What does it say about Tucker Carlson that he's talking about America like its the fall of the Roman Republic? - Its an hour and a half listen, but they touch on a lot of unsaid truths in America today

[Lorne Armstrong]

I’m not a cow. But it’s cool if you want to be.

You’re damn near a LOLcow.

 

[Ishtar]

You’re damn near a LOLcow.

Forgive the analogy. Rural background. Cows don’t know nor really care when they are lead to slaughter.

Political apathy is much the same attitude. I don’t pretend to be a political leader or that my opinions will change anyone important’s mind. But I don’t think it’s virtuous or good to simply throw my hands in the air and cease caring all together.

 

[Lorne Armstrong]

Yeah, well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.

youtu.be

 

[LurkTrawl]

Political apathy is much the same attitude

There's a large difference between political apathy and not being "activated" all the time.

Like, if you see a tornado in the distance, are you going to get pissed off and start shouting at it? Probably not, but you most likely will get your shit together and calmly but quickly prepare for it.

 

[A Logging Company]

Step back and look at this objectively. Can you imagine ANY major network that would allow a talking head to “go rogue” and go off-script? Not just allow it once, but continue to allow it to go on for weeks or months or years? Of course they wouldn’t.

Actually, that is exactly what happened with Keith Olbermann. Back in the day, MSNBC was trying to be right-wing leaning, since Fox News was the big dog they were aping from. And remember, this the early post-9/11 era, when everything was "Ra RA Amurka! Nevur4Get! Fuckin' ragheads, let's get um!" Oldfags who remember the era can attest to American flags and corny patriotism being near ubiquitous during that time.

Keith's show "Countdown" wasn't suppose to be overtly political, but he had an unscripted on air melt down about George Bush when things in Iraq were beginning to sour. The suits were panicking until they saw a huge ratings spike afterward. From there on out they let Keith go apeshit about Bush and retooled their network to be Fox News for libtards.

This is all according to Lawrence O'Donnell in an interview he gave to Playboy years ago (the articles were actually worth reading).

By the way, I feel like Tucker covering Chris-chan was just the universe's way of softening the shock of him doing an hour long interview with Mencious Moldbug.

 

[Lorne Armstrong]

Actually, that is exactly what happened with Keith Olbermann. Back in the day, MSNBC was trying to be right-wing leaning, since Fox News was the big dog they were aping from. And remember, this the early post-9/11 era, when everything was "Ra RA Amurka! Nevur4Get! Fuckin' ragheads, let's get um!" Oldfags who remember the era can attest to American flags and corny patriotism being near ubiquitous during that time.

Keith's show "Countdown" wasn't suppose to be overtly political, but he had an unscripted on air melt down about George Bush when things in Iraq were beginning to sour. The suits were panicking until they saw a huge ratings spike afterward. From there on out they let Keith go apeshit about Bush and retooled their network to be Fox News for libtards.

This is all according to Lawrence O'Donnell in an interview he gave to Playboy years ago (the articles were actually worth reading).

By the way, I feel like Tucker covering Chris-chan was just the universe's way of softening the shock of him doing an hour long interview with Mencious Moldbug.

Well, that’s just it. The suits saw the ratings that content like that drew in, and rebuilt their entire network around it. They allow it to go on, encourage it to go on, because outrage sells.

BTW, I don’t think I’d take O’Donnell’s interview with Playboy as gospel truth, either. Remember, they’re ALL liars and they’re ALL actors. O’Donnell included.

 

[A Logging Company]

BTW, I don’t think I’d take O’Donnell’s interview with Playboy as gospel truth, either. Remember, they’re ALL liars and they’re ALL actors. O’Donnell included.

True. But it came off as candid due to what a smug shitbag he came off as though out that whole interview. I remember him claiming that Sarah Palin was a media invention they effectively created.

 

[Lemmingwise]

He is standing out, which is why I'm asking what for?

It's called controlled opposition you unbearable tard.

