Here’s a dose of The Painful Truth:
Well he sure thinks he’s cute, doesn’t he? I wonder if he has actually raised children.
Ironic considering he doesn’t think no means no.
Religious extremists discussing the importance of accepting loss gracefully is really insulting.
I wish I hadn’t clicked on that stupid-ass link. I endured nearly 10 seconds of it before hitting thumbs down and closing the browser tab. It would have been preferable for the OP to include some actual information about it so we would know in advance if it were worth clicking on or not. In fact, I thought OPs presenting video URLs with little or no information were deprecated around here.
I actually googled “vitamin N” first in an attempt to puzzle out what the OP was talking about, and the only thing found is somebody unrelated promoting nature hikes, making the URL falsely seem innocuous.
“Prager U. Vitamin N”
Here’s a thing Wikipedia has to say about the guy who made that video:
If “Prager U” wasn’t enough of a warning, maybe this will keep you from clicking the link and giving them the YouTube money and algorithm boost they want.
From the end of the video:
That explains a lot! Why invest in a proper healthcare system if your peasants – I mean, if OTHER PEOPLE - will just keep breeding anyways?
[quote=“Enola_Straight, post:1, topic:849625”]
Here’s a dose of The Painful Truth:
[/QUOTE]A clickbait one-liner and an anonymous youtube link isn’t going to get you very far.
For future reference, Prager U is a propaganda mill for some reactionary conservatives. Not worth a thinking person’s time.
Yeah, there was no way in hell I was going to click on a YouTube link to Prager U. Even I don’t hate myself that much.
I think OP’s like that are against the rules.
I lost all respect for Mike Rowe the moment I learned he did work for good ol’ PU.
I clicked on it just long enough to downvote it. But then I stayed just long enough to hear about the dad who bought his five year old an electric guitar and a lap top, as one does for one’s five year old.
That’s what I mean. Even if not explicitly against the rules yet (I looked), it’s definitely deprecated and roundly scorned and hated by this community. An OP who would flout the community standards like that has only themself to blame when they lose everyone’s respect.
Just so I get it…is everybody hatin’ on the message, or the source?
We’re mainly “hatin’” on both the source and an OP with a link to a video and little or no explanation of what the video contains, why it is being linked to or what the OP’s views about the topic are, but the “message” is patronizing, simplistic and not grounded in reality. It’s a hat trick of dislikability.
Few people have actually seen the message, since it’s a shitty source we don’t want to give advertising money. Apparently the specific messenger in this video is also controversial. And you, the OP, supplied no context or real commentary.
Of course, even a blind chicken occasionally finds a grain, but why discuss whatever this is based on a video from a known crank on a ultra-conservative propaganda channel?
[quote=“Enola_Straight, post:1, topic:849625”]
Here’s a dose of The Painful Truth:
[/QUOTE]I would appreciate having some kind of indication to any link, such as a brief description or summary. I’m not going to click on a bare link.
If Prager U says the sky is blue, you’d better look outside and check. Everyone would do well to avoid them if possible, and ignore everything they say if you’re somehow in a situation where it’s impossible to avoid them.
As far as I’m concerned there is no message. You provided us with a link to a garbage delivery service, essentially feeding us a shit sandwich. You’re not going to get a lot of commentary on the flavor of the sauce when nobody is dumb enough to take a bite of the shit in the first place.
If you want us to critique some message, tell us what message you want critiqued. Yourself. in your own words.
Though seriously, sneak preview: garbage delivery services deliver garbage. So your message is, almost certainly, garbage.