The United States has bombed Iran

[lurker]

He's had countless "doctors" on. He brings them on to spread misinformation about Covid or to promote alternative medicine. These doctors are usually disgraced within their field. A lot of the Covid ones were even specialized in that area. A lot of them also had vested interests in alt medicine so they just made up —--- .

You weren't around here on 4m in 19/20 when Covid19 was around, as I had my own personal opinion about the whole debacle. I know nothing more than what you’ve told me about Rogan’s take on it. If you wish, since I don’t want to rehash all of my thoughts on Covid19, look up some old posting from back then — and we can have a conversation at a later date another time, if you want.

[lurker]

Define "woke". I'll help you out. You can't because it's a bull—--word.

Sure I can. And I will, given the chance to explain.


The word Woke goes all the way back to the 1930’s or earlier, with varying meanings or definitions As used in the context of my posting at the time —- duly noting as I’m not wanting to argue, not my intent, but here is my definition <"following an intolerant and moralising ideology" > of the common nowadays word Woke, from Wiki —-

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woke

2019–present: as a pejorative


By 2019, opponents of progressive social movements were using the term mockingly orsarcastically,implying that "wokeness" was an insincere form ofperformative activism. Woke has been used ironically by the right wing to ridicule perceived left-wing "social justice warriors" and "snowflakes", in connection with mockery ofMillennials andGen Z. Some leftists, such as writerDaniel Bernabé and philosopherSusan Neiman, criticize wokeness as a form of tribalism which divides the working class and distracts from the universalist class struggle. The term performative wokeness has been used to refer to social media activity perceived as a self-serving and superficial form of activism, i.e. "slacktivism".British journalistSteven Poole comments that the term woke is used to mock "overrighteous liberalism". Thispejorative sense of woke means "following an intolerant and moralising ideology" according to The Economist.

Nonetheless, and the above duly noted, if you say you are not a Woke person, I have no reason to not believe you, and I’ll apologize for inferring that you are Woke. Fair enough?

[lurker]

I'm more centrist then you think —--

Fair enough. But a greater number of your posts really do infer otherwise —-- so you know. Just trying to be helpful so maybe your future posts can come across not so Leftwing whacky.

—---- but you'd know more than me.

You had a very nice post going and you had to end it with that, SMH, and it wasn’t necessary.

[lurker]

https://youtu.be/mYVzme2fybU

This is a very interesting episode. I'd highly encourage people to put aside their reservations with Bernie and have a listen.

Those of you who feel the system is "broken" will likely find agreement with this.

Sorry, I don’t have the time for an hour and a half. I'll look for some highlights.

[Tyy7777]

You weren't around here on 4m in 19/20 when Covid19 was around, as I had my own personal opinion about the whole debacle. I know nothing more than what you’ve told me about Rogan’s take on it. If you wish, since I don’t want to rehash all of my thoughts on Covid19, look up some old posting from back then — and we can have a conversation at a later date another time, if you want.

I'll decline lol.

I've had enough with that topic. Best to just move on.

[Tyy7777]

Sure I can. And I will, given the chance to explain.


The word Woke goes all the way back to the 1930’s or earlier, with varying meanings or definitions As used in the context of my posting at the time —- duly noting as I’m not wanting to argue, not my intent, but here is my definition <"following an intolerant and moralising ideology" > of the common nowadays word Woke, from Wiki —-




Nonetheless, and the above duly noted, if you say you are not a Woke person, I have no reason to not believe you, and I’ll apologize for inferring that you are Woke. Fair enough?

My point with the word is that it doesn't really have a clear meaning.

Sounds fair.

My motto is to live and let live. That's my approach to social issues.

[Tyy7777]

Fair enough. But a greater number of your posts really do infer otherwise —-- so you know. Just trying to be helpful so maybe your future posts can come across not so Leftwing whacky.





You had a very nice post going and you had to end it with that, SMH, and it wasn’t necessary.

Sorry about the end there.

It's just I think the political spectrum is very skewed in the country at the moment.

[Tyy7777]

Sorry, I don’t have the time for an hour and a half. I'll look for some highlights.

Fair enough.

I think Bernie is very misunderstood. I don't agree with his approaches on everything but I think he makes some very good points.

I don't think he's far away from the people on here.

He mainly spoke about the threat of automation on jobs, money in politics, healthcare and overall the issues facing the working/middle class. He also made a big point about how companies aren't owned by people anymore. They're owned by big firms. People don't get treated the same anymore. Just a number.

