I understand this is supposed to be somewhat tongue-in-cheek, and it is meant to be entertaining...
But I am just so sick of this kind of "reporting." It is simply a means to dump on ordinary Americans, make them look ignorant, and call them "conspiracy theorists" while giving side glances to the camera. It is smug, it is condescending, and it is why independents are sick of Democratic Party.
I thought the Free Press was better than this and actually cared about truth. I hope I'm not wrong.
This clip was disappointing and not what I expect from The Free Press. It seems like Ben was looking for people to say crazy things and he got what he was looking for-- just like the Legacy Media. In my experience, very smart and thinking people are latching onto RFK because he is highly educated and thoughtful.
"How do you know who to trust?" The interviewer asks...
That's easy. Never trust the people who tell you boys are girls and women can be men. Never trust race-hustlers, well-heeled Marxists or "democratic socialists"... never trust people who tell you that climate change is the only thing that matters and that there is something which "the entire planet" must do...
Never trust the left. Never.
Imagine if the American people had as much skepticism about Barack Obama when that malignant narcissist burst onto the scene...
Send Ben out asking the same questions of Biden supporters and Trump supporters. They can also be made to look like fools. This comes-off to me as simply a political hit job and really not worthy of The Free Press.
I've witnessed RFK publicly explain how black rock is absorbing Ukraine, as well as display poise and intelligence in the face of hostilities. I'll vote for him most likely.
There's actually something interesting to be said about why people believe the things that they believe. This clip chose not to engage this fascinating and deep topic. As other commentators here have observed, nothing these people said is crazier than what our mainstream institutions say and require us to respect in order to keep our jobs. One man on the street actually considered more than one definition of the word "immigrant". He makes more sense than a certain justice on the Supreme Court.
This was a really unfunny and incurious video with the punchline that we should... trust the experts?! ... who have themselves back-tracked on every major claim they pushed on us these past 4 years? Bizarre choice for FP to feature. There's one candidate in the presidential race who can actually back every assertion he makes with footnotes, has won lawsuit after lawsuit, written book after book. But instead of looking at any of that, yes, Ben, rely on the NY Times' take on him as your baseline truth, then seek out people to mock for not falling for the NYT party line.
I believe RFK because he is the only candidate who speaks about the problems that effect my life and the lives of the vast majority of Americans.
We do have a chronic disease epidemic that the pharmaceutical companies profit from. We do have a military industrial complex that incentivizes politicians to go to war instead of entering peace talks. Much of our drinking water is polluted, our food is toxic, and the soils that that food is grown on are being degraded year after year by the practices of big ag. On top of all of this our most important right, that of free speech, is being censured so that we cannot even have these important conversations without being called conspiracy theorists.
I am a New Mexico rancher with a deep love for this country, and I will be proud to vote for RFK in November.
Hey, the google search link in response to ivermectin that is shown on the video is from 2021. There are recent articles that if shared in the video may be able to provide a better light on the RFK supporters side of the story. The FDA hasn't approved ivermectin for covid but the FDA agreed to remove the ivermectin horse tweet due to settling outside of court with doctors who sued the FDA in regards to the use of ivermectin. If you are still reading, go to ChatGPT and ask about ivermectin, ask if it is harmless, if the discoverers received a nobel prize, how many times it has been administered. What it seems the FDA was doing was that the vaccines were emergency authorized and if a known medication or treatment already existed, the vaccines would not be eligible for the emergency authorization. In other words, ivermectin was diminished in benefit of the vaccines. It is curious why a mostly harmless, cheap, known drug was diminished for something that is none of those things.
I like Ben Kawaller's man-on-the-street approach. This is very funny, and like all pseudo-satire offers us a glimpse into what people think. However, I will take issue, serious issue, with two things. He asks a young boy about who to trust. Here's how we know. The side that calls for censorship is lying. Who is this? Right now it's the Left - the Democratic Party and its minions: big media, big Pharma, the Swamp. If they are truthful, they'd allow, even welcome debate, but they suppress it. Ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine? Yes they work I'm proof of it. In addition, Ben uses Google to search the answer. Duh! Read my previous statement. Who's been behind the suppression of medical information? Google is one of the worst offenders - it promotes more misinformation and promotes more undocumented attacks on its opponents that perhaps any entity in American history. If you like RFK, jr., vote for him. I won't. I respect much about him, but I think he's still a bit of a kook. He's not a kook about everything. He's been a consistent support of open debate, challenging the regime's narrative and standing up for his sincere beliefs. Kook or not, this is pretty good.
