Comments by "justgivemethetruth" (@justgivemethetruth) on "The Rational National" channel.

  1. 70
  2. 49
  3. 21
  4. 18
  5. 18
  6. 16
  7. 16
  8. 12
  9. 9
  10. 8
  11. 8
  12. 8
  13. 7
  14. 7
  15. 6
  16. 6
  17. 6
  18. 5
  19. 5
  20. 5
  21. 4
  22. 4
  23. 4
  24. 4
  25. 4
  26. 4
  27. 4
  28. 4
  29. 4
  30. 3
  31. 3
  32. 3
  33. 3
  34. 3
  35. Why do people have to agree with everything other people say in order to be accepted? In general I believe a Liberal/Progressive/Socialist/Capitalist/Environmentalist/Western agenda. Things will be going along great, and then the Middle East comes up as a topic and I have to get slammed as not being a Liberal/Progressive because I think the problem here is of course nuanced, but mostly the problem that the Islamic culture cannot coexist peacefully and tolerantly with any other culture, unless it has dominance over then.  I also do think the the problem with the banks is that we are not on the gold standard, or that we have fiat currency. I think that puts me almost exactly coincident with the Bernie Sanders agenda. I think a big problem, and the reason we end up following the money agenda is that the issue agenda fragments people who do not really get the idea of civilization or prioritizing or tolerance.  There are tons of very stupid and anti-social people both sides that cannot be part of a team, and cannot have a rational discussion about much of anything.  These people are so socially isolated that they, in Chomsky's words need to be regimented and distracted like a child or an old person with dementia, and that is what we end up having. The rest of us who might like to have a more cooperative society, and work in more cooperative groups end up the prisoners of these large groups of people that the establishment has developed herding technology to use against us, and we through no fault of our own are disenfranchised and forced to live under the corporate military junta - with no way to fit in because they have enough people to sustain themselves and do not want to argue or be regulated by people of "minimal or no substance or connection" to the existing system - which they see no problem with.
    3
  36. 3
  37. 3
  38. 3
  39. 3
  40. 3
  41. 3
  42. 2
  43. 2
  44. 2
  45. 2
  46. 2
  47. 2
  48. 2
  49. 2
  50. 2
  51. 2
  52. 2
  53. 2
  54. 2
  55. 2
  56. 2
  57. 2
  58. 2
  59. 2
  60. 2
  61. 2
  62. 2
  63. 2
  64. 2
  65. 2
  66. 2
  67. 2
  68. 2
  69. 2
  70. 2
  71. 2
  72. 2
  73. 2
  74. 2
  75. 2
  76. 2
  77. 2
  78. 2
  79. 2
  80. 2
  81. 2
  82. 2
  83. 2
  84. 2
  85. 2
  86. 2
  87. 2
  88. 2
  89. 2
  90. 2
  91. 2
  92. 2
  93. 2
  94. 2
  95. 2
  96. 2
  97. 2
  98. 2
  99. 2
  100. 2
  101. 2
  102. 2
  103. 2
  104. 2
  105. 2
  106. 2
  107. 2
  108. 2
  109. 2
  110. 2
  111. 2
  112. 2
  113. 2
  114. 2
  115. 2
  116. 2
  117. 2
  118. 2
  119. 2
  120. 2
  121. 1
  122. 1
  123. 1
  124. 1
  125. 1
  126. 1
  127. 1
  128. 1
  129. 1
  130. 1
  131. 1
  132. 1
  133. 1
  134. 1
  135. 1
  136. 1
  137. 1
  138. 1
  139. 1
  140. 1
  141. 1
  142. 1
  143. 1
  144. 1
  145. 1
  146. 1
  147. 1
  148. 1
  149. 1
  150. 1
  151. 1
  152. 1
  153. 1
  154. 1
  155. 1
  156. 1
  157. 1
  158. 1
  159. 1
  160. 1
  161. 1
  162. 1
  163. 1
  164. 1
  165. 1
  166. 1
  167. 1
  168. 1
  169. One thing Liberals do that I think you are doing in this video is focusing wholly on the very poor and destitute.  I understand this and agree our society is predatory and we ignore these people, but focusing on them in a current and ongoing way seems wrong, or doomed to failure. What a good Democratic government has always gone is focus on the future.  Give a path to those who are capable of improvement to improve, ie health care and education for example, but we need to devise a system that cares for but does not exacerbate the problem and the number of the really destitute, and does not encourage them to have children they cannot manage. The other day I heard on "All Things Considered" a women talking about how awful it was that some women in prison were offered sterilization, and I agree this could be wrong  if it was done in the wrong way, forced or coerced, but it makes Liberals look terrible to be defending in some way the right of women in prison to have unlimited children, and it turns my stomach. This seems to me to be one of those things designed to turn the public against Liberals and Democrats.  As sad as it seems, or as right-wing as it might make me sound, Liberals are losing badly in this country and they have to be more clever and focus on things that can gain popular support, particularly of the people who flipped and voted for Trump last time - and championing the rights of criminals to have unlimited offspring doesn't seem like a great way to do that ... in fact it seems like a great way to lose.
