General Elon Musk Faded as Hell on JRE
- Thread starter Rambo John J
- Start date
-
- Tags
- jre
He's planning to have Bernie on.
Such as?
He's not a conman. He's an eccentric genius with 0 people skills or business sense. Based on just listening to him speak for hours he's more than likely high functioning autistic.
yeah right, I'm sure his "funding secured" tweet without having any funding secured or his board even being aware of such a plan was his autism kicking in, or the dozens of other things he's done since it became clear the Tesla house of cards was collapsing
Something impulsive and irrational? Actually, yes that sounds very accurate.
You may not have been paying attention if you think the Tesla house was built on something as stable as cards.
Some may call it impulsive, other's may call it a felony & a last ditch attempt to reel in dupes into buying Tesla stock, but I just can't tell if all the execs are leaving b/c Musk is impulsive or b/c he's running a fraudulent company
Allow me to state it more clearly. Solvency was never something that Tesla was going to see. Listen to him speak about developing the a/c compressors on their first cars and it's painfully apparent that they had no idea what the fuck they were doing.
Elon mentioned he likes to have fun and placed little Easter Eggs inside his Tesla cars ...
Apparently this is one of em:
Apparently this is one of em:
There's not really anything political to it since both Elon and Joe are fairly apolitical and Rogan has as many liberal as conservative people on there. The issues to do with Rogan have to do with his stated aims of the podcast at the outset and how he started whiffing softballs. The reason I brought up Stern is because his show was about randomness as much as Joe's is, but when he had guests on who spoke to public interests, he always did his homework and asked incisive questions.
Jason Silva, Alex Jones, Jordan Peterson, Victor Conte, Russell Brand, Steven Pinker, Josh Barnett, Peter Joseph and Mel Gibson.
Each of these guests merited more skepticism and questioning than they got imo.
It seems like he was running a con, then
If those are your examples you really need to reevaluate your biases as it pertains to whom should be allowed to speak.
"Con" implies malicious intent. I've got no reason to believe that's the case. In the case I cited he literally reinvented a wheel.
I don't care enough to document all of his lies designed to dupe people out of their money, but if you don't find them malicious I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you
I don't think he's saying that they shouldn't be allowed to speak just that when given a high profile platform that the interviewer should dig in to them a bit deeper and not just let them dictate the terms of the conversation.
I fully understand Joe not wanting to do that as he generally just wants to have fun conversations with interesting people and isn't a reporter or journalist. The downside to that is that when you give someone with some questionable opinions an ability to control the narrative or just completely avoid the topics like with Mel Gibson then it can be viewed as a missed opportunity to really make someone own their actions.
What was he supposed to do with Mel Gibson? Rake him over the coals for something he said a long time ago and has apologized for? Mel said about 6 words the whole podcast. Mel wanted a doctor and his research to be brought to the public's attention.
What happens is there are some people that certain groups want to end up being the devil that they've decided they are. More often than not, that person isn't as horrible as you've been told (Jordan Peterson might be the best ever example of this) Then when that person has the opportunity to explain their side of the story, and it isn't as bad as was hoped, people get bent out of shape about it. It's a weird time we live in where people seem to think that everyone is an asshole just waiting to be exposed.
I dunno... Maybe ask a single question about anything from his past? Anything at all.
Wouldn't it have been nice to have heard a real conversation about either the anger and frustration, possible substance issues, that Mel was going through when he was freaking out in those phone calls? Or how he felt and has dealt with the public thinking of him as an anti-semite since the police interaction?
Ask him ANYTHING. You can do that without being an ass.
He could press Ben Shapiro harder. He could have asked Alex Jones what the hell he was thinking in regards to Sandy Hook. He could ask Russell Brand on what makes him think that his idea of Socialism and his loathing of profits could possibly be a good thing and how it could even be implemented instead of just talking about a pipe dream.
I know that I would appreciate it if Joe did press his guests a bit more. Millions of people are being introduced to his guests on his platform and if someone isn't there to make it a bit more of an interview then a savvy person can either avoid or change a narrative dramatically without interference or even being factual.
The fact that it is more of a conversation between Joe and his guests are generally why they're more relaxed and will volunteer information or talk about things to begin with. So taking that conversation a step further and asking to explain their position on a subject would be very reasonable.
He was/is very lucky with Peterson because Peterson wants to tell his side and volunteers the info and it has done wonders for him.
So most listeners just want someone to take 5 minutes out of a 180 minute podcast to actually ask OJ to explain his thought process when he agreed to do the book "if I did it" instead of just talking about The Naked Gun 33 1/3rd.
Take advantage of the situation and the stage that exists to find out more about the things that everyone wants to know about.
It's funny you say this after thinking that people wanted Joe to "rake Mel over the coals"...
His interview with Mel Gibson should have included more scrutiny about stem cell treatments down in Panama since that Doc was selling a lot of wolf tickets.
Also, you can't hold the rep as the straight shooter and give someone a pass on their backstory. That's a commercial, not an interview.
M
member 1013
Guest
I’m pretty sure
@Kneeblock is a died in the wool leftist academic, so I had a great laugh at him objecting to Professor Peterson.
Except you lead this post with:
Which has already been covered by Mel when he went to rehab and since.
Was he?