Why not speak about what Kennedy has actually said about vaccines? "Anti-vaccine" is not a monolithic category, and although I haven't heard everything Kennedy has said about vaccines, what I have heard is not a unilateral "all vaccines are bad" but something more like "it depends on which vaccine you're talking about." I agree with others here that this seems like a velveted hit job.
The Ben series are not in keeping with TFP. Every time I see his material it feels as though he is mocking the citizens he interviews. It might as well be "The View"
The partial heritability of IQ is well-established in the literature. Estimates range from 0.45 to 0.8. See “Heritabliity of IQ” (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heritability_of_IQ) in Wikipedia. Quote
“Early twin studies of adult individuals have found a heritability of IQ between 57% and 73%, with some recent studies showing heritability for IQ as high as 80%. IQ goes from being weakly correlated with genetics for children, to being strongly correlated with genetics for late teens and adults. The heritability of IQ increases with the child's age and reaches a plateau at 14–16 years old, continuing at that level well into adulthood. However, poor prenatal environment, malnutrition and disease are known to have lifelong deleterious effects.”
The (alleged) link between vaccines and autism isn’t quite so clear. Some of the specific links (MMR, Thimerosal) have been debunked. However, the broader issue still exists. The number of vaccinations of children has soared since WWII (from 3 to 17). Could vaccinations have some cumulative adverse impact? Hard to prove either way. For a completely different theory. There is a claim that Asians have brought a (otherwise harmless) virus to the US that triggers (in some people) Autism. This theory helps explain the allegedly high incidence of Autism in SV. For a completely different theory. There is a claim that the incidence of Autism has not increased, but it (Autism) is better diagnosed than it was.
Is any of this true?
The practical benefits of vaccines are easily overstated. Most of the reduction in morality occurred before vaccines and antibiotics were invented/used.
I understand this is supposed to be somewhat tongue-in-cheek, and it is meant to be entertaining...
But I am just so sick of this kind of "reporting." It is simply a means to dump on ordinary Americans, make them look ignorant, and call them "conspiracy theorists" while giving side glances to the camera. It is smug, it is condescending, and it is why independents are sick of Democratic Party.
I thought the Free Press was better than this and actually cared about truth. I hope I'm not wrong.
This clip was disappointing and not what I expect from The Free Press. It seems like Ben was looking for people to say crazy things and he got what he was looking for-- just like the Legacy Media. In my experience, very smart and thinking people are latching onto RFK because he is highly educated and thoughtful.
"How do you know who to trust?" The interviewer asks...
That's easy. Never trust the people who tell you boys are girls and women can be men. Never trust race-hustlers, well-heeled Marxists or "democratic socialists"... never trust people who tell you that climate change is the only thing that matters and that there is something which "the entire planet" must do...
Never trust the left. Never.
Imagine if the American people had as much skepticism about Barack Obama when that malignant narcissist burst onto the scene...
Send Ben out asking the same questions of Biden supporters and Trump supporters. They can also be made to look like fools. This comes-off to me as simply a political hit job and really not worthy of The Free Press.
I've witnessed RFK publicly explain how black rock is absorbing Ukraine, as well as display poise and intelligence in the face of hostilities. I'll vote for him most likely.
Read RFK Jr.'s book "The Real Fauci". Heavily footnoted and sourced. Makes one reconsider what one has been told by the "authorities" re Covid.
There's actually something interesting to be said about why people believe the things that they believe. This clip chose not to engage this fascinating and deep topic. As other commentators here have observed, nothing these people said is crazier than what our mainstream institutions say and require us to respect in order to keep our jobs. One man on the street actually considered more than one definition of the word "immigrant". He makes more sense than a certain justice on the Supreme Court.
This was a really unfunny and incurious video with the punchline that we should... trust the experts?! ... who have themselves back-tracked on every major claim they pushed on us these past 4 years? Bizarre choice for FP to feature. There's one candidate in the presidential race who can actually back every assertion he makes with footnotes, has won lawsuit after lawsuit, written book after book. But instead of looking at any of that, yes, Ben, rely on the NY Times' take on him as your baseline truth, then seek out people to mock for not falling for the NYT party line.
