This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
US politics
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In
 Stirlingsays  27 Jan 23 11.24pm |
   |
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
You are avoiding answering a difficult question, as usual. You claimed to know he has a team of editors and lawyers, based on having seen them on one, or more, of his videos. I haven’t, and I watched a few bits and pieces. I have no intention and even less desire to watch any more to prove your claim. More importantly, I want to know who these people are and what their jobs are. Then I can do some investigation. They could just be a couple of his mates. A few words from Brand, a couple of faces on screen and you claiming something, proves nothing. I have only ever seen Brand pontificating his self importance. No sense of anybody else there or involved. He seems to have his own notes, no edited script or autocue. So I am sceptical. You made the claim. It’s for you to prove it, not me. Proving a negative is not a service I provide. I have read a variety of estimates of his wealth, ranging from £7 million to £80 million. So nobody really knows. £20 million is the most popular, probably all from the same back of an envelope. The calculation of his podcast revenue was more detailed, based on the amount per 100 subscribers. I judge on actions. He is concentrating on the podcasts. That’s where the money is. If the subscription base lust for red meat, that’s what he will serve up. Whether he would even be aware of possible troll accounts, let alone care, is beside the point. It suits certain anti-democratic states to encourage dissent and dissatisfaction in the west. So they are highly likely to be encouraging people like Brand, whether with money via troll subscriptions or positive responses. Once again, nothing to back up your claims and you want me to do the work for you. Sorry old bean, I don't work free for confused social liberals. If you watch the videos you'll see his team. I think I last saw them on a stream around Christmas.....It's not as though I spend my time obsessing over Brand streams. Again, anyone who actually watches Brand can tell he's been briefed upon how to talk about the sensitive topics......but apparently editing and lawyers aren't enough or aren't they? If Brand didn't have lawyers then why hasn't he been sued for his Youtube content that you have such issues with. Hey, why not try sending him a letter with all your claims.....That way he can join in on the laughter. You made the claim that Brand apparently needs to make money off of streaming.....nothing to back up your opinion other than your prejudice. I, on the other hand, at least linked to the commonly accepted view that Brand is well north of a multimillionaire, despite you waffling away previously about how apparently down on his financial luck he is.....wrong as usual. As for Brand's intent, now on many topics I'm far more right wing than Brand, however anyone who has watched his stuff knows that he means well whatever someone may think of his politics. In my opinion for someone to think otherwise is more an indication of their personality than his.
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
 Alert a moderator to this post |
  |
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 27 Jan 23 11.25pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Teddy Eagle
Well it's happening so it's time to get over the dread fear of the NHS being overwhelmed. Dread? Dread implies something might happen. In many areas of the NHS it already is happening. Having to treat a larger proportion of the unvaccinated is a problem that could, and should, be avoided if everyone plays their part. You know my views on how priorities ought to be assessed when a crisis point has been reached.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stirlingsays 27 Jan 23 11.29pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
Unvaccinated people already have their liberty! Far too much in my view. I wasn’t aware of the change and question its wisdom, or how long it will last. That's the problem with people like yourself....too stuck in the past. You need to evolve. Get with the times, don't be a dinosaur.
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Teddy Eagle  27 Jan 23 11.35pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
Dread? Dread implies something might happen. In many areas of the NHS it already is happening. Having to treat a larger proportion of the unvaccinated is a problem that could, and should, be avoided if everyone plays their part. You know my views on how priorities ought to be assessed when a crisis point has been reached. Then why isn't the NHS insisting that booster shots continue? Could it be that the risk to the under 50s has been exaggerated?
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stirlingsays 27 Jan 23 11.58pm |
|
|---|---|
|
I'm hearing that a quarter of all US tax income taken by the federal government, goes to servicing interest on the more than 31 trillion dollars of debt that the nation holds.
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stirlingsays 28 Jan 23 12.50am |
|
|---|---|
|
Police cam footage of the home attack on Paul Pelosi. There's no gore but it's still violent so viewer discretion is appropriate. Aside from the attack there are interesting aspects here....the state of dress raises questions certainly. I don't agree with Kassam here though, Pelosi isn't relaxed and he's clearly aware that the guy has a hammer as he's also holding onto it. [Tweet Link]
Edited by Stirlingsays (28 Jan 2023 12.51am)
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Matov 28 Jan 23 7.42am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
Police cam footage of the home attack on Paul Pelosi. There's no gore but it's still violent so viewer discretion is appropriate. Aside from the attack there are interesting aspects here....the state of dress raises questions certainly. I don't agree with Kassam here though, Pelosi isn't relaxed and he's clearly aware that the guy has a hammer as he's also holding onto it. [Tweet Link]
Edited by Stirlingsays (28 Jan 2023 12.51am) The man clearly broke into the property. As to how Pelosi was acting when the police answered the door...perhaps a man who was just trying to cope with a stressful situation? Had been trying to calm the intruder? Life is not a Hollywood film in which every reaction is scripted in advance. And maybe he was in a daze himself? Sleeping pills? Other medication? His wife represents everything I detest about the Democrats but in this case not sure why I think much beyond how the hell did the intruder make it into the house in the first place?