    1
  170. 1
  171. 1
  172. 1
  173. 1
  174. 1
  175. 1
  176. 1
  177. 1
  178. 1
  179. 1
  180. 1
  181. 1
  182. 1
  183. 1
  184. 1
  185. 1
  186. 1
  187. 1
  188. 1
  189. 1
  190. 1
  191. 1
  192. Great channel but it may just be you that sometimes gets things completely wrong and then other times gets things completely right ... you guys need to remember you are expressing opinions and you need to back then up with facts and logic - which you do pretty well for the most part. The problem with this whole genre is that all of you guys from Rational National to Morning Joe make your money off your viewers and you can never offend them, so most of your energy is spent in trying to tow a certain line ( or is it toe a certain line? ).  I don't know the answer or solution to this, but lots of times people do not have anything to say or they are in a bad mood or a having a good or bad day and still have to put something out ... and no one can be brilliant all the time, let alone right all the time. and since the world has yet to converge to a single political point of view, no one has it right, and doubtful anyone will ... so the solution seems to me to create a system where everyone has a chance to live at the very least and express the individuality and their unique point of view in a way that contributes to the world, and has a duty to avoid those points of view that cause chaos unless it is absolutely necessary. I think Hillary lost for a lot of reasons, a series of bad judgements, which added up, and then also a very horrible image. She was as fat as a house, and no one wins the Presidency that has been disgusting in their body image.  Hillary was acting like she was on her last legs with the videos taken of her stumbling around, and she had to where their big solid primary color suits that made her look ridiculous.  She never answered a question with a straight answer, always shifted it and pretended that was the same as taking the high road.  She was an OK person, but an awful candidate.  Plus all the accusations that people hurled at here that she never just said enough is enough - she did not exude type A leadership in any way. Better wardrobe by the way.
    1
  193. David ... what about the opposite effect of talking to the types of people you are careful and patient to tiptoe around so you do not close their minds ... and that is the fact that people like this who as you report share fake news are used to a certain mindset and will often do the opposite with you, because that is what they are all about. For example, go dissect the average right-winger, conservative post here on You-Tube, or especially on Yahoo, they show up already with severe insults in the first thing they say.  They are conditioned to speak and think like that because the people who set up this whole ungodly system know that it fragments people apart and shuts down any hope of communication or even empathy. They are as trained to hate Liberals by just certain key Pavlovian words as the Palestinians are to hate Jews.  When someone is dealing with fake news does it not occur to you that they are probably already too far gone to ever communicate with or show them another way? The basic transactions in a social society system like this are dysfunctional and toxic and driven as deep as possible into the emotional core of people as possible precisely so that they will never be tempted or able to consider other points of view.  It is hard to ever know what might get through to someone so far gone.  I know occasionally it does happen but I am not aware of any real scientific analysis of how or why? Most Progressives, hopefully at least, are able to change their minds, though many are just as knee-jerk as their opposites, because they search for the truth.  I think people who do not search for truth are not courageous enough to deal with the truth, and their behaviors are often not because of the truth but because social conditions, as in they are dependent on someone in their lives they have to please.  This is just like the totalitarian mindset, and it does exist on the left too, but it is not the nature of the Left as it seems to be so integral to the right.
