topcat
Well-Known Member
The reference was to Rogan being popular. I haven't heard anything about Corolla for many years.
RIP Rush Limbaugh
- Thread starter rkymtnman
- Start date
Unclebaldrick
Well-Known Member
Thank god. Last I saw him he was doing low rent car insurance commercials. Anything is possible today.
captainmorgan
Well-Known Member
Corolla is big in podcasting, never could stand him.
smokinrav
Well-Known Member
Yeah, he went to satellite on Serious XM and basically vanished from the National consciousness.
Unclebaldrick
Well-Known Member
It is amazing to me that Kimmel has succeeded in rebranding himself after that car crash The Man Show.
But damned if he didn't. I'm guessing you won't see a picture of he and Corolla together in the last decade. I think he is fine with Corolla wearing that albatross alone.
HGCC
Well-Known Member
Lindbergh and Ford come up quite a bit. It's definitely my current favorite podcast. I'm fond of the fake doctor eps with Billy wayne davis, bit lighter fair than genocide.
That Billy wayne fellow does a po called grown local about weed, its alright.
Edit: I can't stand Rogan, but I have to say it's more about his fan base than his actual show. I back having open talks with various views. I don't like him as he is part of what passes as the conservative intellectuals, along with Shapiro, and they just aren't. They are a step up from screaming nonsense about demon sperm, but man, not much. I do think Rogan has seen the cash and leaned into pulling those sweet conservative bux, can't blame him.
Last edited:
injinji
Well-Known Member
Well said. He votes for his state. We may not like that, but that is what folks are sent to Washington to do.
injinji
Well-Known Member
Kind of like Oprah. I wonder if they regret it.
Budzbuddha
Well-Known Member
Rush would like to say something ..... oh nevermind .
smokinrav
Well-Known Member
I don't know. Stern signed a 4 year $600,000,000 deal right before the pandemic hit. I'd sacrifice my fame for that
The Monarch
Member
That’s
* 2020 World Bank estimate was 48, but that was before the pandemic
There’s the politics, but then there’s Capital, which is solely concerned with maximizing shareholder value. In the absence of any regulation, Capital does whatever it wants. For the last 40 years that means promoting globalization (labor arbitrage and new markets), a powerful Federal Reserve (central planners that destroy savers to benefit The Shareholders), control of media (narrative control plus product promotion in news articles), and a for-profit surveillance system that the government can tap whenever they want. Our children are programmed when infants. All the while our GINI index blows out from 35 to 50+*.
* 2020 World Bank estimate was 48, but that was before the pandemic
Last edited:
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
I don't know, man.
It seems that you are predicting the future based upon the past. Not a bad tactic for short term predictions. The ten-year trend isn't so rosy for the ruling white nationalist coalition of the idle1% and its less educated white supporters in the US. I think they have already gone past the tipping point where they have to eliminate democracy in order to stay in power.
That might happen but we all know what happens when authoritarian dictatorships, like the one Trumpism is trying to install, take over. Those are not stable governments. Capital loses along with everybody else. So capital are backing away from that coalition.
The Monarch
Member
Perhaps, but it was Capital that got Trump elected, you can’t win the WH on just the donor class. When sentiment shifted, they changed their tune (and donations). There are a ton of German firms still in operation that did just fine under Hitler. Politicians are temporary, Capital is forever.
ETA: I’m just presenting the present, based on past activities, not a prediction. This is the world we live in - things are actually more equal in Zimbabwe and the Congo Republic
Last edited:
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
That's a mighty easy thing to say.
Capital got Trump elected.
Capital got Biden elected
Capital got Obama elected
Capital got Bush elected.
No analysis, no facts presented, disregards world affairs and especially disregards democracy.
It's a pretty useless theory. It's also cynical and baseless.
The Monarch
Member
My apologies, next time I’ll provide more backup. I was a treasurer for a super PAC, I know how money is raised and where it comes from, however I’ll back up with FEC data. The GINI estimates are here from the World Bank:
World affairs - what about them? Are you referring to Russian influence? I do think money is going to trump (sorry) Russian meddling. If that makes me cynical, so be it.