I believe RFK because he is the only candidate who speaks about the problems that effect my life and the lives of the vast majority of Americans.
We do have a chronic disease epidemic that the pharmaceutical companies profit from. We do have a military industrial complex that incentivizes politicians to go to war instead of entering peace talks. Much of our drinking water is polluted, our food is toxic, and the soils that that food is grown on are being degraded year after year by the practices of big ag. On top of all of this our most important right, that of free speech, is being censured so that we cannot even have these important conversations without being called conspiracy theorists.
I am a New Mexico rancher with a deep love for this country, and I will be proud to vote for RFK in November.
Hey, the google search link in response to ivermectin that is shown on the video is from 2021. There are recent articles that if shared in the video may be able to provide a better light on the RFK supporters side of the story. The FDA hasn't approved ivermectin for covid but the FDA agreed to remove the ivermectin horse tweet due to settling outside of court with doctors who sued the FDA in regards to the use of ivermectin. If you are still reading, go to ChatGPT and ask about ivermectin, ask if it is harmless, if the discoverers received a nobel prize, how many times it has been administered. What it seems the FDA was doing was that the vaccines were emergency authorized and if a known medication or treatment already existed, the vaccines would not be eligible for the emergency authorization. In other words, ivermectin was diminished in benefit of the vaccines. It is curious why a mostly harmless, cheap, known drug was diminished for something that is none of those things.
I like Ben Kawaller's man-on-the-street approach. This is very funny, and like all pseudo-satire offers us a glimpse into what people think. However, I will take issue, serious issue, with two things. He asks a young boy about who to trust. Here's how we know. The side that calls for censorship is lying. Who is this? Right now it's the Left - the Democratic Party and its minions: big media, big Pharma, the Swamp. If they are truthful, they'd allow, even welcome debate, but they suppress it. Ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine? Yes they work I'm proof of it. In addition, Ben uses Google to search the answer. Duh! Read my previous statement. Who's been behind the suppression of medical information? Google is one of the worst offenders - it promotes more misinformation and promotes more undocumented attacks on its opponents that perhaps any entity in American history. If you like RFK, jr., vote for him. I won't. I respect much about him, but I think he's still a bit of a kook. He's not a kook about everything. He's been a consistent support of open debate, challenging the regime's narrative and standing up for his sincere beliefs. Kook or not, this is pretty good.
Why not speak about what Kennedy has actually said about vaccines? "Anti-vaccine" is not a monolithic category, and although I haven't heard everything Kennedy has said about vaccines, what I have heard is not a unilateral "all vaccines are bad" but something more like "it depends on which vaccine you're talking about." I agree with others here that this seems like a velveted hit job.
As a canadian who can’t vote for anyone in your election, I don’t agree with RFK on everything but at least he talks and debates real issues.
If he is at least willing to debate and to allow debate, then he can be convinced about issues he may be wrong on.
Seems like gold to me
The Ben series are not in keeping with TFP. Every time I see his material it feels as though he is mocking the citizens he interviews. It might as well be "The View"
The partial heritability of IQ is well-established in the literature. Estimates range from 0.45 to 0.8. See “Heritabliity of IQ” (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heritability_of_IQ) in Wikipedia. Quote
“Early twin studies of adult individuals have found a heritability of IQ between 57% and 73%, with some recent studies showing heritability for IQ as high as 80%. IQ goes from being weakly correlated with genetics for children, to being strongly correlated with genetics for late teens and adults. The heritability of IQ increases with the child's age and reaches a plateau at 14–16 years old, continuing at that level well into adulthood. However, poor prenatal environment, malnutrition and disease are known to have lifelong deleterious effects.”
The (alleged) link between vaccines and autism isn’t quite so clear. Some of the specific links (MMR, Thimerosal) have been debunked. However, the broader issue still exists. The number of vaccinations of children has soared since WWII (from 3 to 17). Could vaccinations have some cumulative adverse impact? Hard to prove either way. For a completely different theory. There is a claim that Asians have brought a (otherwise harmless) virus to the US that triggers (in some people) Autism. This theory helps explain the allegedly high incidence of Autism in SV. For a completely different theory. There is a claim that the incidence of Autism has not increased, but it (Autism) is better diagnosed than it was.
Is any of this true?
The practical benefits of vaccines are easily overstated. Most of the reduction in morality occurred before vaccines and antibiotics were invented/used.
Wow, just wow.