    1
  194. 1
  195. 1
  196. 1
  197. 1
  198. 1
  199. 1
  200. 1
  201. READ THIS ..... One problem here is that I have not yet heard even one person acknowledge the significance that Biden is a Senator from Delaware .... DELAWARE. Delaware is like the original Grand Camens of tax shelters for corporations. Look at some of the largest corporations and you will see that wherever they really are they are "Delaware Corporations". Delaware was, I think, the first state to allow corporations to incorporate there and pay low taxes in order to avoid taxes from other states. Biden is the original corporatist. He has done nothing to vote to protect and support corporations, period. Check this out from Wikipedia: The Delaware General Corporation Law (Title 8, Chapter 1 of the Delaware Code) is the statute governing corporate law in the U.S. state of Delaware.[1] It has been the most important jurisdiction in United States corporate law since the early 20th century. Over 50% of publicly traded corporations in the United States and 60% of the Fortune 500 are incorporated in the state.[2] Delaware adopted on March 10, 1899, a general incorporation act aimed at attracting more businesses. The group that pushed for this legislation intended to establish a corporation that would sell services to other businesses incorporating in Delaware.[4] Before the rise of general incorporation acts, forming a corporation required a special act of the state legislature. General incorporation allowed anyone to form a corporation by simply raising money and filing articles of incorporation with the state's Secretary of State. Delaware charges no income tax on corporations not operating within the state, so taking advantage of Delaware's other benefits does not result in taxation.[23] At the same time, Delaware has a particularly aggressive tax on banks that locate in the state. However, in general, the state is viewed as a positive location for corporate tax purposes because favorable laws of incorporation allow companies to minimize corporate expenditures (achieved through legal standardization of corporate legal processes), creating a nucleus in Delaware with operating companies often in other states.[24] In February 2013, Economist published an article on tax-friendly jurisdictions, commenting that Delaware stood for " Dollars and Euros Laundered And Washed At Reasonable Expense ".  No income tax and lots of Banks. That is where Biden lives.
    1
  202. 1
  203. 1
  204. 1
  205. 1
  206. 1
  207. 1
  208. 1
  209. 1
  210. 1
  211. 1
  212. 1
  213. 1
  214. 1
  215. 1
  216. 1
  217. 1
  218. 1
  219. 1
  220. 1
  221. 1
  222. 1
  223. 1
  224. 1
  225. 1
  226. 1
  227. 1
  228. 1
  229. 1
  230. 1
  231. 1
  232. 1
  233. 1
  234. 1
  235. 1
  236. 1
  237. 1
  238. 1
  239. 1
  240. 1
  241. 1
  242. 1
  243. 1
  244. 1
  245. 1
  246. 1
  247. 1
  248. 1
  249. 1
  250. 1
  251. 1
  252. 1
  253.  @nasis18  I totally disagree with that. Criticism is supposed to be constructive. All they do is attack and blame the Israeli government without thought or analysis - and certainly they offer no other alternative as to how Israel can defend itself. Why is there never any investigation as to what Israel is facing in terms of terrorism from Palestinians - who again publicly state that their goal is not peace or statehood, but the destruction of Israel. Why not a little criticism of that - ever? We see plenty of blame cast on Israel for its reactions, but we never hear about what they are reacting to. In the case of today Sept 2022 there have been over 100 terror attacks in Israel, but I've never heard of a single one in the mainstream media, or the Left Wing media. Instead of trying to deny this - which is totally true, why don't you work toward really press freedom and truth and demand objective journalism - because all this bias does it to tell viewers that the Left spokespeople are as bad as the Right spokespeople - and drive them away from the Left. Most of the Left media is subtly designed to discredit the Left. Listen to Tlaib whine about Israel - not to mention she is totally biased and it is not what she was elected to do. Finally - South Africa was apartheid - for no reason other than oppression of blacks. Apartheid is about oppression, Israel's walls and defenses are to protect the country and citizens from terror attacks from radical Muslims who want to kill them and destroy their country. Blacks in South Africa were all about their own human rights and freedom. Palestinians could have self-governance and their own state in 10 minutes if they quit their terrorism and stopped blaming Israel, Jews and the West for all their problems.
    1
  254. 1
  255. 1
  256. 1
  257. 1
  258. 1
  259. 1
  260. 1
  261. 1
  262. 1
  263. 1
  264. 1
  265. 1
  266. 1
  267. 1
  268. 1
  269. - Sarandon is not a working feminist, put it that way. I agree with that stand, that the social change we need in the US is not going to be the result of all the little minorities working separately, we need standardization for everyone ... equality. Health care, education, infrastructure, living wage ... not just special programs like the Republicans have for all their billionaire big-shots and corporations to the point where nothing is clear or understandable. - I think that Sarandon has the same angst that most of us on the Left do, that Obama was a creature of Washington and played all of us, and that goes for Bill Clinton, and kind of the same with Hillary. I think much less of Obama than I did the night he was elected. - What we are hearing a lot of is not sexual harassment, and Hollywood and FOX News is driving a lot of it for political purposes. The absurd attacks on Al Franken are just weird. The terms for what he allegedly did are not sexual harassment, sexual assault, rape or any of it, and it is nauseating to see Americans being manipulated by what anyone with a brain could parse out very quickly. It sounds like some of these woman are so desperate to be Republican-ly relevant that they are thinking of their hips as their butts just to smear Al Franken. I have not followed Sarandon's comments on this situation, but now the issue is so clouded by the very media that is supposed to report, inform and clear it up that it is hopeless ... so I think she is probably sensibly pragmatic on that. - I do think she is wrong about Clinton. There would have been a great difference between Clinton and Trump, and that is where I don't get Sarandon. I felt like here for quite a while after Bernie got cheated, it burned by britches so bad I did not know what to do. I really hated Clinton, and I hated her again when he she did not give the VP spot to Bernie. That was pure politics, probably based on how she undercut Obama in several ways as Sec. of State. But, by election time I had to accept the only sensible way to make any difference was to vote for Clinton, and support Bernie over the next 4 years.
