• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Oprah 2020

Segnosaur said:
Lets say Oprah is not a true believer, and that she was just pandering to believers in woo-nonsense.
Click to expand...


Possibly true for some, but in her own words she's a huge believer in the "law of attraction" woo.

If she gets into congress, and immediately pushes for a law to make faith healing covered by Medicare or psychics used in criminal investigations, then we know her pandering is a problem. But if she behaves like a rational and logical person in the senate, I would have a little more faith in her abilities.
Click to expand...


Similar woo believers have managed to shove through legislation in many states, including my own, mandating that insurance providers cover nonsense like acupuncture, chiropractic, and homeopathic "medicine".

Now, imagine that a certain person is a big friend and promoter of people like Mehmet Oz, Phil McGraw, and their ilk. She's the one who literally made Oz and McGraw celebrities, they were nobodies who would likely be nothing more than little-known, garden-variety hucksters without her promotion. Similarly, Jenny McCarthy was nothing but a C-list actress and soft-core porn model, and was having difficulty gaining exposure for her anti-vax lies outside the small fanatical woo community, until Oprah featured her and put a good deal of time and money into promoting McCarthy's book. That exposure brought the anti-vax lies into the mainstream, and that exposure, combined with Oprah's influence, got her second most influential appearance on Larry King's show (King and Oprah are very closely linked, and share a lot of guests and beliefs). Between the Oprah and King, the two of them share an enormous amount of responsibility for the current mainstream success of the anti-vax movement.

Now, imagine that this person is singularly, solely responsible for the success of one of the most worthless

Now, imagine that this person is in a position to propose, promote, and vote on legislation which can affect what medical services are available to poor and disabled people? Can you imagine such a person pushing to have all sorts of woo covered by Medicare? I certainly can. Can you imagine such a person pushing to have life-saving medications and vaccinations de-emphasized in the name of preventing autism? I certainly can.

On to of all that, despite her background, she's proven herself to be nearly as elitist and clueless as Trump when it comes to poverty, and heavily invested in promoting her "law of attraction" woo even in an educational setting: https://nypost.com/2018/01/08/no-oprah-havent-we-learned-our-lesson-with-celebrity-candidates/

Excerpt:
Winfrey’s materialism extends to her Leadership Academy for Girls, which she founded in South Africa over the government’s concerns that the facility was too lavish, too elite and neglectful of the country’s largely poor children. (Only 152 girls were admitted.) She spent $40 million building a school that includes a beauty salon, yoga studio, 200-thread-count sheets and expansive closets, even though the girls were so poor, they owned very few clothes.

Winfrey didn’t care. “These girls deserve to be surrounded by beauty,” she proclaimed, “and beauty does inspire.”

Within months of its 2007 opening, Winfrey’s school was embroiled in a child abuse scandal, with at least 15 girls claiming they were victimized. In 2011, the dead body of a newborn was found on school grounds, delivered by a 17-year-old student.

For all her good intentions, it seems she threw millions of dollars at a deep, seemingly intractable problem and walked away.

“I’ve always believed in the girls,” Winfrey told CNN in 2012. “I’ve known that no matter what we’re going through, the girls were worth it.”
Click to expand...

There is nothing about this woman's life and career that indicates giving her substantial political power in this country will be anything but disastrous.
 
luchog said:
Possibly true for some, but in her own words she's a huge believer in the "law of attraction" woo.




Similar woo believers have managed to shove through legislation in many states, including my own, mandating that insurance providers cover nonsense like acupuncture, chiropractic, and homeopathic "medicine".

Now, imagine that a certain person is a big friend and promoter of people like Mehmet Oz, Phil McGraw, and their ilk. She's the one who literally made Oz and McGraw celebrities, they were nobodies who would likely be nothing more than little-known, garden-variety hucksters without her promotion. Similarly, Jenny McCarthy was nothing but a C-list actress and soft-core porn model, and was having difficulty gaining exposure for her anti-vax lies outside the small fanatical woo community, until Oprah featured her and put a good deal of time and money into promoting McCarthy's book. That exposure brought the anti-vax lies into the mainstream, and that exposure, combined with Oprah's influence, got her second most influential appearance on Larry King's show (King and Oprah are very closely linked, and share a lot of guests and beliefs). Between the Oprah and King, the two of them share an enormous amount of responsibility for the current mainstream success of the anti-vax movement.

Now, imagine that this person is singularly, solely responsible for the success of one of the most worthless

Now, imagine that this person is in a position to propose, promote, and vote on legislation which can affect what medical services are available to poor and disabled people? Can you imagine such a person pushing to have all sorts of woo covered by Medicare? I certainly can. Can you imagine such a person pushing to have life-saving medications and vaccinations de-emphasized in the name of preventing autism? I certainly can.

On to of all that, despite her background, she's proven herself to be nearly as elitist and clueless as Trump when it comes to poverty, and heavily invested in promoting her "law of attraction" woo even in an educational setting: https://nypost.com/2018/01/08/no-oprah-havent-we-learned-our-lesson-with-celebrity-candidates/

Excerpt:


There is nothing about this woman's life and career that indicates giving her substantial political power in this country will be anything but disastrous.
Click to expand...
Luchog, I am just now understanding this woman with your analysis, I always find you a heavyweight on this forum.
Ladbrokes have her at 10 to 1 second favourite behind Trump at 9 to 4 for 2020.
Antiscience is a strange bedfellow with internet and safe aeroplanes, the world marvels at the contradiction.
 
xjx388 said:
If JoeBentley is correct, then it's clearly true that Sanders never had a chance because the DNC had already picked Hillary to run.
Click to expand...

That's not what Joe's saying at all. If Sanders had had enough votes, the superdelegates wouldn't have mattered. Actually, they didn't here, either.
 
luchog said:
Because, up until this election, the DNC and others claimed that the candidate for president is picked from a pool of available registered candidates during a process known as a primary election, by the citizens via a plurality of the popular vote in popular vote states, and a plurality of caucus voters in caucus states.
Click to expand...

But the votes _did_ matter. The citizens voted for Hillary, overwhelmingly.

If Hillary had won the general election, no one would be complaining about the DNC being rigged. This is just sour grapes.
 
Don't worry the Dems still have well over a year to find a candidate to lose to Trump. I have full faith in them.
 
No.No.No.

I have had enough of "Celebrity Presidents" to make me not want another, of any political stripe, for a long,long,time to come.
 
dudalb said:
No.No.No.

I have had enough of "Celebrity Presidents" to make me not want another, of any political stripe, for a long,long,time to come.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure it's going to take jailing one of them to break the others from the habit of running for high office.
 
dudalb said:
Aggreed, but after the Trump experience voters are going to be considerable more skeptical....
Click to expand...


Judging by the last election, skepticism is something that is distinctly lacking amongst voters, and Trump voters in particular probably can't even spell the word, let alone express it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom