I listened to about 10 minutes of the latest podcast. I can't listen to any one person lecture for an hour unless I'm getting college credit for it.
(my bold emphasis)
Precisely.
If you want to be taken seriously by people who have many other interesting and valuable things to do than to watch some guy they have never heard of talking on screen, WRITE IT DOWN. I have developed rapid reading skills due to my work, and in 5 minutes or so of skimming the text of your talk I would be able to gather what your main points are, and whether what you have to say is worth my further attention.
Or, at least provide a playback speed control. : )
1.5x or 1.75x will deliver the same information at a substantial time savings for busy folks.
Trump opened his campaign with a lie about Obama's place of birth. He ended his term by trying to end the American Republic and start his own personal dictatorship. In between he set a world record for most lies told by a politician.
People with a conservative religious perspective easily rationalize such actions.
Thanks for checking it out. Did you happen to listen to it? Or did my vague description just trigger something for you?
I was about to listen to it, but the description sounded like you were trying to convince people to feel good about a Trump vote. I'm not going to waste time listening to that. I'm far too aware of the kind of person he is to even entertain voting for him. He's a criminal and a traitor to the US, and I am not impressed by the idea that "good people voted for him." While that might be true in a certain respect, voting for Trump does not say anything good about a person's character. The best you could say about them is that they're ignorant rubes. That's the kindest take.
Are you triggered by people being "woke?" Do you take pride in walking through life asleep?
Religion is for people whose existential fear is greater than their common sense.
Tell you what, Tim. If you can actually provide a sufficient definition of "woke ideology" I'll give your podcast a try.
However, the definition must be coherent and represent some aspect of reality. (I know that makes the task almost impossible, but I'd be interested in your attempt to tell me what it is).
Religion is for people whose existential fear is greater than their common sense.
Or, at least provide a playback speed control. : )
1.5x or 1.75x will deliver the same information at a substantial time savings for busy folks.
There's a speed control on the embedded player on my site. I sound much wittier at 1.5.
Oooh, nice. Thank you.
I realize that content creators may want to speak more slowly and clearly for all the right reasons, but taking that care then allows the speed to be cranked up by folks with limited down time. The option is always appreciated.
Tell you what, Tim. If you can actually provide a sufficient definition of "woke ideology" I'll give your podcast a try.
However, the definition must be coherent and represent some aspect of reality. (I know that makes the task almost impossible, but I'd be interested in your attempt to tell me what it is).
This is a fair question.
Related, I’m not seeing that a choice of Trump over Biden as President is sufficiently supported by any claimed ‘woke ideology’ being pushed by the current Administration. The value proposition of a Trump presidency is additionally seriously marred by Trump’s history, personality and leadership deficiencies, emotional immaturity, and persistent pandering to a highly vocal minority of voters with some arguably terrible ideas.
"Democrats" never said anything about believing all women, full stop. That's a silly Right Wing talking point that smacks of whataboutism involving an allegation that took place decades before the "mee too" movement.
I wasn't saying X did something bad so it doesn't matter that Y did something bad. That's a whataboutism and I abhor them with the passion of a thousand suns. What I was saying was that the GOP's ability to look the other way on Trump should cause the Democrats to self-reflect for just one single moment about how they looked the other way, made excuses, and dismissed the awful moral character of Bill Clinton. The only reason I think Hillary should have to carry any of the weight of Bill's transgression is that she has been his chief litigator.
If someone is not willing to say Bill Clinton is a terrible human being with respect to how he treats women, then they probably shouldn't be surprised if no one cares what they say about Donald Trump. An ounce of consistency and a willingness to police your own side can go a long way in calling out the moral rot on the other side.
Tell you what, Tim. If you can actually provide a sufficient definition of "woke ideology" I'll give your podcast a try.
However, the definition must be coherent and represent some aspect of reality. (I know that makes the task almost impossible, but I'd be interested in your attempt to tell me what it is).
I think you're ABSOLUTELY correct that most of the people who complain about woke ideology can't define it past "everything I don't like". It's not really my hill to die on, I'm attempting to make an argument for people who are passionate about killing the woke boogieman. Not because I agree with their political worldview but because I want to persuade them to something different. For the most part "woke" has just replaced "commie" in our lexicon.
BUT, I'm willing to play along (even though you keep asking me to defend arguments I'm not making). I would define "woke" as "a religious-like pursuit of diversity, equity, and inclusion to the detriment of all other virtues." For the average MAGA "woke" just means "anything progressive liberals believe".
