Joshe

This is false according to ChatGPT. https://chatgpt.com/share/67440349-2ff0-8010-bdf2-783e7836afe2 @What Am I I don’t have an explanation and without insider/trade knowledge, I can’t even begin to speculate the motive. Even with insider knowledge, without what is most likely classified intel, you still couldn’t be confident one way or the other. It’s not wise to rely on “appearances” regarding things of a complex nature. If my family found The Atheist’s Bible on my bookshelf, it would appear to them that I’m an atheist and if they saw me reading the King James Bible, it would appear to them I’m interested in becoming a Christian. The more complex a thing is, the more unreliable “appearances” are. Rogan consistently makes this epistemic error, as does the right in general.

There’s a new narrative being adopted to justify this clown show. They’re saying that in normal times, you want steady, competent people running your nation, but we’re not in normal times and so now is the time for risk, adventure, and ambition. In 2016, they justified it by “needing a chaos agent to let our government know they need to shape up”. My bet is, this will be the rationalization that goes mainstream and sticks. JP and Piers articulate it with enthusiasm here: Also, Rogan is blaming the US and Ukraine for potential WW3. Rogan is in the deep end now and he will only get more radical. He will become the most effective useful idiot / propagandist the world has ever known. The post-truth world is about to blow up, hopefully just metaphorically.

Crackpot: The term crackpot refers to someone who holds or promotes eccentric, bizarre, or unscientific ideas, often with a disregard for evidence or rationality. It seems you’re arguing semantics. What I meant was, “respect science”. A layperson who concocts theories which get scientifically debunked and still clings to his theories is an arrogant idiot, for lack of a better term. RFK doesn’t respect science. He thinks he know better than health scientists. He’s made several verifiably false claims. If you made a list of traits you wouldn’t want to see in the person most influential in shaping public health policy, how high up on the list would “Rejects scientific consensus and clings to pet theories” be? How does it affect your estimation of him? Do you give it any weight at all? Do you view his rejection of scientific consensus as potentially good for breakthroughs? Lol

I know a guy with exceptional social skills but is still misogynistic. He has a repressed inferiority complex because he’s short and was always picked on for it, but he’s a popular social butterfly. I think you’re spot on about the root cause though. They need women to validate their worth and when they don’t, they hate them for it.

My read is based on very few data points. What data do you use to assess him? When sizing someone up, you can’t just look at their physical appearance and what they say, at least not with most people. You can do that with Bernie Sanders because he has integrity. The biggest strike against him(based on very limited data) is he’s a crackpot. If he just believed in science like normal people, I might have high hopes for him doing good things. Again, I haven’t jumped to final conclusions about him because I don’t have enough info, but from the little I have, if I had to make a call about him right now, I’d have to bet on him being a high functioning narcissist seeking all the things those types seek. I’m not gonna give someone who aligned with Trump the benefit of the doubt, especially when he’s a crackpot. To be clear, I’m not really saying anything bad about him, just what I think is likely, and even that wouldn’t make him a bad guy if he has good intentions. Also, I shouldn’t have used the word grifter. It’s probably more likely he’s just a delusional narcissist who wants recognition, but I guess we’ll find out the truth soon enough.

11-22-2024 Texas approves new Bible-based curriculum for elementary schools. Teachers can opt in, but state is offering financial incentive of $60 a student for participating school districts https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/nov/22/texas-approves-bible-based-curriculum-elementary-schools

I literally haven’t assumed anything about his diet, but you have. He might be really healthy, but my point was that muscle mass and his talking about health should not be used to presume he’s a champion of good health, mostly because there are aspects of his character that point to a lack of integrity and a disregard for truth. From my view, it’s safer to assume he is a grifting narcissist rather than a genuine champion of good health. I could turn out to be wrong, but in a game of imperfect information, you have to act on the best information you have, and right now, that info points to devilry, not virtue.

