• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

Politics & The CIC/Prez

Forums New posts

Free episodes:

Most people accept that life begins when you are born, not before.

If you believe otherwise — as some do — fine. You don't have to have anyone in your family get an abortion.

But consider this:

What if a woman has a miscarriage? Is she a murderer?

What about rape?

What about incest?

What if the life of the mother is at stake?

The issue is not the unborn, by the way, it's those who are born and are ignored by those states who go hog wild while they are still gestating.
 
Most serious people know that Brand is just a performance artist, that a lot of what he says is just false. Ditto for Tucker Carlson, where court documents demonstrate that he lied about alleged election fraud due to ratings and advertising.

You'd know this in 30 seconds if you bothered to check.
 
Gene Steinberg said:
Yes I know it's about a forbidden subject, but it's designed to demonstrate Brand's word salad rather than the topic he's dealing with.
Click to expand...

Calling what Russell says "word salad" is simple hand waving that lacks an appropriate level of appreciation for what's being said, and that you simply buy into Parkman's shallow character assassination only reveals your own bias and lack of depth when it comes to the subject. If you really want to dig into this, then fine — stop censoring my content and stop using partisan politics and baseless character assassinations to defend your position.

To do that, let's watch some of the interview without Parkman's biased play by play ...

[Link violates TOS.]

Now — if you can for any length of time set your partisan disdain for Tucker Carlson aside, and fair mindedly evaluate the content of his show, maybe we can get somewhere.

"As much as I might enjoy the feeling of privilege and luxury and I'm certainly making no claims to being an ascetic, I remember what reality is. I remember that my wellness is contingent upon spiritual connection, upon certain values and principles, and I'm sorry to admit involve sacrifice and self scrutiny about my own conduct and behavior, which often falls short and I'm working on improving myself." — Russell Brand​
​
Does that sound like someone who is billing himself as a "public intellectual"? Is it fair to label him as such? If you've listened to as many of his shows and interviews as I have, you might agree that he's worthy of the compliment. There are lots of examples that reveal Russell to be a highly intelligent complex person who I don't personally believe is out to con anyone into anything.

That's not to say that there aren't times when he's too hyper for me to get through all of his rants, but it would not be fair to judge him on those alone. Like most more complex people, he needs to be taken more holistically to be appreciated — not dissected down to fit some left or right wing agenda.

Pay Attention

 
Gene Steinberg said:
I didn’t make him act like an idiot. He manages to have made a profession of it. Fine. But it’s not my cup of tea.
Click to expand...

Whether it's "your cup of tea" or not is irrelevant to the issues under discussion, and using pejoratives like "idiot" to attack character instead of the argument doesn't hold any weight as counterpoint. Can we not elevate the discussion beyond this?
 
Gene Steinberg said:
You miss the point. That’s his Shtick.
Click to expand...

Writing off what Brand says at merely being a "shtick" is another form of hand waving — it's being dismissive rather than engaging the content. So "No" — I'm not missing the point — you are. Can you even tell me what it is ? It's right there in the video — all you have to do is actually pay attention. It starts at about 15:15 with —

"Do you think that this is the best that we can do for the American people? Do you think this is the function of the media? Because this is what I believe is possible for the media: You can have transparency, accountability, authenticity, integrity, an open conversation with your viewers ... "
 
Last edited:
Gene Steinberg said:
Most people accept that life begins when you are born, not before.

If you believe otherwise — as some do — fine. You don't have to have anyone in your family get an abortion.

But consider this:

What if a woman has a miscarriage? Is she a murderer?

What about rape?

What about incest?

What if the life of the mother is at stake?

The issue is not the unborn, by the way, it's those who are born and are ignored by those states who go hog wild while they are still gestating.
Click to expand...
I'm quoting myself because I hear silence when it comes to a response from Pygar2.
 
Some of the contents on the alleged laptop appear to be genuine, while some cannot be confirmed.

Whatever Hunter Biden might have really done, mostly tax dodging related, doesn't hold a candle to the shenanigans involving Saudi Arabian funding of Trump-related ventures, some of which began while he was still President and his daughter and son-in-law were White House advisors.

This obsession with President Biden's troubled son is absurd. We know what the President earned because his tax returns have been public for years. Now we know how Trump, while claiming to be a successful businessman, reported massive suspicious losses for years.
 
Back
Top