I began this read expecting some real information on Kennedy and this possible VP pick. Instead we are, once again, simply fed several paragraphs of emotional clap trap that only reflects Paul's prejudices. I am not familiar with Open Philansthropy and how complicated a structure they have which may mean that one person is not that famil…
I began this read expecting some real information on Kennedy and this possible VP pick. Instead we are, once again, simply fed several paragraphs of emotional clap trap that only reflects Paul's prejudices. I am not familiar with Open Philansthropy and how complicated a structure they have which may mean that one person is not that familiar with all their projects. My sense about Kennedy is that he sees certain issues but may not be looking deeply at the whole as we have seen him do with his blanket support for Israel's genocide. Of course, valuing his life, he may have said that to create cover for his protection. It was too bad he had to come out so adamently and sounded so ignorant of the situation and its genesis. But Paul has provided us no information or insight other than bigotry.
I am very familiar with Open Philanthropy - because I've done my own research. It's not Dr. Paul's responsibility to educate me on topics he mentions. Don't be lazy and do your own research- no one is here to spoon feed you data on every individual or organization he mentions.
In case you dont understand this is a public space where censorship is not practiced by principle so why are you trying to censor me. Are you one of these 'principled' people only so long as everyone agrees with you? However, FYI, it seems many people here respond well to my comments so you may be in the minority.
So people here respond positively to your calling Dr. Paul's writing "emotional clap-trap"? And declaring him prejudiced? Sure they do. My point stands, period.
I began this read expecting some real information on Kennedy and this possible VP pick. Instead we are, once again, simply fed several paragraphs of emotional clap trap that only reflects Paul's prejudices. I am not familiar with Open Philansthropy and how complicated a structure they have which may mean that one person is not that familiar with all their projects. My sense about Kennedy is that he sees certain issues but may not be looking deeply at the whole as we have seen him do with his blanket support for Israel's genocide. Of course, valuing his life, he may have said that to create cover for his protection. It was too bad he had to come out so adamently and sounded so ignorant of the situation and its genesis. But Paul has provided us no information or insight other than bigotry.
huge kisses Tanya....you did not read my post. focus on Kamala
I am very familiar with Open Philanthropy - because I've done my own research. It's not Dr. Paul's responsibility to educate me on topics he mentions. Don't be lazy and do your own research- no one is here to spoon feed you data on every individual or organization he mentions.
You're always in here spewing this nonsense. Which begs the question -- if you dislike it so thoroughly, why ARE you here?
In case you dont understand this is a public space where censorship is not practiced by principle so why are you trying to censor me. Are you one of these 'principled' people only so long as everyone agrees with you? However, FYI, it seems many people here respond well to my comments so you may be in the minority.
So people here respond positively to your calling Dr. Paul's writing "emotional clap-trap"? And declaring him prejudiced? Sure they do. My point stands, period.