Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I'm interested to watch the interview.
And what do you hope to learn?
I make an effort to listen to all different viewpoints, especially interviews with leaders of countries who have nukes who we are in a proxy war against. It beats being spoonfed a one-sided media diet.
Putin is an Ex-KGB agent who has found a useful idiot to advance his cause. Tucker wants to get back to where he was in popularity and he’ll debase himself and his country to get there.
I’m sorry to say, based on your post, and a sheepish response to all this, it’s pretty easy to assume you probably support many of the values Putin claims to care about (Christian nationalism, anti-gay policies, “traditional values”). You’re not here because you “just want to avoid war unnecessarily” or whatever excuse you have. You probably straight up don’t like a lot of contemporary liberal values.
If you’re okay with listening to what a guy who keeps on annexing ex-Soviet countries has to say, it’s pretty clear you’re sympathetic to his reasoning.
Palestine espouses Islamic nationalism, anti gay policies, and traditional values.
And yet no one accuses the far left of the bolded.
You guys are impossible.
Clever distraction. “Firehose of propaganda” technique.
It's called context, and it's important when you're evaluating the validity of an assertion. If you're saying that people who don't want the US involved in the Ukraine/Russia conflict are pro-Russia and everything Russia stands for, then it stands to reason that the same is true for the left and the Palestine/Israel conflict.
It’s whataboutism.
Let’s stick to Tucker interviewing a KGB dictator who hates gays, pushes his political opponents out of windows or sends them to Gulags in Siberia, and is invading neighboring countries in an effort to grow territory lost and become an empire again.
And let’s talk about how conservatives are okay with listening to this propaganda session because of their confirmation bias. You hate liberal culture so much you’re willing to align with an authoritarian regime.
So, you have an opinion now?
Charlie Rose:
![]()
Megyn Kelly:
![]()
Barbara Walters:
![]()
Oliver Stone:
Tucker isn't a journalist
https://www.findlaw.com/legalblogs/greedy-associates/tucker-carlson-successfully-argues-nobody-really-believes-tucker-carlson-is-reporting-facts/
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
Republicans will not acknowledge that their party is the treason party and it’s not like the rest of us normal voters can do much about it. It’s the truth that the right wing is compromised in multiple ways at multiple levels. That’s the truth. The GOP voters do not want to hear it and the media never talks about it.
This.
It’s shocking actually. But the lack of media attention is even more disappointing. It’s our country and national security has become a quaint notion.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
Republicans will not acknowledge that their party is the treason party and it’s not like the rest of us normal voters can do much about it. It’s the truth that the right wing is compromised in multiple ways at multiple levels. That’s the truth. The GOP voters do not want to hear it and the media never talks about it.
This.
It’s shocking actually. But the lack of media attention is even more disappointing. It’s our country and national security has become a quaint notion.
Anonymous wrote:
Republicans will not acknowledge that their party is the treason party and it’s not like the rest of us normal voters can do much about it. It’s the truth that the right wing is compromised in multiple ways at multiple levels. That’s the truth. The GOP voters do not want to hear it and the media never talks about it.

Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It's not even that he praised Moscow--there are a lot of beautiful places around the world and it's quite conceivable some are in Russia--it's just odd to be praising Russia so excessively ("so much nicer than any city in my country") at this time in history.
Moscow is really nice - if you have been there is it truly the reverse of “paris syndrome”
But it is nice because it drains so much capital (human, financial, etc) from a continental sized country
as much as Americans complain about big cities sucking up all capital and young peeps and talent from flyover country, it is nothing like the scale of Moscow vs rest of Russia
I agree with this. I lived in Moscow for a while decades ago and I do think it is a beautiful city and the metro is amazing. I think one thing Tucker liked about it is that you don’t see homeless people or drug addicts — that’s what he means by clean. But that’s a direct result of a totalitarian government. Tucker is willing to trade freedoms for not having to look at poor people. It reminds me of when Trump was praising the Dubai airport during one of thd campaigns and criticizing U.S. airports. I’m sure the Dubai airport is nice. But it’s the direct result of a political and economic system that I find pretty abhorrent. There’s a lot of things that can be accomplished if you’re willing to have a very economically stratified country with few rights for the majority. These folks would have loved the court of Louis Xvi, too.
The other thing that is eye-rolling is that things like a clean and well-run metro cost a LOT of taxpayer dollars. That's fine with me and I am prepared to pay taxes for such amenities even if I rarely use them. Infrastructure is important as is public transportation - spending money on such things helps the economy overall. But conservatives are always complaining about not wanting to pay more in taxes even if it's for things that benefit all of society. How does Tucker imagine our public transport systems can improve without more public funding?