    1
  270. 1
  271. 1
  272. 1
  273. 1
  274. 1
  275. 1
  276. 1
  277. 1
  278. 1
  279. 1
  280.  @BenWeeks  > Friedman argues that capitalism needs to be constrained by laws and regulations. I'd agree with that, and I think most people would agree, at least publicly. > As long as regulators have integrity, good laws and enforcement power that should This is the core of the problem, Pikketty's book "Capital in the 21st Century" shows that capital grows faster than wages in every case. If you are to have meaningful and effective regulation, you must recognize and counter this trend or you get into a class warfare on the poor situation we are in today ... and it is not just the poor. America has always exploited the poor and the weak, and even manufactured them but exploitation. When people are allowed to get so rich and powerful they grow apart and insulated from everyone else and end up thinking of the rest of us as an exploitable resource and use their money and power to capture the regulators. > Once people know slaves are used they can choose to stop buying that brand This is the problem too. Even today people know for example blacks are exploited in the South, and they just do not care. It is not their problem and the general tenor of the society is to be cold and merciless. I know this is not only the South by the way, but that is the center of it, as Saudi Arabia is one of the centers of Islam. Competition is the thing that most companies will do anything to avoid, and what the super-wealthy in American have done as well in school and in corporate jobs - you get nowhere if you are not connected, and they limit the connectivity to outsiders. Petersons is a shill for the right wing. Hard to blame him because he'd have to get a normal job like everyone else if we was not a Right-Wing fake celebrity.
    1
  281. Dear Rational National, You know you have reached a point where your journalism and editorials are so biased and so dependent on a self-selected audience that you cannot interact or respond to questions or debate, only pander to your audience ... which is just what the Right-wing nuts thrive on. To wit: I've left many questions and comments for you to react to, and have never gotten an acknowledgement or response from you. Here is some thoughts on the Palestinian-Israeli situation that maybe you could consider? Criticism is supposed to be constructive. But all I see from the Left ( and on all other issues I am solidly on the Left ) is repetetive and relentless attacks and blame on the Israeli government without thought or analysis - and certainly they offer no other alternative as to how Israel can defend itself. Why is there never any investigation as to what Israel is facing in terms of terrorism from Palestinians - who again publicly state that their goal is not peace or statehood, but the destruction of Israel. Why not a little criticism of that - ever? Why are the Palestinians and Palestinian terrorism never addressed except as the undeserving victims of Israeli defense, otherwise called abuse or apartheid? We see ONLY plenty of blame cast on Israel for its reactions, but we never hear about what Israel faces and is reacting to. In the case of today Sept 2022 there have been over 100 terror attacks in Israel, but I've never heard of a single one in the mainstream media, or the Left Wing media. Instead of trying to deny this - which is totally true, why don't you work toward really press freedom and truth and demand objective journalism - because all this bias does it to tell viewers that the Left spokespeople are as bad as the Right spokespeople - and drive them away from the Left. My thesis is that the money people who support the Left are actually Right-wing and they do it in order to subtly turn people away from the Left to protect their vicious global oligarch franchise or exploitation of all of us. Most of the Left media is subtly designed to discredit the Left. Listen to Tlaib whine about Israel - not to mention she is totally biased and it is not what she was elected to do. Finally - South Africa was apartheid - for no reason other than oppression of blacks and to steal their lands. Apartheid is about oppression, Israel's walls and defenses are to protect the country and citizens from terror attacks from radical Muslims who want to kill them and destroy their country. Blacks in South Africa were all about their own human rights and freedom. Palestinians could have self-governance and their own state in 10 minutes if they quit their terrorism and stopped blaming Israel, Jews and the West for all their problems. Finally, as an exercise for the viewer ... how is Israel wanting to have a Jewish state any different from the oppressed Kurds who want to have a Kurdish state?