He’s probably healthier than most his age. Being a rich elite makes health much easier. You can build muscle like he has while eating fruit loops for breakfast and Oreos for dinner. Optimal diet is better for health than optimal muscle mass, as is optimal sleep. For most guys with that much muscle, it is mostly about the image. The following indicates something as well, albeit, more abstract and not as easy to see as big muscles: Big muscle man Hunts for sport Thinks his ideas are superior to world renowned scientists, even though he’s not a scientist Aligned himself with Trump and calls known right wing grifters friends He seems like an opportunist operating on a niche narcissism, rather than a paragon of health and virtue.

Good epistemology + pure observation + deep contemplation hones intuitive faculties where patterns are noticed by the subconscious and sends them up to the conscious for processing. ”The internal process begins with deliberate observation, which provides the intuitive faculty with a rich foundation of raw data. Over time, patterns begin to emerge through intuition—subtle connections and relationships that are not immediately accessible to conscious thought. These patterns eventually surface in moments of clarity, often experienced as a "click," where everything suddenly aligns and makes sense. At this point, the conscious mind evaluates the insight for validity and refines it into something actionable. This process, driven by the emergence of understanding through intuition, becomes sharper and more effective with consistent observation and reflection.”

Who gives a shit? Is this supposed to indicate good health or a well-developed character? Even if he’s all natural, it says nothing. He probably has a gym in his mansion. It’s not difficult to walk to your gym and meet your personal trainer for a daily workout. The average man can figure out how to workout daily. If I had a 6 pack, I wouldn’t be caught without a shirt, because it’s fucking cringe. LOOK AT ME!!!!!

Pete Hegseth openly advocates for using the military against the left. Someone like this is exactly who you'd want if you were planning on executing something like Project 2025. This is the same mentality of the president of The Heritage Foundation, when he said "The revolution will be bloodless, if the left allows it to be". "Pete Hegseth, Donald Trump’s pick for defense secretary, has written in a book that he could imagine a scenario in which the US armed forces would be used violently in American domestic politics. Hegseth’s 2020 book exhorts conservatives to undertake “an AMERICAN CRUSADE”, to “mock, humiliate, intimidate, and crush our leftist opponents”, to “attack first” in response to a left he identifies with “sedition”, and he writes that the book “lays out the strategy we must employ in order to defeat America’s internal enemies”. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/nov/22/trump-defense-secretary-pete-hegseth-book

I assume Leo has enough self-awareness to not be getting high on putting himself above others or demeaning them. I interpret his words like "Hey, I'm playing this game and crushing it... what are you doing? Are you gonna crush it too, because you can if you want?" I see it as a call upwards, not an attack or arrogance. But IDK Leo personally, so maybe there are aspects about him I'm not aware of. I just give him the benefit of the doubt that he's not engaging in petty ego stuff. If this is correct, it seems a lot of people project their insecurities onto him. Maybe this style resonates most with A-type personalities who have high self-confidence and self-efficacy. I prefer to be surrounded by people more developed than myself because it's the best thing for growth. If they taunt or tease me about something I want to excel in but I'm making errors or have stagnated, it can strengthen my resolve and remind me of my values and vision and make me want to increase my efforts. That's how I've always rationalized Leo's seeming arrogance—as a call upwards.

@What Am I , @sholomar When people you care about reject scientific fact and embrace quackery, such as adding a drop of bleach into their morning coffee to clean them out, would your approach be to respect their belief that bleach is good for them? Would that bother you? What if it occured on a regular basis and they were constantly making poor life choices based on absolute falsehoods? What would your response to that be? Respect? If you don't have anybody in your life who is a common fool, then maybe it's hard to understand the struggle. If this is the case, you might not be aware of the degree falsehood is flourishing and truth is diminishing. But if you are aware, you will naturally ask "why?". And the answer is all the things I mentioned. It has nothing to do with ideology or hate. It comes from a strong desire to prevent suffering. FALSEHOOD HAS A COST! The degree to which we deviate from truth is the degree to which we fuck ourselves. In case you haven't noticed, we're now collectively drifting very far from truth. Also, the biggest problem is not the people who know not what they do. It's the people who know those people are easily fooled and who take advantage of them, simultaneously being praised by the people they're taking advantage of. The whole thing is just sick.

