Title : I'm amused by the combination of the headline and "at least somewhat correctly."
link : I'm amused by the combination of the headline and "at least somewhat correctly."
I'm amused by the combination of the headline and "at least somewhat correctly."
I'm reading "Joe Rogan Irresponsibly Suggests Kari Lake Has a Point About Election Fraud/Joe Rogan quickly veered into conspiracy territory in his most recent podcast" (Daily Beast). It begins:
Joe Rogan on Thursday let loose another doozy of a false claim, suggesting that despite a number of failed lawsuits and months of fruitless efforts, Arizona gubernatorial candidate Kari Lake may actually be correct about the wide-scale voter fraud she’s so far been unable to prove.
“It looks like there’s real fraud,” Rogan suggested during an episode of his podcast. “At the very least, there were voting machines that weren’t working properly,” Rogan said, at least somewhat correctly, an apparent reference to an incident in which some printers in Maricopa County voting centers didn’t make dark enough marks on ballots—a technical problem that former President Donald Trump also seized on at the time.
Boldface added.
Here's the clip that Kari Lake is sharing on Twitter:
I've transcribed it. Joe says:🔥WATCH & SHARE:
— Kari Lake (@KariLake) August 3, 2023
Joe Rogan sides with @KariLake on Arizona's Fraudulent Election
People are ditching the Fake News in exchange for truth-tellers like @JoeRogan.
You love to see it. https://t.co/Q3GcAeuHbp pic.twitter.com/sxP8GtSZkV
"How much election fraud do you think is real?... Because I don't think it's zero.... It's not zero, I think we could all agree it's not zero.... And we know these voting machines can be fucked with. And we know that there's some irregularities. All that Kari Lake stuff in Arizona that they're trying to dismiss. It doesn't look like that's invalid. It looks like there's real fraud there. It looks like real shenanigans there. At the very least, there was voting machines that weren't working properly. And it seems very suspicious that a lot of them were in Republican areas. There's a lot of shenanigans. And I think there's coordinated efforts to make sure that certain people get elected. I don't know how far they go, but I know it's not zero."
The Daily Beast article calls this "full-on conspiracy territory." Joe just said "it's not zero." He said "it's not zero" 3 times. Election fraud is something more than nothing.
How is that "full-on conspiracy territory"?! It's the most modest expression of curiosity on the topic as opposed to robotic mouthing of the opinion that the authorities have handed down and are straining to enforce. This Daily Beast article is part of the straining. If they're really so sure what they're saying is 100% true, why must they strain so hard? Why are they so afraid of debate? Why do they go to extremes denouncing those who entertain the possibility that it might be something less than 100% true?
That last question of mine is the thought that stimulates ideation of far-reaching conspiracy, not Joe's modest "it's not zero" observation.
And the article admits that Joe's less-than-zero remark was made "at least somewhat correctly"! But it was made "irresponsibly." You see? This is not about truth. This is about message control and the belief that the truth is too dangerous to explore. You want to talk about threats to democracy?
I'm reading "Joe Rogan Irresponsibly Suggests Kari Lake Has a Point About Election Fraud/Joe Rogan quickly veered into conspiracy territory in his most recent podcast" (Daily Beast). It begins:
Joe Rogan on Thursday let loose another doozy of a false claim, suggesting that despite a number of failed lawsuits and months of fruitless efforts, Arizona gubernatorial candidate Kari Lake may actually be correct about the wide-scale voter fraud she’s so far been unable to prove.
“It looks like there’s real fraud,” Rogan suggested during an episode of his podcast. “At the very least, there were voting machines that weren’t working properly,” Rogan said, at least somewhat correctly, an apparent reference to an incident in which some printers in Maricopa County voting centers didn’t make dark enough marks on ballots—a technical problem that former President Donald Trump also seized on at the time.
Boldface added.
Here's the clip that Kari Lake is sharing on Twitter:
🔥WATCH & SHARE:
— Kari Lake (@KariLake) August 3, 2023
Joe Rogan sides with @KariLake on Arizona's Fraudulent Election
People are ditching the Fake News in exchange for truth-tellers like @JoeRogan.
You love to see it. https://t.co/Q3GcAeuHbp pic.twitter.com/sxP8GtSZkV
"How much election fraud do you think is real?... Because I don't think it's zero.... It's not zero, I think we could all agree it's not zero.... And we know these voting machines can be fucked with. And we know that there's some irregularities. All that Kari Lake stuff in Arizona that they're trying to dismiss. It doesn't look like that's invalid. It looks like there's real fraud there. It looks like real shenanigans there. At the very least, there was voting machines that weren't working properly. And it seems very suspicious that a lot of them were in Republican areas. There's a lot of shenanigans. And I think there's coordinated efforts to make sure that certain people get elected. I don't know how far they go, but I know it's not zero."
The Daily Beast article calls this "full-on conspiracy territory." Joe just said "it's not zero." He said "it's not zero" 3 times. Election fraud is something more than nothing.
How is that "full-on conspiracy territory"?! It's the most modest expression of curiosity on the topic as opposed to robotic mouthing of the opinion that the authorities have handed down and are straining to enforce. This Daily Beast article is part of the straining. If they're really so sure what they're saying is 100% true, why must they strain so hard? Why are they so afraid of debate? Why do they go to extremes denouncing those who entertain the possibility that it might be something less than 100% true?
That last question of mine is the thought that stimulates ideation of far-reaching conspiracy, not Joe's modest "it's not zero" observation.
And the article admits that Joe's less-than-zero remark was made "at least somewhat correctly"! But it was made "irresponsibly." You see? This is not about truth. This is about message control and the belief that the truth is too dangerous to explore. You want to talk about threats to democracy?
Thus articles I'm amused by the combination of the headline and "at least somewhat correctly."
You now read the article I'm amused by the combination of the headline and "at least somewhat correctly." with the link address https://welcometoamerican.blogspot.com/2023/08/im-amused-by-combination-of-headline.html
Related Posts :
76 | Lakers host Hawks, November 11, 2018 +Next game vs. Portland Trailblazers
World Leaders Gather In Paris To Remember The 100th Year Anniversary Of The End Of The First World War
French President Macron Calls For The Rejection Of Nationalism. Labels It As Unpatriotic
The Death of Shame
33 68 86 156 | The final episode of Anthony Bourdain's Parts Unknown, November 11, 2018, 156-days after his death
0 Response to "I'm amused by the combination of the headline and "at least somewhat correctly.""
Post a Comment