"The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command." - 1984 - George Orwell. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 28 Jan 23 8.39am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
Once again, nothing to back up your claims and you want me to do the work for you. Sorry old bean, I don't work free for confused social liberals. If you watch the videos you'll see his team. I think I last saw them on a stream around Christmas.....It's not as though I spend my time obsessing over Brand streams. Again, anyone who actually watches Brand can tell he's been briefed upon how to talk about the sensitive topics......but apparently editing and lawyers aren't enough or aren't they? If Brand didn't have lawyers then why hasn't he been sued for his Youtube content that you have such issues with. Hey, why not try sending him a letter with all your claims.....That way he can join in on the laughter. You made the claim that Brand apparently needs to make money off of streaming.....nothing to back up your opinion other than your prejudice. I, on the other hand, at least linked to the commonly accepted view that Brand is well north of a multimillionaire, despite you waffling away previously about how apparently down on his financial luck he is.....wrong as usual. As for Brand's intent, now on many topics I'm far more right wing than Brand, however anyone who has watched his stuff knows that he means well whatever someone may think of his politics. In my opinion for someone to think otherwise is more an indication of their personality than his.
. It’s so clearly you who is confused. I have made no claims. You have. I have made observations based on my own experiences which I have no intention of enhancing. Nothing I can find online or have seen myself backs up your claims. You probably subscribe to his money machine so have the access needed. For someone not obsessed with Brand videos you seem to refer to them in an obsessive way. Brand comes across to me as a narcistic self opinionated prat with an opinion on everything and knowledge about almost nothing other than how to milk the impressionable. I cannot imagine him listening to anyone. The content I see is 100% him. There is a big difference between needing to use a lawyer on occasions and having them on your team. One is temporary, the other permanent. I have an hour with a barrister on Monday myself but I wouldn’t describe him as on my team! It’s again you who are suggesting that Brand’s current income doesn’t mainly depend on these podcasts, when it seems as clear as day that it must be. It’s what he spends most of his time doing. Brand is an entertainer. He knows how to adopt a persons. You cannot fool all of the people all of the time. But you can fool some of the people most of the time. That they think he is well meaning just proves how effective that fooling seems to have been. It’s no more than a cleverly constructed reality show designed to attract people who have already been fed a diet of dissatisfaction elsewhere and feel comforted by someone from “the other side seeing the light”.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 28 Jan 23 8.42am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
That's the problem with people like yourself....too stuck in the past. You need to evolve. Get with the times, don't be a dinosaur. . Untrue. What I would like to see has never been done before and would be pretty revolutionary. Maybe in 50 years we will get there!
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 28 Jan 23 8.47am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Teddy Eagle
Then why isn't the NHS insisting that booster shots continue? Could it be that the risk to the under 50s has been exaggerated? We will have to see whether that policy continues. I suspect it may prove to be a pause rather than a cancellation and when a new strain becomes a real risk again it will be reinstated. This isn’t over yet.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Teddy Eagle 28 Jan 23 8.59am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
We will have to see whether that policy continues. I suspect it may prove to be a pause rather than a cancellation and when a new strain becomes a real risk again it will be reinstated. This isn’t over yet. The booster(s) will still be available to those who are clinically vulnerable. The reason for the cancellation seems to be that the take up rate among younger people (under 50 anyway) has been very low. One reason could be that many have now had Covid and decided it wasn't too bad.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stirlingsays 28 Jan 23 1.42pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Matov
The man clearly broke into the property. As to how Pelosi was acting when the police answered the door...perhaps a man who was just trying to cope with a stressful situation? Had been trying to calm the intruder? Life is not a Hollywood film in which every reaction is scripted in advance. And maybe he was in a daze himself? Sleeping pills? Other medication? His wife represents everything I detest about the Democrats but in this case not sure why I think much beyond how the hell did the intruder make it into the house in the first place? If he broke into the property, which is probably the most likely explanation then that footage backs up your summary of the event. I fully concur politically on his wife, and the corruption around US politicians in general. However, I'm uneasy over the partisan republican take on this event which goes beyond the political. The evidence seems to point to a break in and this guy was attacked with a hammer and could have lost his life. The Democrats and every supporter of theirs I'm aware of who commented on it whitewashed the murder of Babbitt and/or made political capital out of it. We should not do the same of this attack. Edited by Stirlingsays (28 Jan 2023 1.42pm)
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Login / RegisterNew users
Registration is now on our new message board
Existing users
To login with your existing username you will need to convert your account over to the new message board.
Sponsors
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2024 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.