Graphic video released of Tucker Carlson being sodomised (NSFW)

Carson isn't too bad. He does seems like he tries to understand "the other side". He's just kinda ill-equipped for it. His best defense for being bought being that he was a millionaire well before joining FOX. He would have been fine without FOX.

Chomsky quote is also kinda true. “I’m sure you believe everything you’re saying. But what I’m saying is that if you believe something different, you wouldn’t be sitting where you’re sitting.” It was obv said afterwards and would have been less confrontational.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mrxt5Ggiox0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ZO6ND2wvTA

Oh and the speculation that Carson sabotaged his own segment with profanity because the Dutch dude was saying something unheard of does fall on the conspiratard spectrum. The same things have been said in his show before, just with less confrontational tone.

Also something about catching flies with honey. I prefer vinegar for my own amusement, but that's not because i think it's even remotely productive.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gimmick

Carson isn't too bad. He does seems like he tries to understand "the other side".

---

this is a recent development. ben shapiro has effectively forced him to rebrand himself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sonatine

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gimmick

Carson isn't too bad. He does seems like he tries to understand "the other side".

---

this is a recent development. ben shapiro has effectively forced him to rebrand himself.

---

For those wondering about this comment: Here’s an example of how Carlson has woken up (to some degree) about the potential social unrest that can result from unbridled capitalism. But even I don’t agree with his call for artifically restricting the deployment of the labor-saving technology of self-driving trucks as a preventative measure to the socially disruptive effects of reducing the job prospects of non-college educated men.

https://youtu.be/z3E1I4lu6u0

Come on, let's get real here.

Fox News is a business which makes money by delivering news with a conservative slant. That's their entire goal. Appeal to their conservative base, get money, sell ads aimed at that base, get more money.

Tucker is not doing anyone's bidding. He is one of several conservative hosts there who says what the audience wants to hear, and probably also believes most of what he is saying.

This doesn't mean he's brainwashed by the billionaire owners to then brainwash his audience to not support increased taxation of the mega-wealthy.

It just means that the billionaire owners hired him to make them even more money through their Fox News venture.

Rutger is peddling an insane conspiratard theory with no real evidence to back it up.

If he wants to argue that the super-rich need to pay more, that's fine. I don't agree with him for the most part, but at least I can understand the argument.

That's not what he's doing. He's acting like he's blowing the lid off a long-held, tight-lipped conspiracy by big media to brainwash the populace into supporting low taxes for the insanely wealthy.

It's no wonder that Tucker was getting tilted trying to debate with someone like this. I'm not defending Tucker somewhat losing his composure, but it's not like he was debating a logical guy who was owning him with salient points. He was debating a conspiratard who kept repeatedly talking over him with nonsense.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

Come on, let's get real here.

Fox News is a business which makes money by delivering news with a conservative slant. That's their entire goal. Appeal to their conservative base, get money, sell ads aimed at that base, get more money.

Tucker is not doing anyone's bidding. He is one of several conservative hosts there who says what the audience wants to hear, and probably also believes most of what he is saying.

This doesn't mean he's brainwashed by the billionaire owners to then brainwash his audience to not support increased taxation of the mega-wealthy.

It just means that the billionaire owners hired him to make them even more money through their Fox News venture.

Rutger is peddling an insane conspiratard theory with no real evidence to back it up.

If he wants to argue that the super-rich need to pay more, that's fine. I don't agree with him for the most part, but at least I can understand the argument.

That's not what he's doing. He's acting like he's blowing the lid off a long-held, tight-lipped conspiracy by big media to brainwash the populace into supporting low taxes for the insanely wealthy.

It's no wonder that Tucker was getting tilted trying to debate with someone like this. I'm not defending Tucker somewhat losing his composure, but it's not like he was debating a logical guy who was owning him with salient points. He was debating a conspiratard who kept repeatedly talking over him with nonsense.

---

Who the fuck said that Carlson, or any other Fox News host, was “brainwashed”??? You’re making shit up to convince yourself that Rutger is “talking ... with nonsense.” Get a grip!

That fact is that Rutger called Carlson out to be a shill for people much more powerful than him, and Carlson got passed about his integrity challenged.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MumblesBadly

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

Come on, let's get real here.

Fox News is a business which makes money by delivering news with a conservative slant. That's their entire goal. Appeal to their conservative base, get money, sell ads aimed at that base, get more money.

Tucker is not doing anyone's bidding. He is one of several conservative hosts there who says what the audience wants to hear, and probably also believes most of what he is saying.

This doesn't mean he's brainwashed by the billionaire owners to then brainwash his audience to not support increased taxation of the mega-wealthy.

It just means that the billionaire owners hired him to make them even more money through their Fox News venture.

Rutger is peddling an insane conspiratard theory with no real evidence to back it up.

If he wants to argue that the super-rich need to pay more, that's fine. I don't agree with him for the most part, but at least I can understand the argument.

That's not what he's doing. He's acting like he's blowing the lid off a long-held, tight-lipped conspiracy by big media to brainwash the populace into supporting low taxes for the insanely wealthy.

It's no wonder that Tucker was getting tilted trying to debate with someone like this. I'm not defending Tucker somewhat losing his composure, but it's not like he was debating a logical guy who was owning him with salient points. He was debating a conspiratard who kept repeatedly talking over him with nonsense.

---

Who the fuck said that Carlson, or any other Fox News host, was “brainwashed”??? You’re making shit up to convince yourself that Rutger is “talking ... with nonsense.” Get a grip!

That fact is that Rutger called Carlson out to be a shill for people much more powerful than him, and Carlson got passed about his integrity challenged.