It's basically a zero % chance. Americans wouldn't allow it. There would be a massive rebellion long before it ever came to people like you being targeted. Just think of the millions that rank much higher than you in the anti-Trump camp. They would be targeted first and that process would trigger massive revolt, even among the right. The only way this happens is if we become like North Korea or Russia.

@What Am I If truth is the guide, there's no need for ideology or camps. I've watched my low conscious family members try to be healthy and they fail miserably at it—largely due to the information they seek, which is usually a magic pill, and YouTuber who tells them what they want to hear. Then, they call truth false, no matter how vetted or compelling the evidence. This is the problem. Low consciousness, bad epistemics, willful ignorance, and stubborn refusal to accept what is true, which seems to stem from an unconscious emotional bias. It's the same problem we find ourselves in when we discuss politics or any other topic of consequence. I'm sorry to tell you, but some things are detrimental and others are beneficial. If someone tells you cyanide is all natural and organic and a little drop here and there is good for you, they're right that it's natural and organic, which might make them think it's good for you, but that's false. There is no squaring that circle. Truth is what it is, no matter how much people want it to be otherwise. How do you suggest this problem be dealt with?

I understand the idea and it is good that something made them start thinking about health and what they're putting in their bodies, but there's a problem. Biochemistry and human health is complex. Dealing with complexity requires sound epistemics and without it, tinkering with the body is dangerous. My sister’s now looking up ingredients in vaccines and jumping to bad conclusions. Her kid has health issues and was recommended the Prevnar 20 vaccine, but she found out it has aluminum phosphate and is now against it. She’s furious that the healthcare system approves injecting “heavy metals” into kids. She thinks statins are a net negative (big pharma/FDA are poisoning people to line their pockets). She lets her kids drink Coke but not Coke Zero (thinks aspartame is worse than sugar). So, it's good they're thinking about health, but also problematic. They often end up doing harm to themselves and their children. They end up drinking blue silver their preachman sold them and taking supplements that are a complete waste or damaging. They call healthy, unhealthy. Like how many currently don't believe high serum cholesterol is bad and they're against statins, so those folks will see an early grave. There won't be a huge health initiative on the right. They might get healthy from the working out at the gym, because appearances matter more to them than anything, but they don't care about cholesterol, free radicals, etc. This applies to most Americans, but the right is more likely to reject science, seek magic pills, and rely on poor information sources. Case in point: RFK thinks AIDS is fake and vaccines cause autism. Sound epistemics are needed if health is to be pursued.

Healthy foods like whole grains and beans go a long way and are cheap and can be used to make a ton of dishes that taste really good, but they'd rather spend $25 on pizza. The REAL reason Americans eat like shit is because they're lazy, always taking the path of least resistance, and because they care more about instant gratification than health. This being the case, they rationalize it all away with "healthy food is too expensive". You can make an extremely healthy meal that would last you all week for less than $20. I do a daily smoothie with all organic plant foods (spinach, banana, blueberries, date), fortified with ground flaxseed, chia seeds, turmeric, black pepper, pumpkin seeds, walnuts. I haven't added the cost up but I'm sure it's less than 2 or 3 dollars a day, which could easily be offset by eliminating expenditure on bad habits such as blowing money on fast food and convenient stores, eating out, buying lotto tickets, coffees, soda, and dozens of other bad habits Americans partake in that they don't mind dispensing with their hard-earned cash. They don't eat healthy because they don't give a fuck about it and they're too lazy to set it all up. My right wing sister is all of sudden worried about chemicals and ingredients in foods and she blames it all on corrupt food companies, big pharma, and the FDA. Interesting how she's just now concerned about it. I wonder if she might have been manipulated just like she was manipulated in 2020 when she all of sudden she was going to "save the children" from pedophiles. Now she's all of a sudden amped up about health... got it!

