discusseded

joined 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Here is his acknowledgement and explanation if anyone is interested:

https://youtu.be/LHg3_iYIBVQ?si=fGQiaY3IlwT0XJ2s

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 weeks ago

I did end up watching that episode. The part where Jon called him a red-pilled Smokey the Bear was really funny.

The accusation wasn't of rape but sexual assault, which is quite different, though no less wrong.

The show makes the distinction of mainstream and not. Not sure the real difference is liberal versus conservative.

And the Samoa situation is really strange, but I don't think Robert went around and told locals to not vaccinate. I said in another comment that he has something to answer for here, but saying he is responsible seems like speculation, given the evidence as presented.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 weeks ago

I can see how the advance/change of criteria can lead to an increase in diagnosis. But I don't think it's merely a perception that has evolved. Cancer rates in youth are rising significantly. The recommended age for common cancer screens are being lowered to reflect the change.

There was a time when the use of lead was perfectly normal and the flight to eliminate it for public safety was deemed as fringe. Likewise, I feel that we have new kinds of pollutants affecting our health and I have a keen interest in knowing what's safe and what isn't, now that I have children to care for.

I see vaccinations as one of humanity's greatest achievements. mRNA technology is exciting to me. But just like scaremongering upsets me, so does hasty policy making and social policing.

That said, my family is fully up to date on vaccination schedules. But I have worries that if we let our guards down and only take in facts on authority, we'll give way to corruption due to our unquestioning nature. This is in no way limited to vaccines, in fact I hardly question vaccines at all. I'm mostly interested in industrial pollution and Robert has extensive experience in this area. That's why I favored him, as a figure who lived to expose industrial and government corruption at the cost of human health.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I'm sorry, but I have respect for a guy who can expertly sex up his partner. A guy who sees sex as filthy and indignant? Nope, I don't respect that crap

Through my eyes the first guy has dignity, the second has problems.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

No worries, I really appreciate your follow-up.

I agree with Robert's professed view that vaccines should have enhanced safety protocols to ensure positive health outcomes. Specifically, a long term study on ingredients and so forth. This, he claims, stems from the staggering increase in child health issues in the past forty years. It makes perfect sense to want to use US health institutions to research possible causes and get to the bottom of it. I don't trust monied interests, but I do trust the scientific method.

However, scaremongering is wrong, and that appears to be what caused the issue. It isn't perfectly clear that Robert directly has blood on his hands, but it does seem like the company he kept at the time has done some damage, and so he at least has something to answer for here.

Thanks again for getting back to me on this.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 weeks ago

"Thank goodness water has memory."

-Elsa

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Cool, then I don't care either.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 weeks ago

Don't care about down votes, but at least have the guts to support your decision. I'm putting my thoughts out there, you can refute them just the same.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

So he and some friends found roadkill and thought it would be funny to put it in a park to give the appearance that a NY bicyclist ran it over and left it? That's supposed to make me not vote for the person?

To me that says he has a sense of humor, strange as it may be. But how is that supposed to turn me off compared to grabbing women by the pussy or approaching young women from behind and smelling their hair and pecking at them publicly? I'll take dark humor over fucked up shit any day.

Come back when you have a video of RFK doing anything as grizzly as the two formerly leading candidates. Brain worms are fairly common and only support his claim that he's an avid outdoorsman. Again, how is that something to disqualify a candidate, when the next two are both literally and publicly out of their minds?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 weeks ago (5 children)

Ok that just sounds whacky and made up. At best a mischaracterization of some obscure situation.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

He's a Kennedy, I'm sure he's been around a great number of people. But of all the interviews I've seen, both before and after his intention to run for president, I never heard him refer to those people as his friends. He had rational reasons for his relationship as far as Epstein goes. I don't have any reason to believe he was a child rapist.

As far as the other two, all I can say is that famous people tend to talk to other famous people at parties. It doesn't mean RFK approves of their behavior or character. If you have evidence of the contrary I'm all ears. Cherry picked sounds bytes don't impress me so you don't have to bother with that.

Also I'm not saying he's the pinnacle of greatness. He only had to top Trump and Biden, and that's not hard to do this election. There were other Democrats I would have gladly voted for but the DNC and Biden didn't give me the chance.

view more: next ›