---

Whether the accusation is that he's being brainwashed or a shill, it does't really matter.

My point is that, rather than accepting the obvious that Fox News hires biased hosts to cater to a biased audience, he came up with all kinds of nonsense conspiracy theories that the billionaire media owners are paying millions of dollars to lackeys to distract America from the tax-the-rich issue.

The fact that this weirdo is being celebrated by the left is perplexing to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MumblesBadly

Who the fuck said that Carlson, or any other Fox News host, was “brainwashed”??? You’re making shit up to convince yourself that Rutger is “talking ... with nonsense.” Get a grip!

That fact is that Rutger called Carlson out to be a shill for people much more powerful than him, and Carlson got passed about his integrity challenged.

---

Whether the accusation is that he's being brainwashed or a shill, it does't really matter.

My point is that, rather than accepting the obvious that Fox News hires biased hosts to cater to a biased audience, he came up with all kinds of nonsense conspiracy theories that the billionaire media owners are paying millions of dollars to lackeys to distract America from the tax-the-rich issue.

The fact that this weirdo is being celebrated by the left is perplexing to me.

---

This is kind of a chicken and egg argument. Was Kimberly Guilfoyle a right winger when married to Gavin Newsom? Was Elise Jordan or Nicole Mitchell left wingers while building their careers in the right wing?

I mean, all the networks cater to their wealthy stockholders. It’s simply self-interest.

I believe Tucker was always conservative since his bow-tie Crossfire days.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BCR

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

Whether the accusation is that he's being brainwashed or a shill, it does't really matter.

My point is that, rather than accepting the obvious that Fox News hires biased hosts to cater to a biased audience, he came up with all kinds of nonsense conspiracy theories that the billionaire media owners are paying millions of dollars to lackeys to distract America from the tax-the-rich issue.

The fact that this weirdo is being celebrated by the left is perplexing to me.

---

This is kind of a chicken and egg argument. Was Kimberly Guilfoyle a right winger when married to Gavin Newsom? Was Elise Jordan or Nicole Mitchell left wingers while building their careers in the right wing?

I mean, all the networks cater to their wealthy stockholders. It’s simply self-interest.

I believe Tucker was always conservative since his bow-tie Crossfire days.

---

BCR: Longer than that.

https://youtu.be/gdGKTT7Oie8


Druff: Please explain how Rutgers is a “weirdo”.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MumblesBadly

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BCR

This is kind of a chicken and egg argument. Was Kimberly Guilfoyle a right winger when married to Gavin Newsom? Was Elise Jordan or Nicole Mitchell left wingers while building their careers in the right wing?

I mean, all the networks cater to their wealthy stockholders. It’s simply self-interest.

I believe Tucker was always conservative since his bow-tie Crossfire days.

---

BCR: Longer than that.

https://youtu.be/gdGKTT7Oie8


Druff: Please explain how Rutgers is a “weirdo”.

---

-450 rush limbaugh called him one

tucker still getting his shit pushed in

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VXju7udPHiM

All I know is for being some form of a tard, Dan Druff has spent a whole lotta effort to discredit him.

Druff, are you going to defend your boy again?

Quote:

---

Fox News host Tucker Carlson said Sunday that he wouldn't apologize for a series of derogatory comments he made about women on a radio show several years ago.

In the audio clips surfaced by Media Matters, Carlson makes a number of derogatory comments about women. He also makes multiple observations about issues related to sexual abuse.

Among other things, Carlson described Martha Stewart's daughter Alexis Stewart, journalist Arianna Huffington and Britney Spears with pejorative terms, according to transcripts posted by the outlet.

He said in October 2007 that women as a whole were "extremely primitive," according to the transcripts.

Carlson also appeared to call for an end to rape shield laws in 2006. Such laws are intended to protect victims of sexual assault.

---

https://www.thewrap.com/wp-content/u...9.36.57-AM.png

Tucker Carlson is just a clueless asshole.

If he worked at MSNBC he would have been fired a long time ago.

Tucker isn't accused of sexually harassing any women, right?

The outrage is over comments of his on a shock-jock show in 2007?

Question to those feigning outrage over Tucker's 2007 comments: Do you think Howard Stern should be off the air, too? Because he pretty much has done the same thing for decades.

With that said, this could end up being a problem for Tucker, because he's now a commentator on serious political issues, and not a shock jock. So this might finally be the shot that takes him down.

If that's true, the left might as well not rejoice, because Fox will find another Tucker Carlson to replace him.

Embedded Tweet

Druff has a strange schtick of whataboutism combined with talking in broad strokes - like “the left”.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MrTickle

Druff has a strange schtick of whataboutism combined with talking in broad strokes - like “the left”.

---

Druff uses the term “leftist” as a fearmongering label to conflate the mixed-capitalism policies advanced by the Progessives with the property rights-denying Marxists of the Eoropean “lefttist” tradition.

Unfortunately for his agenda, such political labeling doesn’t work with American swing voters as efficaciously as “elites”, which Tucker Carlson adopted as his go-to bogeymen when disingenuously spouting a fraudulent populist screed.

https://youtu.be/RNineSEoxjQ

https://youtu.be/F-GzruNvWnQ

:lol2

Separate topic, but I doubt David Pakman would have the balls to take on something like Gamergate again, given how left his audience leans, and given how the left has zero tolerance these days for dissent amongst their own.

Remember when he had Gamergate scammer (and left wing darling) Brianna Wu on the show, and completely destroyed him/her (albeit politely)?

I couldn't picture that happening today, or Pakman's audience would revolt. But I had a lot of respect for the guy at the time for doing that.