Nice to hear. I can see how peeps these days fall into it. Most can't break out because they don't have the self-awareness to see what it does to them and what they're doing with it. You're a lucky one!

How did you come to see through it?

Donald Trump Nominates WWE Co-Founder Linda McMahon as Education Secretary McMahon serves as board chair at the Trump-aligned think tank America First Policy Institute. In her 2010 U.S. Senate campaign, McMahon's team implemented a voter registration drive at the University of Connecticut, offering $5 bonuses for each Republican voter registered. Linda McMahon has been linked to controversies involving her husband, Vince McMahon, including allegations of sexual misconduct and a federal investigation into sex trafficking. While she has not been directly implicated, her association with these issues has drawn public scrutiny. "Linda McMahon’s lack of direct experience in education policy, administration, or teaching raises significant doubts about her qualifications to serve as Secretary of Education. While her leadership roles in WWE and the Small Business Administration demonstrate administrative and managerial capabilities, these do not translate to the expertise needed to oversee the complex challenges of the U.S. education system, such as curriculum development, equity issues, and compliance with federal laws like Title IX. Her nomination appears to prioritize loyalty and business acumen over the specialized knowledge traditionally expected for this role." It's odd that most of Trump's picks have been involved in sex trafficking investigations.

Large circle of concern + discernment + valuing of integrity + duty to warn + recognition of the populace putting the polar opposite of that which is good on a pedestal to idolize = A person who denounces Trump to the degree that he is praised. When over half the U.S population not only condones but praises such a con artist, which serves to degrade human life and the virtues most people on this forum would claim to value, people who care about those things will speak up. If you're not a native English speaker and not from America or have not spent considerable time here, it's highly unlikely that you can understand what Trump is. So if that's you, I'd be careful in thinking I know what Trump is. You guys keep thinking it's a political issue or bias. It's not that people are sounding the alarm about his ideology, because he has none. They are sounding the alarm that goodness itself is under attack and the purpose is an attempt to make them see that which they fail to see. Wise people aren't so much against Trump's con artistry and deception as they are against the American people's embrace of it. THAT is what all the noise is about. If people knew Trump was a total bullshit con artist who lies every time his mouth opens and doesn't care at all about anyone, much less America, then there would be no need for sounding the alarm. The whole point of sounding the alarm is to wake you the fuck up to your ignorance of what Trump is and the implications of his widespread embrace. We have a totally unwitting population who cannot see he throws even his closest allies under the bus and that he will lie to every single fucking group he talks to and tell them all he loves them and will deliver everything they want... and they believe it. Wise people know everything that comes out of his mouth is a lie and they can, clear as day, see the rot coming from the top down. If there is growing love and support for someone who tells lies everytime he speaks, and the people who hear them clap and grow even fonder of him.... People who can see where this leads, people with integrity, people who care about good things, will be bothered that the people fail to see. That's why integrous people are so serious on this matter. Don't mistake them for ideological, biased leftists, just because you yourself cannot see the nature of Trump, Trumpism, it's evolution, and what the implications of those are, because if you could see, Leo's stance would not boggle your mind. It would make perfect sense.

True. Of course the left would bring up cheating, especially after the last election. But it’s wise to not forget the story of the boy who cried wolf. There might be a natural tendency to reject claims based on the fact that you knew the lies were coming because you know the nature of things. I fit into this category and have taken no other claims of fraud seriously because they were mere speculation. However, this theory has the appearance of validity. We know Trump, Musk, and Russia have no qualms about rigging the election and we know they have the resources. Without knowing more about the voting system design and hearing from other experts, the safe play is to not accept this theory, but until then, I wouldn’t assume it’s false either. Also, this guy didn’t produce the video thumbnail. He just did a short interview on the guy’s show who did. He’s a lifelong Republican. .

