Maybe.
After a while you begin to wonder though.
If you agree with bigots on the bigoted things they've said and defend them but you are not a bigot, what are you?
Dumb, unaware or just two faced?
REMINDER: THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. has no obligation to monitor the Forums. However, THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. reserves the right to review any materials submitted to or posted on the Forums, and remove, delete, redact or otherwise modify such materials, in its sole discretion and for any reason whatsoever, at any time and from time to time, without notice or further obligation to you. THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. has no obligation to display or post any materials provided by you. THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. reserves the right to disclose, at any time and from time to time, any information or materials that we deem necessary or appropriate to satisfy any applicable law, regulation, contract obligation, legal or dispute process or government request. Click on the following hyperlinks to further read the applicable Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Bill Maher lays it down on Joe Rogan
- Thread starter grapedrink
- Start date
After a while you begin to wonder though.
If you agree with bigots on the bigoted things they've said and defend them but you are not a bigot, what are you?
Dumb, unaware or just two faced?
It means there's a lot more to life than trying to achieve anti-bigot purity spirals
I doubt there are that many bigoted things coming from his controversial guests that Rogan actually agreed with. Oftentimes he lets people talk and does not interrupt, with maybe a "hmm" or "ok" to keep the conversation going. People often mistake that for agreement, and Rogan has talked about how he specifically does that in order to not derail the flow of what they are saying.
He was wrong about the "lispy queer" comment, but I honestly think he thought it was your standard schoolyard jab.
IMO Rogan is mostly just dumb and/or unaware. I've never seen him back peddle or change his opinion on anything to appease a guest. He's fairly consistent in his views.
Free speech matters to Rogan. The same loud people who are freaking out about Rogan and Bernie are anti-free speech. It's really that simple
You don't have to be anti-bigot, you could be indifferent but Rogan is not.
He actively defends that kind of behavior and on the transgender issue he openly endorses it.
Maybe he's just insensitive and unaware but that's not a good excuse.
Last edited:
Exactly. Rogan gives a platform to people who the SJWs think should not have a platform. They hate that. Deplatforming them in venues that they can control or at least influence is not enough for them, which is why they are going after Rogan so hard.
That's the 1a in action, b!tch. Love it or leave it.
You have told the forum about listening to JR podcasts a number of times now. It sounds like you are a frequent flyer. (I've never watched an entire one and the only reason I did that was this place. Hitting the play button on one of these threads)
Wouldn't that make YOU one of his fans?
Joe Rogan is the guy you LOVE to hate.
You tune in (to use obsolete terminology) primarily so you can rant at the speakers as you drive to your next gig.
Most of the people I knew that were religious Bill O'really viewers were uber liberals that simply LOVED to hate Bill. I used to watch BO primarily to bag on him while viewing. (which irritated the wife, lol)
This is not meant to be hostile or argumentative by the way. I'm laughing at myself re this as well. It's normal. I'm not trying to start a fight.
You Joe Rogan fan you.
Uh no. I watch Fox News sometimes but I'm not a "fan".
I just like to get out of my bubble and Rogan, like erBB, is a great place to hear how stupid people think.
It's fascinating.
Nobody is disputing freedom of speech dummy.
Would you say anything to people just because you're free to say it?
To make this about freedom of speech is stupid AF.
Nobody is stoping Rogan or your Alt-right bros from screeching. Stop playing a victim.
It's a discussion about civility, not 1A.
The pushback these assholes are receiving is just consequence of their free speech, and in itself constitutes free speech.
You haven'tsaid a single coherent thing in this thread yet you're strutting like you won something. lulzies
I think there's a certain amount of virtue in the host giving the subject of their interview the room to convey their views. What other purpose is there for the pushback an interviewer can give but to elicit any defense the subject may be using to support their views - i.e., more of the same?
If you're worried about ideas spreading that you don't like as a result of more people being exposed to them all that means is that you don't want or trust people to form their own opinions. Because when you decide who can and cannot be allowed to speak you're also making a decision for a much larger group of people as to what they can and cannot be allowed to hear or consider.
Which as I understand it, is precisely your intention - to prevent as many people as you can from from hearing or considering or comparing (to your orthodoxy) alternative perspectives that Big Brother has decided amounts to thoughtcrime.
If you're worried about ideas spreading that you don't like as a result of more people being exposed to them all that means is that you don't want or trust people to form their own opinions. Because when you decide who can and cannot be allowed to speak you're also making a decision for a much larger group of people as to what they can and cannot be allowed to hear or consider.
Which as I understand it, is precisely your intention - to prevent as many people as you can from from hearing or considering or comparing (to your orthodoxy) alternative perspectives that Big Brother has decided amounts to thoughtcrime.
Last edited:
LOL
His opinions change with every guest.
He didnt call Eddie Izzard a lispy English faggot.
Wonder why.
Just like you and your bros who only dare say sh!t about transgenders on ErBB, never to their face.
If he was doing that, there would be no problem.
He's endorsing certain views and expressing his own.
That's way more than "giving room".
I'm all for him interviewing despicable characters.thats the only reason I listen to his podcast occasionally.
No, this is exactly about free speech. Not so much the legal aspect, but the cultural ideal of free speech that has extended from the legal framework. Deplatforming, by definition, is anti free speech. Carlos Maza constantly argues in favor of deplatforming, and he is enraged by the fact that Rogan gives a platform to people he feels should not have one.
I think that probably most people disagree with Rogan at one point or another. That doesn't seem to be a deal killer for his audience.
I don't think it would have boded well to call your own guest a lispy queer. He also never called Carlos Maza or anyone else that.
His opinions change because he is easily influenced. That's not the same as flipflopping to appease a guest. That's just being gullible.
Yes it was a standard homophobic schoolyard jab.
Why are you afraid to spell it out?
Except neither Crowder or Rogan are school children.
That's why the word bigot exists.
It's for adult school children who still bully gay people.
I didn't say it was a deal killer, it's not a deal killer for me either.
I'm just calling out his bullshit.