[Morgs153]

https://publicistpaper.com/bernie-sanders-net-worth-in-2025-a-look-at-the-financial-life-of-americas-progressive-senator/

Nah. He's nothing like me in regards to wealth, net worth, investments (Amazon, Pfizer, ExxonMobil, Lockheed Martin, and Nike), property ownership and his car collection. Big Pharma hasn't given me $4 million in donations. I have two properties, my residence and a rental home. I don't have ten properties valued at $7 million. He has a penchant for exotic cars, I have a penchant for my F-150.

Nor do I care to lean toward socialism. I've had several actual working jobs in my life, retired from a 30 year career in one professional occupation and still have a part time job as a heavy equipment operator and truck driver. Bernie has had only one job, a life long politician. I sometimes understand his schtick and his appeal for some but at 83 years old it's probably time to pass the hammer and sickle on. My neighbor up the road used to live in Vermont and Bernie was his rep back in the day and he's filled me in about some things, and they weren't all bad either.

Boy, did this thread go off the rails.

[Tyy7777]

https://publicistpaper.com/bernie-sa...ssive-senator/

Nah. He's nothing like me in regards to wealth, net worth, investments (Amazon, Pfizer, ExxonMobil, Lockheed Martin, and Nike), property ownership and his car collection. Big Pharma hasn't given me $4 million in donations. I have two properties, my residence and a rental home. I don't have ten properties valued at $7 million. He has a penchant for exotic cars, I have a penchant for my F-150.

Nor do I care to lean toward socialism. I've had several actual working jobs in my life, retired from a 30 year career in one professional occupation and still have a part time job as a heavy equipment operator and truck driver. Bernie has had only one job, a life long politician. I sometimes understand his schtick and his appeal for some but at 83 years old it's probably time to pass the hammer and sickle on. My neighbor up the road used to live in Vermont and Bernie was his rep back in the day and he's filled me in about some things, and they weren't all bad either.

Boy, did this thread go off the rails.

Oh boy, I knew this was coming.

Firstly. Is Trump closer? The billionaire. The one who has received over a billion dollars in donations? That guy?

I don't get this narrative with Bernie. Republicans flock to look at his net worth while supporting a billionaire draft dodger.

Secondly, your figures are wrong. He doesn't have 10 properties, he has 3. He has a home in a middle class Burlington, VT neighborhood. He has a home in Washington DC and he has a summer lake house. That's very modest for someone who has devoted 44 years of his life to public office. His net worth is around $3 Million according to most sources. Again, very modest for 44 years of public office. He's also wrote two books. He doesn't own individual stocks, only mutual funds. There's no evidence of him having a car collection. Bernie received $1.4 Million from the Pharma industry but it was all from rank-and-file employees. He rejects donations from executives. Bernie actually spoke about health in the podcast and said he agrees with what RFK wants do in that respect.

Thirdly, Bernie says he wants to see something similar to the Nordic model which isn't even socialist itself. He wants to decrease wealth inequality. How is that a bad thing? He wants to ensure the very top are being taxed effectively. He wants to break up the big wall street firms. He wants healthcare for all. He wants education to be more accessible. How are these bad things?

I'm not on board the Bernie train per se but he has a very good vision. I just don't think he is pragmatic enough but he's worth listening to. For an 83 year old he's still very with it. He's sharper than Trump and Biden that's for sure.

Bernie has had more than one job. He has worked as an early childhood teacher, a psychiatric aide, a carpenter, filmmaker and writer. I assume you have your reservations about politics in general and subsequently as a career but 44 years in public office is one hell of an achievement.

[Morgs153]

Yeah but here's the thing about Trump. He's never pretended to be something he's not in regards to his personal wealth. He was born on third base and hasn't tried to convince people he hit a triple. He owns his image and who he is and how he's made his way in life before politics not like the inside trading grifters of the left who are all about the - woe us little people like little ol' me, all while enriching themselves and getting fat off a life in politics.

[Tyy7777]

Yeah but here's the thing about Trump. He's never pretended to be something he's not in regards to his personal wealth. He was born on third base and hasn't tried to convince people he hit a triple. He owns his image and who he is and how he's made his way in life before politics not like the inside trading grifters of the left who are all about the - woe us little people like little ol' me, all while enriching themselves and getting fat off a life in politics.

Who do you honestly think has the interests of working class Americans at their heat more? The guy worth $3 Million or the guy worth $5 Billion? If you honestly think it's the guy worth $5 Billion then I've got a bridge to sell you.

Trump's entire rise is based off trying to be relatable to working class Americans and he's been very effective at doing so. He's nothing like his supporters. It's an act.

