this post was submitted on 01 Aug 2023
663 points (89.8% liked)

politics

19239 readers
2720 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Rogan promoted the conspiracy theory that Epps was an “agent provocateur” for the feds, a baseless claim that has led to a defamation suit against Fox News.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] MushuChupacabra 9 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Much like John Oliver's Truthiness, Joe Rogan does a caricature of skepticism. He does the Question Things part, but then gets dazzled by whatever answers are spicy, instead of the most reasonable or likely.

On a completely unrelated note, I wonder what Joe Rogan would sound like after a year of sobriety from all recreational drugs, and bullshit supplements.

[–] kameecoding 7 points 1 year ago

Joe Rogan is a cunt who straight up claimed that he knows for a fact "they put litterboxes in class rooms, because some kids feel like playing like cats"

even though in reality it was just put there so that in case of school shooting kids don't have to pee on the floor.

then when called out on it, he just claimed "he was joking"

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What do you have against John Oliver?

[–] MushuChupacabra 2 points 1 year ago

Nothing at all. What I was trying to say was that Joe questions stuff, but that is the extent of his brand of skepticism. While on the surface, it may sound like (to his followers, possibly himself) he's being a skeptic, his inability to accept a dull truth, in favor of fanciful claims means that he's doing a caricature of skepticism.

It's fake skepticism, and is a podcast/banter version of truthiness.