How can you put so much effort into posts yet lack the ability to make that last step in grasping things time and time again?

Without people like Tucker you might get another Trump. There is a constant fight to have the finger on the pulse of what people are feeling and thinking and then to redirect it when necessary. The biggest people on tv have the best amalgation of people's opinions together. That's how they build trust. That's how they build their value to their network.

Then they can use that influence to amplify or smother various stories.

I really hate hate hate that you do what you're supposed to do, put in the effort, talk about some of the important things and then not even have the right answer in a list of 20?

 

[TheProdigalStunna]

Well, that’s just it. The suits saw the ratings that content like that drew in, and rebuilt their entire network around it. They allow it to go on, encourage it to go on, because outrage sells.

BTW, I don’t think I’d take O’Donnell’s interview with Playboy as gospel truth, either. Remember, they’re ALL liars and they’re ALL actors. O’Donnell included.

True. But it came off as candid due to what a smug shitbag he came off as though out that whole interview. I remember him claiming that Sarah Palin was a media invention they effectively created.

Somewhat OT, but I checked out that interview out of curiosity and WOW did he get a lot of things wrong. Such as:

Spoiler

-"Republicans won't vote for someone who has been married three times/moral character matters"
-"You have to be thin to be elected"
-"Evangelicals would vote for an atheist before a Mormon" (I grew up in an evangelical environment and Romney's Mormonism was NOT an issue, and frankly, they probably wouldn't care if an atheist ran as a Republican as long as he said the right things. Maybe 15-20 years ago they might have, but definitely not now).
-"Pawlenty is the only one who can get the nomination" (LOL)
-And a good 'ol "hey Social Security and Medicare are socialism, what's the big deal? Even Republicans are socialist."

He definitely gives off this vibe of the "stone-cold realist who knows how the political system really plays out" which seems hilarious given how wrong his observations were in hindsight. I think he is mostly right about the viewership and Palin and Bachmann only managing to succeed in a 24-hour news environment, though.

Back on-topic (but somewhat related), Tucker is not going anywhere no matter how many washed-out fringe political theorists he talks to. Rupert Murdoch wants one thing: for viewers/readers to keep voting for the parties that will best protect his assets. One thing the Lawrence O'Donnell interview was right was that no one at Fox News needs to really believe the stuff they're saying, and they really can't afford to alienate the fringe parts of their base. They just need to keep people voting Republican. It doesn't matter if that means the station has to promote a figure he dislikes (Trump) or if Tucker Carlson goes full nazbol. All that matters is that the GOP does not sink into oblivion and the tax cuts come through.

 

[Lorne Armstrong]

Somewhat OT, but I checked out that interview out of curiosity and WOW did he get a lot of things wrong. Such as:

Spoiler

-"Republicans won't vote for someone who has been married three times/moral character matters"
-"You have to be thin to be elected"
-"Evangelicals would vote for an atheist before a Mormon" (I grew up in an evangelical environment and Romney's Mormonism was NOT an issue, and frankly, they probably wouldn't care if an atheist ran as a Republican as long as he said the right things. Maybe 15-20 years ago they might have, but definitely not now).
-"Pawlenty is the only one who can get the nomination" (LOL)
-And a good 'ol "hey Social Security and Medicare are socialism, what's the big deal? Even Republicans are socialist."

He definitely gives off this vibe of the "stone-cold realist who knows how the political system really plays out" which seems hilarious given how wrong his observations were in hindsight. I think he is mostly right about the viewership and Palin and Bachmann only managing to succeed in a 24-hour news environment, though.

Back on-topic (but somewhat related), Tucker is not going anywhere no matter how many washed-out fringe political theorists he talks to. Rupert Murdoch wants one thing: for viewers/readers to keep voting for the parties that will best protect his assets. One thing the Lawrence O'Donnell interview was right was that no one at Fox News needs to really believe the stuff they're saying, and they really can't afford to alienate the fringe parts of their base. They just need to keep people voting Republican. It doesn't matter if that means the station has to promote a figure he dislikes (Trump) or if Tucker Carlson goes full nazbol. All that matters is that the GOP does not sink into oblivion and the tax cuts come through.

