S11.E19: RFK Jr

[peeayebee]

It's amazing and maddening to me how people are so ill-informed about a candidate they support, whether it's Trump or, in this case, RFK Jr. I mean, I know that lots of people get their news from sources within their bubble, and those sources often have an agenda, but it's still maddening. 

RFK Jr is such a wacko. He certainly had a huge trauma in his life (when his father was assassinated), so I can understand his drug use and other behaviors, but ... Well, I don't know what to say. I guess at some point in his life he latched onto a deep suspicion of medicine and then fully embraced it. I completely agree with John that RFK is a full-blown menace. (Love the callback to RFK saying 'full-blown autism.')

Another line from John mocking RFK: "Nothing is a coincidence except when I do it."

And coincidentally, there's a new story out about RFK having dumped a dead bear cub in Central Park in 2014. Article.

Re Trump's appearance at the NABJ, that was typical.  I'm not defending Trump AT. ALL.  But I don't think he was literally saying Kamala Harris suddenly turned black. I think he was being sarcastic, that she -- according to him -- had never referred to being black, only to being Indian, but now that she's running for President, she's promoting her black heritage. Of course that's false. It was never a secret that she has a Jamaican father and an Indian mother. Trump is a collection of every bad attribute a person can have. Whether his comment is just sarcasm or a result of his communication deficit, I don't know. He loves plausible deniability.

BTW, the way he says "black" particularly in that clip, is so weird.

I loved seeing the interview with the guy who played Dionysus in the Olympics Opening Ceremony. The uproar over the whole thing is so ridiculous. Last Sunday when my sister got home from church, she said she wanted to watch the Opening Ceremonies. I figured she had heard about the 'sacrilege,' and I was right. The priest had talked about it in his sermon. She didn't want to hear it from me, but I told her that they weren't depicting the Last Supper, but Greek mythology. I don't know if she did watch.  

BTW, what was the thing with Pikachu in the opening?

[arachne]

23 minutes ago, peeayebee said:

BTW, what was the thing with Pikachu in the opening?

Could it have been this? https://www.wionews.com/trending/jd-vance-told-his-seven-year-old-son-to-shut-the-hell-up-about-pikachu-747012

[shapeshifter]

34 minutes ago, peeayebee said:

BTW, the way he says "black" particularly in that clip, is so weird.

More than weird. Very deliberate, but I don't know whether it's a pronunciation used by a particular group, or if he just snarled every time he said it or…?
As someone with an ear for variations of pronunciation, it's still bugging me, which I guess was its purpose.

[Shrek]

40 minutes ago, peeayebee said:

 

BTW, what was the thing with Pikachu in the opening?

I read somewhere that the reason for this was that the animation studio for Pokemon is in Paris, not sure if that's correct but it's as good a theory as anything else.

 

[peeayebee]

36 minutes ago, arachne said:

Could it have been this? https://www.wionews.com/trending/jd-vance-told-his-seven-year-old-son-to-shut-the-hell-up-about-pikachu-747012

Ah yes. I heard about that and watched the clip. I'll have to rewatch the show's opening and pause to see what Pikachu is saying.

[Palimelon]

Quote

BTW, the way he says "black" particularly in that clip, is so weird.

Well this is the guy who used Palestinian as a slur...

[peeayebee]

I just paused on the Pikachu graphic. It's saying all sorts of things that a child would say to a parent, so, yeah, it's definitely a reference to Vance.

[Lantern7]

There's nothing like the audible gasp when John mentioned that Trump would make RFK Jr head of HHS. That's a move so heinous, I bet it's not covered in Project 2025.

We need a third party, but that's impossible to hope for. You'd need big names to defect from the main parties and a few billionaires willing to make positive change . . . and they're impossible to find. Instead, we get whackjobs that can cause real damage.

"It's not sexual harrasment if it's a horse." Oh, John . . .

Edited August 5 by Lantern7

[DoctorAtomic]

3 hours ago, peeayebee said:

BTW, the way he says "black" particularly in that clip, is so weird.

That's his 'dog whistle' voice. He does it a ton. 

[ottoDbusdriver]

3 hours ago, peeayebee said:

I just paused on the Pikachu graphic. It's saying all sorts of things that a child would say to a parent, so, yeah, it's definitely a reference to Vance.