    1
  282. 1
  283. 1
  284. 1
  285. 1
  286. 1
  287. 1
  288. 1
  289. Cenk claims he is no longer a Muslim too, but when he had that 3 hour epic long debate with Sam Harris he sounded very defensive of "The Prophet".  So, that is sort of OK because I listen carefully to what people say, and often Cenk expresses Progressive values very well, so on those occasions I agree with him.  It is just not good to decide that one really likes someone and so must agree with them all the time. I did not know Cenk used to be Conservative, but I do remember looking up and finding the funding, at least the initial funding for TYT was from a Conservative.  So, I am looking for why and what is going on with the Conservative ownership of Progressives voices? Having heard some of what Cenk said that was deemed offensive, it was more extremely immature, like adolescent fantasy talk, and very stupid, very, very stupid.  It sounded to me like anyone who would talk like that, or write like that, was mostly concerned about being a celebrity and politics and ethics came a distant second if not worse. There was always something about the discussion with Cenk in the center presiding over a lot of kind of titillating sexual-related stories that I always used to wonder ... what are they doing talking about this stuff on a political show.  I thought it was more to attract an audience that was not patient enough to talk just about political issues, but now I think it was more, there was something wrong about that, and while i got used to hearing that and mostly tuned them out, I did like the interviews he did with Bernie Sanders and Jane Sanders, and some of the other work he did.  I felt that proved his Progressive bona fides and it was not necessary that everything he did in his life was perfect, but I can see why this happened in today's almost nonsense climate. Which is also probably a good time to express that I don't that many, or as many as I think women coming out and accusing predators and harassers - and I wonder why that is.  In fact it almost seems like as many women came out to point the finger at Al Franken as the total that came out about other harassers.  That's an exaggeration, but Franken was slammed in the media like no one I have ever seen with accusations that were trivial compared to Cosby, Weinstein, Trump or Roy Moore.  I felt like this was all staged for the public in some way.
    1
  290. 1
  291. 1
  292. 1
  293. 1
  294. 1
  295. 1
  296. 1
  297. 1
  298. 1
  299. 1
  300. 1
  301. 1
  302. 1
  303. 1
  304. 1
  305. 1
  306. 1
  307. 1
  308. 1
  309. 1
  310. 1
  311. 1
  312. 1
  313. 1
  314. 1
  315. 1
  316. 1
  317. 1
  318. 1
  319. 1
  320. 1
  321. 1
  322. 1
  323. 1
  324. 1
  325. 1
  326. 1
  327. 1
  328. 1
  329. 1
  330. 1
  331. 1
  332. 1
  333. 1
  334. 1
  335. 1
  336. 1
  337. 1
  338. 1
  339. 1
  340. 1
  341. 1
  342. 1
  343. 1
  344. 1
  345. 1
  346. 1
  347. I think a lot of young Lefties do not know how to put this in perspective. They see the Democratic party as being afraid of Bernie Sanders. Personally, I am a big supporter of Senator Bernie, and I see him pretty much as the only path to fix what is really wrong with the country. Biden is OK, but there are a few things wrong with him policy wise: 1. He is the corporate candidate from Delaware, the original corporate state. 2. He is very establishment. 3. His foot in mouth problem, including his twisted quote today about guns. 4. In the VP debates Biden just sucked, even against Ryan who he should have trounced. Biden would be just another temp Democrat because the public is mad at the Republicans. Biden would do nothing to really fix the problems of the country - he has said nothing about what is going on. He is some interest group's stealth candidate. That said, it is also important to remember the long term horrible stench of defeat of George McGovern, a far Left anti-War candidate in the 70's who lost by the worst landslide every in the history of the US. That is when Democrats started to change and become less Liberal, and did not defend or support Unions, and did not defend or extend the FDR legacy - they ran from it. That really pissed me off, but it is understandable, as is their embrace or at least testing Joe Biden. People say they will vote for Bernie, but if the Republican can fear-monger the socialist again, it may be another big defeat. So, try to understand and be patient with an old and rigid institution. If you want to changed the Democratic party, you have to support it and work hard. Not too many Liberals will really do that. They are great at slinging facts, they are great at calling names now that they match the Republicans on that score, but as the left election showed - Liberals are not great at showing up to vote - very low voter turnout in 2016. If Democrats are not going to show up we are going to get candidates like Biden or Clinton.
    1
  348. 1
  349. 1
  350. 1
  351. 1
  352. 1
  353. 1
  354. 1
  355. 1
  356. 1
  357. 1
  358. 1
  359. 1
  360. 1
  361. 1
  362. 1
  363. 1
  364. 1
  365. 1
  366. 1
  367. 1
  368. 1
  369. 1
  370. 1
  371. 1
  372. 1
  373. 1
  374. 1
  375. 1
  376. 1
  377. 1
  378. 1
  379. 1