Rupert Murdoch wants the same thing the owners of the other networks want. He wants people tuned in through the commercial breaks so he can sell advertising and make money. No one at ANY of the networks needs to believe the stuff they're saying, (and I'm sure most of them don't). Tucker is just taking up the role of the Talking Head for the folks who feel like they're out of power. Maddow/O'Donnell/etc played this role during the previous Admin same as Olbermann played it for the last few years of W and Hannity played it during Obama's 8 years. The folks running these networks don't give a fuck about political ideology because they're getting their breaks regardless of who's in the Oval Office. Its about making money and the shit that Tucker says makes FNC money, so FNC is going to keep Tucker saying that shit.

 

[Haim Arlosoroff]

I really hate hate hate that you do what you're supposed to do, put in the effort, talk about some of the important things and then not even have the right answer in a list of 20?

So the Political Heterodoxy is just being another Glenn Beck chalkboard-for-conspiracies outreach program, and so the next five years for Tucker is amazing ratings followed by RNC and Fox disavowal and cancellation for "Going too far" after he successfully keeps the "American Taliban" voting Red for the RNC and ratings for Fox?

Well, your hatred answered my question and I learned something. Which was the only reason for the effort-posting in the first place. Thank you for answering it. Tucker is just making the Neo-Reactionaries worse like Big Bang Theory did for the entire internet—and of the ideas put out there, I'm now sure a boomer will take nothing away from this.

I was hemming and hawing between Sad Burnout Tucker and Hopeful Paradigm-Change Moment, and I have Lorne Armstrong and Shamash to thank for re-enacting my slow realization that Tucker continues to be fake and gay. I guess Doomers really are right, and I briefly forgot.

 

[Lemmingwise]

I guess Doomers really are right, and I briefly forgot

See this is what I mean. You think I am a doomer simply because I don't think Tucker is my lord and saviour. Doomers are retarded too. Some doomers may well have a mostly accurate world view and it's true that the transition from fantasy to mostly accurate world view can be depressing. It's like finding out that the hide the snake game you used to play with your dad wasn't a fun game but sexual abuse. It's very depressing.

But you can't really get to happiness and a better life if you don't acknowledge that it was abuse. Doomers are people who remain stuck in the depression phase. But humans need hope, a vista, a future to look forward to. And you can have that without living in fantasy land.

Even in the face of what looks like armagadon you can remain upbeat, positive, productive, realistic.

There are a number of things you could do that are more productive than walking to Tuckers drumbeat. Spend some time to research. Find other people that do. Share results. Develop better connections. See if there are holes to Tucker's stories and put him on blast where he fails and see if your criticism resonates with people.

Or altenately, find a path where you're less a short term political pawn and think about the long term political game. Family, religion / organisation, figure out the building blocks of a better future, for yourself, your family, your groups, your people, your county,

Stop trying to find a one-stop solution to all this, because if it were that easy, we'd have fixed all this permanently ages ago.

Oh and read silver's book "lifting the veil" and get realistic about the state we're in.

You're an effort poster, you might even have the discipline to do so.

 

[Haim Arlosoroff]

I don't think Tucker is my lord and saviour. Doomers are retarded too. Some doomers may well have a mostly accurate world view and it's true that the transition from fantasy to mostly accurate world view can be depressing. It's like finding out that the hide the snake game you used to play with your dad wasn't a fun game but sexual abuse. It's very depressing.

For all your repeated comments praising the idea of Effort Posting, you never read anywhere in any of my posts that I thought that Tucker was burning out? I thought his career was coming to an end, and that maybe he was going to go nuts and maybe just maybe he'd end his public career with a visit to Infowars once after leaving Fox. He's some rich man's lesser son who sucked up to power until it humiliated him by siding with Jon Stewart and the public, so now he looks to the forgotten corners of the public for attention having never valued money from his time being raised by his rags-to-riches father.