The questions during the Pikachu graphic are:
-- You know where Pikachus store electricity ?  Do you ? Do you want to know ?They store it in their cheeks!
-- Whenever a Pikachu encounters something new, it blasts it with electricity and guess what ? Guess what ?
-- A Pikachu can deliver 1,000 Amperes of electricity in a single blast!
-- Pikachus charge themselves while sleeping!
-- Pikachus will evolve into a Raichu with a Thunder Stone!
-- He lives in the forest, but also ? He loves ketchup!
-- Boy Pikachus have straight-ended tails but girl Pikachus ? They don't. They have heart-shaped ones!
-- Pikachu is an electric mouse Pokémon that's weak to ground-type moves!
-- When, like, a bunch of Pikachus get together, they can cause a lightning storm!

[DoctorAtomic]

I don't want to be a professor-y, but the reason we get these RFK type people is because no one knows what science is as a process. So you see a conclusion and you work back from there to think where it came from, which is what John was getting at in this episode. Or you extrapolate incorrectly. Saying 'follow the science' is actually wrong; it's follow the process. Granted, they're not doing themselves favors with the poor public communication, but our general lack of education doesn't help either. I kind of wished Fauci just told everyone to stfu and calm down while he fixes the problem that he's literally dedicated his life to. Oh, he makes money? So what? So do I. 

That's where you get the conspiracies from, and once you get there, you see conspiracies everywhere. I can't imagine how exhausting that would be. Then, the problem is if you're all, 'well, I'll change my mind if I see the right science,' is great, but then you just question the source of the information. 

No wonder RFK is so jacked. Having to move those goalposts all over the place. 

[DoctorAtomic]

I am glad John brought up who might benefit from voting for RFK. I don't see how he takes votes away from Harris though. Just in general, in the news, typically RFK is called an anti-vaxxer. That's mostly your extreme right crowd, no?

[peeayebee]

13 minutes ago, DoctorAtomic said:

No wonder RFK is so jacked. Having to move those goalposts all over the place. 

Good one. Oh, I loved how they put up the graphic of Smokey the Bear alongside RFK. I can just hear all the writers cackling when they discovered the similarity.

 

2 minutes ago, DoctorAtomic said:

I am glad John brought up who might benefit from voting for RFK. I don't see how he takes votes away from Harris though. Just in general, in the news, typically RFK is called an anti-vaxxer. That's mostly your extreme right crowd, no?

You'd think. However, there's the low-information voters who only hear the Kennedy name, get nostalgic, and just assume he's a warm and cuddly progressive.

[Palimelon]

Quote

However, there's the low-information voters who only hear the Kennedy name, get nostalgic, and just assume he's a warm and cuddly progressive.

[marina to]

20 minutes ago, DoctorAtomic said:

I am glad John brought up who might benefit from voting for RFK. I don't see how he takes votes away from Harris though. Just in general, in the news, typically RFK is called an anti-vaxxer. That's mostly your extreme right crowd, no?

He also has his environmentalist cred, and I know a shocking amount of otherwise progressive people who are anti-vaxxers.

[DoctorAtomic]

He's also got the conspiracy angle going for him. It seems like it would mostly be a wash than taking significant Harris votes. 

[kittykat]

I think this was a smart story to put out at the right time.  Harris has momentum right now so John comes out and tries to tell everyone the truth about the third party candidate people believe will be the savior of America.  And talk about a void in charisma.  This is why I hate when people judge a candidate on charisma and likeability because it only seems to be a make or break issue when said candidate is female.

Not sure what side he will take away from and John is right to push for the case for ranked choice voting.

[meowmommy]

8 hours ago, peeayebee said:

I think he was being sarcastic, that she -- according to him -- had never referred to being black, only to being Indian, but now that she's running for President, she's promoting her black heritage.

My unscientific theory is that he, the way he conflated Nikki Haley and Nancy Pelosi, in that moment confused Kamala Harris with Nikki Haley, and now won't admit it.

I didn't learn much new about RFK Jr., but I appreciated John putting the word out there.  Like the MAGAs, his supporters are unfathomable.  Can we never learn the lesson of elevating an unqualified nepo baby to a position they don't deserve?

Anyone who doesn't like cheesecake cannot be trusted, ever.

Edited August 5 by meowmommy

[DoctorAtomic]

I think he knew exactly what he was saying because he used his dog whistle voice. He's always 'sarcastic' because he can say, 'oh, I'm joking everyone is so sensitive'. I don't think it's working anymore. I didn't see anyone rushing to his defense to spin what he 'really was saying'. 

I'd love to play poker with this guy if he had any real money. He's got more tells that you could count. 

