Comments by "MarcosElMalo2" (@MarcosElMalo2) on "Dr. Todd Grande"
channel.
-
69
-
15
-
14
-
13
-
Dr Mike should know better, but is subject to the same human foibles as are we all. This is a good reminder that despite his expertise in the field of Medicine, that expertise doesn’t confer wisdom or maturity. (The half-assed apology video underlines this point.)
A half hour ago I learned COVID has hit my neighborhood. The family that operates the little bodega around the corner has been infected. The father has already died and one of the daughters is in the hospital. It’s really terrible news. And right now, I’m going over in my mind my exposure risk. It’s been over a week (closer to two weeks) since I visited to store, but I’m thinking about the times I’ve been lax in following the pandemic protocols. The slip ups, the momentary lapses.
Because this is the neighborhood store, everyone in the neighborhood has potentially been exposed either directly, or second hand. It’s frikkin’ scary. I’ve primarily had contact with one person over the course of the pandemic, but we’ve rarely worn masks inside my home. I know that she wears a mask and maintains social distancing on the outside, but if I’ve slipped up, she probably has also.
11
-
10
-
10
-
9
-
8
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
It’s certainly within his right, up to a point. That point is can the actual challenges in court change the outcome, and the answer to that is no. In court, one must show credible evidence to back one’s claims. After a certain point, further litigation is frivolous and should stop. Trump has exhausted his right.
His wild and damaging claims made outside of court are also his “right” (as in the right free speech). However, he’s not only telling lies, he’s doing great and long term damage to the country. It’s immoral, unethical, and irresponsible. If he had credible evidence for any of his claims, it would have been presented within the past month.
Al Gore had the right to challenge the 2000 election that he lost to George W. Bush. And he got two recounts in Florida (where the court challenges took place). It was during the third recount that the Supreme Court stepped in and said, “enough”! Al Gore had exhausted his right to challenge the counting of votes. Realizing this, he conceded, and then . . . HE SHUT UP. He did not continue grousing, whining, or complaining. He did not try to undermine the public’s faith in elections, for the good of the country. It would have been his right to do so but he didn’t because he’s a decent human being, whatever his liberal shortcomings. (And yes, I’m a conservative who left the GOP when it became clear that its shift to Authoritarianism couldn’t be stopped.)
7
-
Accents are weird things. I’m native born Californian, English is my first language, but I’ve grown up around Spanish my whole life. I like to joke that Spanglish is my first language, but it’s only a tiny bit true. I didn’t really become fluent in Spanish until after living in Mexico for a few years.
So here’s the deal. I’ve got a gringo accent to my Spanish. I work at it, but I’ll probably always have it to some extent. It’s worse when I’m tired. But the funny thing is this: when I’ve been in Mexico for a while, immersed in Spanish, and I come back to L.A., I speak ENGLISH with a Mexican Spanish accent for at least a few days. I’m not trying to! And I’ll get words mixed up sometimes.
Now my mother was born and raised in South Pasadena, California. He father was born and raised in Hawaii, the son of plantation workers who came to L.A. in the 1910s. My mother used to go visit her cousins on the Big Island, and they all spoke Hawaiinized English. Sort of like pidgin, but not really. They all can speak English perfectly if they need to. My mother would come back from her visits with this accent. It was pretty funny. And she could do it on command, but right after a trip it was unconscious.
So I’m not saying that Hilaría isn’t nuts, but she has been fluent in Spanish from a young age and spent long periods immersed in Spanish speaking environments. We shouldn’t jump to conclusions about her accent.
6
-
6
-
6
-
Your analysis was indeed interesting, but I think it was also unkind, especially in your conclusion. We, your fans, love your dry wit, but I felt a little uncomfortable with a few things you said that bordered on cruelty.
With a little more empathy, this rather trivial matter could be an interesting entry into a discussion about identity, how it can be formed and unformed, self-image and presentation/persona, etc. Really, there are a hundred interesting paths this could have taken without devolving into a snark exercise. Oh, well. Better luck next time.
5
-
You seem deeply in denial, perhaps delusional. Of course, it is useless to argue with you because you are not amenable to logic.
The Russians did interfere in the 2016 election, and they did influence people. There is little doubt about this among those that investigating—the only argument and room for opinion is how much influence did the Russian operation have on the 2016 election. We can also debate what the Russian goals were. Was it to help Trump win or was it to foment division, or was it originally one and then morphed into the other?
See, those are debates we can have if you could accept the basic facts on the ground. But you won’t because you’re enmeshed in system of fantasy thinking.
Now, let’s address the question of collusion and Trump’s obeisance to Putin, a similar delusion among some Democrats, but not a majority. Again, the evidence doesn’t exist that Trump colluded with the Russians and was being directed by Putin. There are some facts that suggest it could have happened (Trump’s own words and the attempts by Rodger Stone), but no direct proof—despite extensive investigation.
At best, we know Trump and his family have borrowed money from Russians and are predisposed to friendlier relations with Putin and Russia so as not to disrupt their business relations. But it doesn’t prove the wilder conspiracy theories put forth by a few delusional Democrats.
If you are not delusional, by chance, but are merely trying to make what (you think) is the strongest case, you’re doing yourself and everyone else a disservice. Stick to the facts, be open to new facts, find a basis of agreement, and we can debate.
5
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
I believe a rational person can explore irrational and suprarational thoughts, but it does require a temporary letting go of ones rational framework, a stepping outside of it in a way. You don’t need drugs to do this, but if you’ve learned meditation or self hypnosis techniques they might be helpful. It might also be useful to keep a journal, notes, or some written record.
You might do it like this. Say to yourself, “Suppose that . . . .” and add something pleasant, but unlikely, unprovable, or impossible. And then suppose that it’s true. Discard thoughts about why it’s not possible, or how one could make it possible. Just suppose for the moment that it is true, and suppose what that would be like.
I want to stress that the thing you suppose can really be unlimited. Suppose I am a coyote. Suppose there were two planet earths and we could travel between them. Suppose God existed. Suppose our bones were stronger than steel. Suppose farts had medicinal properties.
Part of this exercise is to imagine what the experience is like living in a world that you just supposed. To imagine it so vividly that you almost feel like you have experienced it, to experience it as real.
Don’t worry about all the reasons your supposition is not possible. Don’t try to undermine it. Obviously, a part of your mind will want to analyze all the ways your supposition is absurd, wouldn’t work, or is impossible. Let those thoughts drift away, reframe the question, and continue imagining.
I suggested you use a pleasant supposition. The reason for this is an unpleasant or negative one, even a morbid one, might cause you worry and anxiety—this will impede you in two ways. One, it triggers your analytic mind which will strive to relieve you of the anxiety, most easily by explaining to yourself why the triggering supposition is impossible. Two, an unpleasant supposition could disuade you from repeating the exercise.
Anyway, I hope this is useful. It’s possible to take time away from the hyper mechanistic and rational self without becoming an idiot or a loony. It’s quite useful to do so. I don’t want to use the word “escape” because it’s not accurate. But it is stepping outside of it, and it is possible because we are larger than our rational minds.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1