Maybe we have a different perspective, not sure why that would make things so immediately baseless, useless and cynical to you. We don’t always have to compete so hard, you know?
hanimmal
Well-Known Member
I did think that your Fed 'destroying savers' thing was naive.My apologies, next time I’ll provide more backup. I was a treasurer for a super PAC, I know how money is raised and where it comes from, however I’ll back up with FEC data. The GINI estimates are here from the World Bank:
World affairs - what about them? Are you referring to Russian influence? I do think money is going to trump (sorry) Russian meddling. If that makes me cynical, so be it.
Maybe we have a different perspective, not sure why that would make things so immediately baseless, useless and cynical to you. We don’t always have to compete so hard, you know?
The Monarch
Member
Why? The Fed controls s/t interest rates, they have kept them near zero for much of the last 20 years. Saving is not a choice for a lot of people. The textbooks refer to it as a preference, but I think THAT’S naive (or convenient). Every basis point of interest lost, along with having to eat all the inflation since then, has financially destroyed millions of households over time. It’s just math and compounded interest
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
Again, no evidence presented to justify your statement. "I am an expert, so I'm right and you are wrong". lolMy apologies, next time I’ll provide more backup. I was a treasurer for a super PAC, I know how money is raised and where it comes from, however I’ll back up with FEC data. The GINI estimates are here from the World Bank:
World affairs - what about them? Are you referring to Russian influence? I do think money is going to trump (sorry) Russian meddling. If that makes me cynical, so be it.
Maybe we have a different perspective, not sure why that would make things so immediately baseless, useless and cynical to you. We don’t always have to compete so hard, you know?
Plenty of rich people think they can buy elections and fail. Bloomberg was one of the latest. As for Trump's winning the election "becuz capital", Clinton spent more. Trump's racist and misogynist rhetoric resonated with racist right wing white nationalist authoritarians. I'm not speaking for the world but for the US. Big donations buy access to political leaders when in office and quite often large donors give to both sides. But there is little evidence that money is all that matters.
Also, there is plenty of evidence that Russia had an effect on the 2016 election. That is not a cynical statement, it is backed up by plenty of documentation. We may begin with the Mueller report if you like.
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
So, here is an explanation of why I said you ignored world affairs in your cynical "money buys presidents" claim.
Again, sticking to the US. We are in the middle of an unprecedented shift in diversity in the US. For the first time in US history, we are seeing the decline in political power of white people and growth in political power of nonwhites.
White right? How demographics is changing US politics
In the US, non-whites have higher birth rates and make up the bulk of new immigrants. As white people lose their demographic majority, some will resist the accompanying political changes.
theconversation.com
White right? How demographics is changing US politics
Demography and democracy
That powerful shift in the makeup of the U.S. population has created ideal conditions for a political backlash against people of color, including Hispanics, blacks, Asians and especially immigrants of color.
One prominent example: President Trump’s lament that the U.S. was being overwhelmed by immigrants from “s-hole countries,” rather than from places like Norway.
The backlash also extends to the political leaders who support minorities’ right to be accepted and respected as Americans.
These communities of color remain in the minority. But already in some states, white voters as distinct from all whites are in the minority, and nationally, whites are unlikely to remain in the majority for long.
In California, for example, non-white populations now make up 62 percent of the population, with Hispanic and white populations at near parity at 38 percent each.
Cali is a great example of what happens when there is a shift from traditional white power to multiracial democracy. The traditional white and wealthier group is no longer in power.
Fighting for lost dominance
My research reveals that it is the declining majority that tends to act aggressively, often imagining it must preempt a rising minority. Simply put, declining majorities don’t want to yield their status or hegemony.
This turns demographic shifts into a struggle about power and dominance, with elements of the majority refusing to cede ground to emergent new pluralities and majorities that might displace them.
This is not the whole story. A rise in automation has a significant affect on where and how people work, assuming they can find it. Farming communities are being driven out of existence because farm jobs are replaced by tractors, pesticides and AI.
So, just waving ones hand and saying "its all money" is kind of stupid and as with all false theories falls apart upon closer examination.