[Annber03]

Can we just, like, put a moratorium on the whole idea of conspiracy theories in general? Please? At the very least, can se stop having political candidates who are out there happily spouting them? I swear to god, if I never hear the words "conspiracy theory" again, it'll be too soon. 

3 hours ago, DoctorAtomic said:

I don't want to be a professor-y, but the reason we get these RFK type people is because no one knows what science is as a process. So you see a conclusion and you work back from there to think where it came from, which is what John was getting at in this episode. Or you extrapolate incorrectly. Saying 'follow the science' is actually wrong; it's follow the process. Granted, they're not doing themselves favors with the poor public communication, but our general lack of education doesn't help either. I kind of wished Fauci just told everyone to stfu and calm down while he fixes the problem that he's literally dedicated his life to. Oh, he makes money? So what? So do I. 

Yep. Our science education in this country (along with our education in civics, health - especially sex ed, history, etc.) is just...beyond pitiful. And it makes for ripe conditions for ignorant people to latch on to whackjob cospiracy nonsense. Which s precisely a big reason why some politicians are actively trying to defund various education deptartments/organizations, and why they're pushing for less funding for public schools, and so on. Can't have a smart, well-educated population, after al, that makes it harder for their conspiracy nonsense to land and gain traction!

3 hours ago, DoctorAtomic said:

Just in general, in the news, typically RFK is called an anti-vaxxer. That's mostly your extreme right crowd, no?

As noted elsewhere, sadly, no. At one time the anti-vaccination movement actually tended to be more of a fringe thing among some on the left - usually your new age sorts who were into holistic/alternative medicine and didn't trust mainstream/typical medicines and vaccines and such. 

But COVID really seemed to drag a lot of right-wing people into the mix as well  and anti-government types in general, and...well. Here we are. There's a reason the horseshoe theory is a thing in politics, it will sometimes lead to the strangest of alliances. 

The story about the couple whose deceased child was being used for anti-vaccine conspiracies was heartbreakng and horrifying. Between that and RFK, Jr.'s effots in Africa that played a role in the measles outbreak there, at t that point, there needs to be legitimate, serious consequences for pulling that kind of shit. You're actively adding to someone's trauma and pain and exploiting their child for your own lies and misinformation. People need to be held liable for that, both civily and crminally. 

I also sure wish that we'd spend as much effort on tackling issues that actually affect children on a grand scale as we do these conspiracy theories about supposed threats to children*. It continues to amaze me how we blame everything BUT guns for mass shootings. They are called mass shootings for a reason, people. 

*Regarding the stories about people who did have side effects from the vaccine, the thing that really gets me about tht one is that I very clearly remember Fauci and all other medical experts acknowledging that, while extremely rare, side effects of the COVID vaccines could be a thing for some people, as is the case with any kind of medicine or vaccine that's out there. And I also remember them actively encouraging people to speak to their healthcare providers to see if they did have any health issues that could be exacerbated if they were to get the vaccine, and if so, they could plan accordingly from there to find other similarly viable treatments if need be. It's not like they were out here claiming that side effects weren't a thing at all. 

5 hours ago, Lantern7 said:

There's nothing like the audible gasp when John mentioned that Trump would make RFK Jr head of HHS. That's a move so heinous, I bet it's not covered in Project 2025.

Yeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeah, that was...all sorts of YIKES. As was the clip of RFK, Jr. just ralling off, like, every single major horror show of a guy of the past couple decades. Like, holy shit, dude...

And saying the Kennedys "always do the right thing"...ehhhhhhhhhh...if they're talking in terms of politics, yes, the Kennedys have, in the past, generally been known for supporting a lot of good policies overalll. In terms of their personal lives, however? Yeah. Not so much. Add in RFK Jr.s conspiracy nonsense and the actual damage that has come from his actions on behalf of his conspiratorial beliefs, and that's even more of a questionable claim. 

5 hours ago, Lantern7 said:

We need a third party, but that's impossible to hope for. You'd need big names to defect from the main parties and a few billionaires willing to make positive change . . . and they're impossible to find. Instead, we get whackjobs that can cause real damage.

I really appreciated John acknowledging that it would take a LOT of changes to allow for a viable third party to be set up in this country. Way too many people think just slapping down a vote for a third party candidate every four yeras will somehow magically make some kind of major change, and, wel...we've seen how well that line of thinking's been working out thus far in recent years. 