Any intelligent thoughts on this? Duty to Warn Letter - to VP Harris - Re: Election 2024 Summary of Duty to Warn Letter to Vice President Kamala Harris: Author & Background: Stephen Spoonamore, former CEO/CTO of multiple tech firms specializing in hacking and counter-hacking. Experience with government agencies (DoD, DHS, State Dept.) and as an after-action reviewer for 9/11 data failures. Lifelong Republican prioritizing democracy over party loyalty. Purpose of the Letter: Urges Vice President Harris to reverse her concession and demand hand recounts in seven swing states. Asserts clear indications of deliberate hacking and vote manipulation in the 2024 Presidential Election. Key Claims of Election Hacking: Approximately 600,000 Trump-only “bullet ballots” (votes for Trump without down-ballot selections) were added in swing states, reversing outcomes. These anomalies are absent in non-swing states and push Trump’s totals beyond recount thresholds in key states (e.g., AZ, MI, NC, WI). Claims the manipulation required modest programming skills, limited access to tabulators or ePollBook data, and a small team (6-10 people). Analysis of Vote Irregularities: Unprecedented levels of Trump-only ballots in swing states: AZ: 123,000+ Trump bullet ballots (7.2% of total vote). NV: 43,000+ Trump bullet ballots (5.5% of total vote). NC: 350,000+ Trump bullet ballots (>11% of total vote). Contrasted with normal levels of bullet ballots (<1%) in neighboring non-swing states. Proposed Hacking Mechanisms: Hack Part 1: Creation of ghost voter data using pledged Trump supporter addresses (e.g., Elon Musk’s $1M lottery database). Hack Part 2: Matching manipulated ePollBook data with tabulator results, potentially through network connectivity or physical access. Recommendations: Full hand recounts in swing states to expose discrepancies between paper ballots and electronic results. Immediate investigation into data anomalies and potential co-conspirators in tabulation centers. Additional Concerns: Bomb threats at tabulation centers could have been used as a diversion to introduce fraudulent ballots. Suggests a connection between the election hack and broader cyber operations by foreign actors. Call to Action: VP Harris is uniquely positioned to demand recounts across all affected jurisdictions. The author and volunteers plan to continue investigating but stress the need for official action. Conclusion: Appeals to Harris’s responsibility to defend the integrity of the election and democracy. Offers personal assistance and outlines the importance of swift and thorough investigation.

Yeah, I mean, teams of world-class hackers exist. Ever see Mr. Robot? I think one reason it might not be a common idea is that most people are tech-illiterate. They have no idea how computers work, networks, systems, vulnerabilities, social engineering, etc. Most don’t have a clue about Russian hack teams working round-the-clock looking for exploits. All it takes is one phished fool to download a Word doc. Also, I wonder how modern and secure our election software is. You’d think it would be set up to only send data one way (out). According to this guys theory, data was sent and written to the machines, which seems easy to prevent.

Trump appoints TV celebrity Dr. Oz to head up CMS, an agency responsible for overseeing Medicare, Medicaid, and the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) for more than one hundred million Americans, as well as implementing policies to ensure access to healthcare, managing healthcare spending, and improving program efficiency. Implications of Dr. Oz’s lack of experience in managing large federal healthcare programs: Policy and Operational Challenges: Without relevant experience, he may struggle to navigate the complexities of healthcare policy, potentially leading to inefficiencies or mismanagement in administering these vital programs. Increased Influence of Ideology or Personal Bias: A lack of expertise might make him more reliant on advisors, lobbyists, or political ideologies rather than evidence-based decision-making, potentially skewing policies toward special interests. Impact on Beneficiaries: Mismanagement or poorly informed policy decisions could disrupt access to healthcare for millions of Americans who depend on these programs, particularly vulnerable populations like seniors, low-income families, and children. Undermined Credibility of CMS: Appointing someone without relevant experience may erode trust in the agency’s ability to fulfill its mission, both among the public and healthcare professionals. Potential for Controversy: Dr. Oz's celebrity status and history of promoting controversial or unproven health remedies could draw scrutiny and criticism, overshadowing the critical work of CMS and potentially politicizing its operations. The appointment could create an environment where public health priorities take a backseat to political or personal agendas, with serious consequences for healthcare policy and administration.