• A father who outted a former Women's Tennis Association player who had some success on the professional circuit named "Renée Richards" as a man in 1976, Daddy Carlson and Mommy Lombardi divorced over it.
• Carlson was granted custody of Tucker. Tucker Carlson would later say that his mother left the family when he was six, wanting to pursue a "bohemian" lifestyle.
• In 1977, Richard Warner Carlson joined San Diego Federal Savings and Loan (later Great American First Savings), a savings and loan headed by Gordon Luce, a former cabinet member and close friend of Ronald Reagan, as its public affairs director. In 1979, Carlson married divorcée Patricia Caroline Swanson, an heiress to the Swanson frozen-food fortune. Swanson is the daughter of Gilbert Carl Swanson, and the niece of Senator J. William Fulbright.
• In 1981 60 Minutes had Mike Wallace interview Carlson about controversial home foreclosures executed by Great American First Savings, in which the bank had been accused of duping low-income Californians. Carlson hired a camera crew to videotape the interview and, when the 60 Minutes cameras were not rolling during a commercial break, caught Wallace making a racist joke about blacks and hispanics.
• In the summer of 1986, Carlson became director of Voice of America, a U.S. government-funded, state-owned multimedia agency which serves as the United States federal government's official institution for non-military, external broadcasting.
• In June 1991, Carlson left Voice of America after President George H. W. Bush nominated him to be the U.S. ambassador to the Seychelles.

Tucker meanwhile:

• In 1999, Carlson interviewed then-Governor George W. Bush for Talk magazine. He quoted Bush mocking Karla Faye Tucker (who was executed in Bush's state of Texas) and frequently using the word "fuck". The piece led to bad publicity for Bush's 2000 presidential campaign. Bush claimed that "Mr. Carlson misread, mischaracterized me. He's a good reporter, he just misunderstood about how serious that was. I take the death penalty very seriously."
• In October 2004, comedian and The Daily Show host Jon Stewart appeared on Crossfire, ostensibly to promote America (The Book), but he instead launched into a critique of Crossfire, saying the show was harmful to political discourse in the U.S.
• Carlson's early evening show, The Situation With Tucker Carlson, premiered on June 13, 2005, on MSNBC with Rachel Maddow featured as a guest co-host on a rotating panel. Brian Stelter, writing for The New York Times, wrote that "during Mr. Carlson's tenure, MSNBC's evening programming moved gradually to the left. His former time slots, 6:00 p.m. and 9:00 p.m., were subsequently occupied by two liberals, Ed Schultz and Rachel Maddow." Carlson said the network had changed a lot and "they didn't have a role for me."
• Carlson was a contestant on season 3 of the reality show Dancing with the Stars, which aired in 2006. Carlson was the first contestant eliminated, on September 13, 2006.
• In May 2009, Fox News announced that Carlson was being hired as a Fox News contributor. He was a frequent guest panelist on Fox's late-night satire show Red Eye w/Greg Gutfeld, made frequent appearances on the All-Star Panel segment of Special Report with Bret Baier, was a substitute host of Hannity in Sean Hannity's absence and produced and hosted a special entitled Fighting for Our Children's Minds in September 2010.
• Carlson had cameo appearances as himself in the Season 1 episode "Hard Ball" of 30 Rock and in a Season 9 episode of The King of Queens. He had a cameo appearance in the 2008 film, Swing Vote, again playing himself.
• On November 14, 2016, Carlson began hosting Tucker Carlson Tonight on Fox News.
• In February 2021, Carlson announced a multiyear deal with Fox News to host a new weekly podcast and series of monthly specials dubbed Tucker Carlson Originals exclusively on sister streaming service Fox Nation, which released on March 29.