(There's also the fact that a lot of people vote third party 'cause they still fall victim to the "both sides are equally bad" mindset regaridng the two major parties, and...yeah, no. Both parties do indeed have faults, LOTS of them, but there are still a lot of VERY noticeable differences in policy stances and things of that sort, and if people still can't see that rather obvious difference after these last few years especially, then I really don't know what to say other than those people clearly aren't paying attention to anything.)

As for the Olympics, I haven't seen a single second of the games thus far and have no interest in following them, but even then, I've still managed to hear about the controversies around them thus far, and all I can say to anyone who's all upset about that stuff is...please get off the computer/turn off the TV and go outside and get some air. 

The bt about the South Korean team being introduced wrong, though. Oh, my god. Also, I wish the reporter had asked Trump what the Last Supper is. I'd love to see his attempt to explain that. 

[DoctorAtomic]

24 minutes ago, Annber03 said:

Can we just, like, put a moratorium on the whole idea of conspiracy theories in general? Please?

Remember when they were fun because they were just on the X Files and everyone knew it was only fiction? 

The last supper was a supper; and they had bread I would think, maybe some cheese, I don't know how hot it was, and you dip the bread in oil and some other things; they had some things to drink too, it was a long time ago so wine, lots of wine in jugs all over the table. Here's the thing. It was the last one. They wouldn't do it again. Because it's the last so now we call it the last supper. 

[peeayebee]

1 hour ago, DoctorAtomic said:

I think he knew exactly what he was saying because he used his dog whistle voice. He's always 'sarcastic' because he can say, 'oh, I'm joking everyone is so sensitive'. I don't think it's working anymore. I didn't see anyone rushing to his defense to spin what he 'really was saying'. 

I think Vance defended him. But of course he would.

31 minutes ago, Annber03 said:

(There's also the fact that a lot of people vote third party 'cause they still fall victim to the "both sides are equally bad" mindset regaridng the two major parties, and...yeah, no. Both parties do indeed have faults, LOTS of them, but there are still a lot of VERY noticeable differences in policy stances and things of that sort, and if people still can't see that rather obvious difference after these last few years especially, then I really don't know what to say other than those people clearly aren't paying attention to anything.) 

No candidate is perfect. It's ok to vote for someone who doesn't tick all the boxes, esp when the other candidate is a horror show. 

Quote

Also, I wish the reporter had asked Trump what the Last Supper is. I'd love to see his attempt to explain that. 

It is so obvious with so many topics that he just doesn't have a clue. I'm sure he knows what the Last Supper is, but he doesn't know what to say except that whatever happened was horrible, no good, very bad. 95% of the time he says nothing of substance. I continue to be dumbfounded that his fans don't notice or don't care or are just as empty-headed as he. 

[Annber03]

1 minute ago, peeayebee said:

No candidate is perfect. It's ok to vote for someone who doesn't tick all the boxes, esp when the other candidate is a horror show. 

It is so obvious with so many topics that he just doesn't have a clue. I'm sure he knows what the Last Supper is, but he doesn't know what to say except that whatever happened was horrible, no good, very bad. 95% of the time he says nothing of substance. I continue to be dumbfounded that his fans don't notice or don't care or are just as empty-headed as he. 

It boggles my mind, too. For as long as I live, I willl never, ever understand how someone like him got the kind of cult-like following he did. 

And regarding the candidate thing, exactly. I would much rather vote for someone I can agree with some of the time, because at least there's more of a chance for communication on the areas where we disagree, and more of a chance for compromise. I'm sure as hell not going to get that if I'm stuck with a candidate who has no interest in supporting any policies that are of any importance to me or others who share my views. 

[arachne]

Slightly OT: FWIW, the actual "Last Supper" probably looked nothing like the DaVinci painting. By the start of the Common Era, the Roman practice of lying down to eat had spread thruout the empire. And if it was a Passover seder, they would have been eating matzohs, not those dinner rolls you see in the painting.

Okay, back to your regularly scheduled comments... 

[peeayebee]

And I guess everyone wasn't sitting on the same side of the table.

[Palimelon]

They might not have even been sitting at a table, they might have been sitting on the floor.

Edited August 6 by Palimelon

[SG429]

On 8/6/2024 at 3:01 PM, peeayebee said:

And I guess everyone wasn't sitting on the same side of the table.

That was just for the photo op.

[Makai]

On 8/5/2024 at 12:47 PM, DoctorAtomic said:

I am glad John brought up who might benefit from voting for RFK. I don't see how he takes votes away from Harris though. Just in general, in the news, typically RFK is called an anti-vaxxer. That's mostly your extreme right crowd, no?