Trump has been involved in 130 lawsuits related to workers being mistreated, usually not being paid for their work. Here's an example. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...uits/85297274/

Trump used ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS on a building project and didn't even PAY THEM ALL THE TIME AND WHEN HE DID HE PAID THE $5 AN HOUR. The source for that? His own secretary of state Marco Rubio, who cited a lawsuit. https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/docu...ts-build-trump

You really think that guy would give a sh1t about you?

I've spoken about insider trading before. People on both sides do it. It's not a left v right thing.

You've clearly not bothered to read my rundown on Bernie. He doesn't trade individual stocks. He doesn't take money from executives. He's only worth $3 Million after 44 YEARS. He owns just one more property than you.

Take a second to actually think from a neutral position about what you're saying and what the facts are. Trump doesn't care about the working class. Wake up.

[lurker]

Tyy7777, your comments above got me thinking —- just changing one word, twice, then placing three sentences in MY context.

Obama’s entire rise is based off trying to be relatable to working class Americans and he's been very effective at doing so. He's nothing like his supporters. It's an act. You really think that guy would give a sh1t about you? Obama doesn't care about the working class. Wake up.

Not trying to start a pi$$ing match, but Obama didn’t give a sh^% about me — or a lot of OTHER people like me.

[lurker]

I know you guys are talking about Bernie and his war chest of donor donations, but let’s be realistic in the grand scheme of reality in the world I live in —---

Nationwide, the story is much the same. Harris is ahead of Trump in overall fundraising ($678.2 million vs. $309.2 million), spending ($445.3 vs. $178.4 million), and cash on hand ($235.4 million vs. $134.5 million). Based on campaign statements and media report scontributions to Harris surged in August—when the Democratic Party held its national convention—and dwarfed donations to Trump ($190 million to $45 million).

[Tyy7777]

Tyy7777, your comments above got me thinking —- just changing one word, twice, then placing three sentences in MY context.





Not trying to start a pi$$ing match, but Obama didn’t give a sh^% about me — or a lot of OTHER people like me.

Ok so there's a couple things I'd like to address here and I'd really appreciate if you read what I say carefully.

Firstly, before getting into the meat of the statement itself, I feel that your post represents something that republicans tend to do a lot. That is, when presented with something that their party or politician of choice did that it bad, instead of accepting that they look for an example of the other side doing the same to justify it, even if they think the action is bad itself. Two wrongs don't make a right.

Now onto the statement itself.

Firstly, you have to understand that Obama inherited the GFC. That straight away is going to cause issues and so it's important to keep that in mind. I've studied Obama a lot of the years and to me he seems like one of the most genuine politicians. That isn't to say he isn't without fault. He come from a very humble background, not inheriting daddy's real estate business and using that to build enormous amounts of wealth on the back of exploiting his workers.

Now I'm going to explain what Obama did and then after I'm going to explain what made his efforts even more impressive.

Manufacturing jobs were freefalling under Bush. From 2002-4 there was sharp drop in manufacturing jobs of about 15-20%. It flattened before dropping at the start of 2007 which was then accelerated in 2008 with the GFC. Obama was able to catch the drop by his 2nd year and under his watch the manufacturing job market slowly began to recover, a recovery Trump was able to inherit. It was the first time since the 1st Clinton term that manufacturing jobs were growing again. Source: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MANEMP

He helped revive GM. Dan Akerson, who was CEO of GM has said that if weren't for Obama, GM would have been dead and buried. That would have been a huge hit to our auto industry.

He was able to restore the huge unemployment rates that were suffered as a result of the GFC. He was able to catch it a 10% early on in his presidency and had it declining well enough by the end of his first term. He inherited 7.8% in Jan 2009 and had it to 4.7% by Trump's inauguration.

Obamacare. Would he introduce a plan to expand healthcare for low-middle income earners (aka working class people) if he didn't care?

In 2009, he provided tax relief for 95% of working families, while repealing the tax cuts Bush gave the top tier of earners. Is that a guy who doesn't care about the working class? His stimulus was crucial for getting people out of the GFC. He expanded the EITC.

He increased funding to make childcare and early childhood education more accessible. That took a burden off parents but also helped develop the next generation.

GDP per capita steadily rose every year. His final term saw rapid growth in median income. That time period also saw rapid decline in poverty rates. He saw a rapid increase in the stock market, the fastest ever. He expanded apprenticeships.

He also initiated expansions on overtime eligibility.

Ok, so what makes this even more impressive? Aside from his first two years, he never had the House. He also didn't have the senate for his final two years. He was able to initiate all this change while having a notoriously obstructive congress.

I'm not how you can read all of that and tell me he didn't care and he didn't help, at the very least to the degree that Trump does.