He never did anything outside of bouncing around from News Network to News Network, he is the upper class privilege that is put on Straight Whites regardless of their jobs or class. I don't like him frankly. I think he's radical only in his hatred of his fellow journalists, and my thinking is that it makes him only sometimes more honest when other journalists are not. He was a kiss-ass at CNN, a punching bag at MSNBC, and exactly what you think of him at Fox. However, why would that type think Yarvin was the easiest way to get clicks and eyeballs? I guess to capture the fleeing republican base, yeah that's convinced me. It does work, if the fleeing republican base are so radicalized by the last 5 years that Neo-reaction is needed to steer them back towards 'voting Red like you're brain dead'.

Family, religion / organisation, figure out the building blocks of a better future, for yourself, your family, your groups, your people, your county,

Moved my family out into the countryside, best thing I ever did. We homeschool, it works. We don't even own a TV, although the internet is still too much.

read silver's book "lifting the veil" and get realistic about the state we're in.

I'm having a hell of a time, is this it?

 

[Lemmingwise]

@Haim Arlosoroff

For all your repeated comments praising the idea of Effort Posting

I had a period of effort posting, but it's not currently something I do.

I currently make snap judgements and snap comments.

Doesn't mean I don't value it or don't think more people should do it.

I'm having a hell of a time, is this it?

yes.

 

[Ishtar]

I have to wonder, if there was no Tucker Carlson who would replace him? Sean Hannity? Tucker Carlson promotes ideas and concepts that are in opposition to forty years of movement conservatism.

Namely government bad, shrink government, low taxes for rich, welfare is bad, the market is God.

Now sure you can argue the movers and shakers or Murdoch family or whoever have their pulse on popular sentiment and Tucker feeds into that, but I’m sorry that’s just fundamentally bullshit.

I hung around conservative sites and fora in the late Obama era, it was and in some places still is “the government is the problem, I want my taxes cut, damn welfare parasites, more warr with Iran!”

This sort of Hannity/Beck/Newsmax conservatism was dominant for forty years.

Why on earth would Tucker Carlson go against that, when it’s clearly what the “movers and shakers” want? Now yes, Tucker did say he was Murdoch’s bitch at one point, but then so what?

Tell me where else you will find someone on the right suggesting the government provide financial support to families? Did Rupert Murdoch and Roger Ailes just magically decide to push a gasp more socialist line of thought for White lower middle class people, or is Tucker interacting with(or his writers interacting with) other ideas outside of the conservative mainstream?

No one has presented a convincing explanation for why Tucker advocates anything different than Obama era Bill O’Reilly.

 

[stares at error messages]

... it means that Tucker Carlson has read The Fate of Empires by John Bagot (1978, Blackwood).

 

[Sargon's wife's son]

It's called controlled opposition you unbearable tard.

How can you put so much effort into posts yet lack the ability to make that last step in grasping things time and time again?

Without people like Tucker you might get another Trump. There is a constant fight to have the finger on the pulse of what people are feeling and thinking and then to redirect it when necessary. The biggest people on tv have the best amalgation of people's opinions together. That's how they build trust. That's how they build their value to their network.

Then they can use that influence to amplify or smother various stories.

I really hate hate hate that you do what you're supposed to do, put in the effort, talk about some of the important things and then not even have the right answer in a list of 20?

Because people scream the world controlled opposition don't know what actual controlled opposition looks like people who are actually controlled opposition would be people like Ben Shapiro and Steven Crowder who pushed the same neoconservative bulshit

That the Republican base and had to swallow for the past 40 years

It's people who want to be the only people saying what they want to hear and believe that they're the only ones who found some deeper truth it's an immature way of thinking that you're smarter than everyone around you and everyone around you couldn't come to the same conclusion that you came to
It's a soft form of narcissism

And it makes sense that he interviews moldbug if you read his book he says he's not a populist he believes in a form of government run by
Confident ruling class with an actual vision of the future that make sense