I agree. He was going to take votes away from Biden because of protest voting (particularly with younger voters) but that possibility has diminished significantly since Harris became the nominee. 

[DoctorAtomic]

I thought RFK would take votes from Trump from conspiracy minded voters, but I suppose the anti-vaxx is a wash. 

I don't think he'd be a protest vote more than not voting at all would be the protest. Those people not voting now possibly voting for Harris might be a boost. 

[iMonrey]

On 8/5/2024 at 9:43 AM, peeayebee said:

BTW, the way he says "black" particularly in that clip, is so weird.

Trump tends to over-enunciate things he has disdain for, for emphasis. Like the way he says "CHI-na." 
 

I'm not sure how John's team managed to miss the bear cub story, but this episode was recorded about a day or two too early because RFK Jr.'s appearance with Roseanne has been all over the place the past couple of days. His poll numbers are tanking too.

Edited August 10 by iMonrey

[Makai]

2 hours ago, DoctorAtomic said:

I don't think he'd be a protest vote more than not voting at all would be the protest. Those people not voting now possibly voting for Harris might be a boost. 

It doesn’t make any sense but there were a lot of people on social media saying they were going to do just that, particularly younger millennials and gen z. Who knows if that would have turned into actual votes.

There was/is a lot of anger in that demographic towards Biden. I work with one of them and she was 50/50 between not voting at all and voting for RFK Jr. 

Edited August 10 by Makai

[Palimelon]

Quote

There was/is a lot of anger in that demographic towards Biden.

Some of that might be coming back after Harris' "I'm speaking!" moment.

[Anela]

10 minutes ago, Palimelon said:

Some of that might be coming back after Harris' "I'm speaking!" moment.

It is.  There is hope that it’s just because she’s still the VP, not the president, but there have been people who didn’t get swept up in everything, over the last few weeks, for this reason.  

Edited August 10 by Anela

[Shrek]

A lot of youngsters seem to think that not voting D but either of the others is okay & see it as a protest vote against the Ds & what is happening in Gaza. They seem to think that DT will end that war but they don't seem to realize that if the Rs win Trump will end the war by wiping Palestine off the face of the earth.

[Anela]

3 minutes ago, Shrek said:

A lot of youngsters seem to think that not voting D but either of the others is okay & see it as a protest vote against the Ds & what is happening in Gaza. They seem to think that DT will end that war but they don't seem to realize that if the Rs win Trump will end the war by wiping Palestine off the face of the earth.

From what I'm seeing/hearing, it's more that they want to vote for Kamala - they were happy with a new candidate - but there was a reason they wanted a new candidate, and that was to stop the bombing in Gaza. they want a promise that things will change with her in charge, that's why they're "uncommitted". 

I follow someone whose daughter is a first-time voter, and she wasn't going to vote for Biden, but is happy with Kamala. 

[JustHereForFood]

Many people were turning their noses at voting or voted a third-party candidate in 2016 too. This is just one of the results of that: Child rape survivors face extraordinary barriers in states with abortion bans

 

[Anela]

1 hour ago, JustHereForFood said:

Many people were turning their noses at voting or voted a third-party candidate in 2016 too. This is just one of the results of that: Child rape survivors face extraordinary barriers in states with abortion bans

 

Yeah, I shared something about that on social media, yesterday. 😔

[andromeda331]

I miss when conspiracy theories were fun too.

I can't believe anyone would take RFK Jr seriously. He's just as bad as Trump. Hey, at least he's would say he's wrong if he is. Oh, wait no. He won't. He gets a bunch of kids killed because of what he said and convinced others to believe. But no that wasn't his fault. He didn't do anything or say anything. Of course. Can't possbily take responbility for it. 

I've never been a Kennedy fan but John and Robert at least had brains and got a lot of stuff done. I can see why people would hope for another one to inherited some of that. I've been hearing that since the 90s. I don't know about the rest of the clan but RFK JR isn't the one.  

[Lugal]

On 8/10/2024 at 9:41 AM, iMonrey said:

I'm not sure how John's team managed to miss the bear cub story, but this episode was recorded about a day or two too early because RFK Jr.'s appearance with Roseanne has been all over the place the past couple of days. His poll numbers are tanking too.

Especially since it was Tatiana Schlossberg (Caroline Kennedy's daughter) who first covered the story when it happened.