while forgiving your destructive behavior.  

That's literally the way grownups interact with dumbass infants. 

People's right to say stupid shit or any other kind of shit is already a default.  When did he have to demand for the right? moreover, when did he demand that you or anyone else listen to it?

6 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

It's hilarious how one second these IDW fans are all in on the "the system is so corrupt that there's a global conspiracy to kill as many people as possible!" and the next are like "well if pushing disinformation killed people they would absolutely be convicted!" Just absolutely broken-brained babies.

I'll venmo you $100 for each person in this thread you can name who is supposedly in this conspiracy, and you venmo me $1 for each person who isn't.  Deal?

[wildcat09 29187]

Wait, do you think that I meant y’all are part of a conspiracy?

Bless your heart.

[Longhorn_Fan68 33824]

if you take medical advice from Joe Rogan you deserve whatever happens to you

[956 Worldwide 34313]

20 minutes ago, 52-80 said:

A buncha people thinking they're the only adults grown enough to dictate permissibility for others.  See:

 

People's right to say stupid shit or any other kind of shit is already a default.  When did he have to demand for the right? moreover, when did he demand that you or anyone else listen to it?

I'll venmo you $100 for each person in this thread you can name who is supposedly in this conspiracy, and you venmo me $1 for each person who isn't.  Deal?

Lulz, you kind of blasted by the second clause in my sentence didn't you.  You have the right to say whatever the fuck you want anytime, but only very young children and people without control of their faculties get to say whatever they want with minimal consequences, criticism and a deep well of "second chances."

Edited January 14, 2022 by 956 Worldwide

[52-80 19066]

28 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

Wait, do you think that I meant y’all are part of a conspiracy?

Bless your heart.

You backtrack so much Chris Berman would run out of breath

Quote

It's hilarious how one second these IDW fans are all in on the "the system is so corrupt that there's a global conspiracy to kill as many people as possible!" and the next are like "well if pushing disinformation killed people they would absolutely be convicted!

who are these "fans" who are simultaneously saying both these things?  I'll raise the stake to $1000.

 

17 minutes ago, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

if you take medical advice from Joe Rogan you deserve whatever happens to you

rightfully as it should be.  is there anyone here who is supposed to be guilty of that?

[52-80 19066]

18 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

Lulz, you kind of blasted by the second clause in my sentence didn't you.  You have the right to say whatever the fuck you want anytime, but only very young children and people without control of their faculties get to say whatever they want with minimal consequences, criticism and a deep well of "second chances."

Here's the chance to explore that second clause in full:  what are the minimal consequences appropriate in this scenario and why?

[956 Worldwide 34313]

3 minutes ago, 52-80 said:

Here's the chance to explore that second clause in full:  what are the minimal consequences appropriate in this scenario and why?

Medical doctors calling him a dumbfuck and urging Spotify to take away his microphone is a good start. 

[wildcat09 29187]

I mean, at a minimum I think he should be forced to do a walk of shame where we all get to throw rotten produce at him. He can keep his clothes on, though.

[52-80 19066]

2 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

[1] Medical doctors calling him a dumbfuck and urging [2]Spotify to take away his microphone is a good start. 

(1) everyones got a mic so have at it

(2) people pining for this are gonna be in for a hell of a heartbreak...

[hayden_horn 11360]

imagine spending any amount of time defending this meathead bro. 

at some point you have to ask yourself "why am i spending all this time defending joe fucking rogan," right? 

[hpslugga 4039]

6 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

I mean, at a minimum I think he should be forced to do a walk of shame where we all get to throw rotten produce at him. He can keep his clothes on, though.

Yeah but the COVID patients he convinced to take ivermectin get to shit their projectile diarrhea onto him.

Edited January 14, 2022 by hpslugga

[52-80 19066]

7 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

imagine spending any amount of time defending this meathead bro. 

at some point you have to ask yourself "why am i spending all this time defending joe fucking rogan," right? 

hey man, theres a 50 page thread somewhere on this website about charlie strong and another 200 page about vince young's nfl career where you can lodge your concern

[Longhorn_Fan68 33824]

2 minutes ago, 52-80 said:

hey man, theres a 50 page thread somewhere on this website about charlie strong and another 200 page about vince young's nfl career where you can lodge your concern

[YChang 3430]

25 minutes ago, 52-80 said:

Here's the chance to explore that second clause in full:  what are the minimal consequences appropriate in this scenario and why?

I mean isn't being critiqued/called out by other parts of society basically the minimal consequences of his actions? Not trying to bait you or be an ass but I'm a bit confused... are you saying if there's not a state sanctioned or some sort of punitive punishment, then it means he hasn't done anything wrong?

[hpslugga 4039]

2 minutes ago, YChang said:

I mean isn't being critiqued/called out by other parts of society basically the minimal consequences of his actions? Not trying to bait you or be an ass but I'm a bit confused... are you saying if there's not a state sanctioned or some sort of punitive punishment, then it means he hasn't done anything wrong?

Confused recipients tend to be confused by confused senders.

[Longhorn_Fan68 33824]

1 minute ago, hpslugga said:

Confused recipients tend to be confused by confused senders.

[aggie08 21379]

This is anecdotal, sure, but there's definitely a different tenor when encountering an avid Rogan listener these days. A few years ago, when someone told you that they listen to Rogan religiously, your immediate thoughts were "Ok cool, you like to get high and ramble about everything and nothing. Who was on last week?" Now, when someone asks if you caught the latest episode, you reflexively start bracing for the crypto or "how mRNA 'vaccines' aren't technically vaccines" diatribes that they've got locked and loaded.