Tucker Carlson Obsession Thread (merged)

[luthervol]

No. That’s not a legitimate question. The minority leader should be able to appoint any members they choose so why did Pelosi not honor that tradition? Could it be she knew that with anyone who wasn’t on her team would expose the farce the committee was?

That's insane and you know it.
Your position is that out of 200 republican house members, only a small handful of rabidly partisan Trump humpers were not on Pelosi's team. That position makes it obvious who had the problem.

 

[luthervol]

Lawgator obviously has a valid point since by your own admission there were only a few republicans who were not on Pelosi's team.

 

[WBO]

I’m not a FN viewer but how are they any different than the other cable newstainment networks?

They aren't, except Fox seems to have done it on steroids. I don't watch any of the others either. Even as a liberal I would never watch CNN or MSNBC. If that were my only option I would rather catch up on "The Last of Us" episodes.

 

[WBO]

So is it better for a network to tell viewers what they want to hear or is it better to tell viewers what the government wants them to hear?

It's not an either/or proposition.

 

[CobbVol]

For the fifth time.
I think it should be done EVERY TIME!!
Radical partisans intent on nothing but increasing the divide should NEVER be allowed on committees by the party in the majority.

My plan: the Rs pick 10 Ds to rank all Rs from least to most partisan.
The Ds pick 10 Rs to rank all Ds from least to most partisan.

The 10 with the worst rating are never allowed on any important committee.
The party in power can and should reject anyone at the bottom of the list, but they should be required to give 5 acceptable names for every one they reject.

Get real. The only items your plan is missing are unicorns grazing happily under lollipop trees on a grassy hillside.

 

[CobbVol]

That's insane and you know it.
Your position is that out of 200 republican house members, only a small handful of rabidly partisan Trump humpers were not on Pelosi's team. That position makes it obvious who had the problem.

That is insane. Her decision to use her hand-picked individuals made this a partisan circus from the start even containing a TV producer to edit and create the desired narrative. Now, we have evidence potentially withheld and Tucker Carlson having to give the transparency required that should have been present from the start if this was truly the worse attack on the Capital since the Civil War.

 

[luthervol]

Get real. The only items your plan is missing are unicorns grazing happily under lollipop trees on a grassy hillside.

What's so difficult about it. It looks like Pelosi has taken an appropriate first step,

 

[luthervol]

That is insane. Her decision to use her hand-picked individuals made this a partisan circus from the start even containing a TV producer to edit and create the desired narrative. Now, we have evidence potentially withheld and Tucker Carlson having to give the transparency required that should have been present from the start if this was truly the worse attack on the Capital since the Civil War.

Hand picked? What total nonsense. She was willing to have 3 of the 5 repubs and would have accepted a great number of others to fill those two spots.

She was 100% correct in refusing those two nut-jobs.

 

[W.TN.Orange Blood]

Hand picked? What total nonsense. She was willing to have 3 of the 5 repubs and would have accepted a great number of others to fill those two spots.

She was 100% correct in refusing those two nut-jobs.

Lmao. Wrong as usual. It was 3-5 cherry picked repubs who agrees w/ Pelosi or none at all.

 

[luthervol]

Lmao. Wrong as usual. It was 3-5 cherry picked repubs who agrees w/ Pelosi or none at all.

What? She was willing to accept 3 of the 5 McCarthy recommended. She didn't cherry pick anyone.

 

[SpaceCoastVol]

We’ve now seen 2 biased hatchet jobs from the 2 opposing sides.

Release it all

It will all be released in the same data dump as the Fauci Flu files.

We probably won't find out the truth about that until that POS is dead.

 

[scooty_vol]

Lmao. Wrong as usual. It was 3-5 cherry picked repubs who agrees w/ Pelosi or none at all.

Yep that's right. Just remember who you're trying arguing with. Give him some grace.

 

[luthervol]

Yep that's right. Just remember who you're trying arguing with. Give him some grace.

Did she accept 3 of McCarthy's 5 picks?

 

[W.TN.Orange Blood]

What? She was willing to accept 3 of the 5 McCarthy recommended. She didn't cherry pick anyone.

Those 3 of 5 chosen had to go along w/Pelosi & the Democrats lunatic one-sided agenda. Pelosi didn't want any kind of repubs opposite opinions/thoughts brought to the committee.

 

[OrangeTsar]

She only rejected two. She accepted the other 3, and he could have appointed 2 others. Why was it so important to have those two radically partisan Trump humpers on the committee? Did he feel that an average republican house member wouldn't do the job? We all know the answers.

Tell me any time in the history of the US Congress in which the majority refused to seat any prospective committee members nominated by the minority party. Pelosi blatantly broke with 240 years of tradition and precedent; but you seem to think that was ok?????
Those two representatives were duly elected by United States voters and the Speaker had absolutely zero right to reject their participation just because she disagreed with their politics. THAT is authoritarianism which I thought was Democrats greatest fear?

 

[OrangeTsar]

Did she accept 3 of McCarthy's 5 picks?

She had no precedent to reject ANY. Tiny tinpot dictatorial action

 

[OrangeTsar]

That's insane and you know it.
Your position is that out of 200 republican house members, only a small handful of rabidly partisan Trump humpers were not on Pelosi's team. That position makes it obvious who had the problem.

Never. Happened. Before. In. The. History. Of. The. Republic.
Please continue trying to defend the indefensible
If you are going to break all previous tradition and precedent, you better be able to come up with a DARN good reason
(„But Trump…..“ is NOT sufficient)

 

[luthervol]

Tell me any time in the history of the US Congress in which the majority refused to seat any prospective committee members nominated by the minority party. Pelosi blatantly broke with 240 years of tradition and precedent; but you seem to think that was ok?????
Those two representatives were duly elected by United States voters and the Speaker had absolutely zero right to reject their participation just because she disagreed with their politics. THAT is authoritarianism which I thought was Democrats greatest fear?

Not only did she have the right to do it, she had the responsibility.
Things will operate much better moving forward if the most radical are left off of important committees.
I view it kind of like lawyers being able to pick jurors.

 

[OrangeTsar]

Not only did she have the right to do it, she had the responsibility.
Things will operate much better moving forward if the most radical are left off of important committees.
I view it kind of like lawyers being able to pick jurors.

You are obtusely and deliberately avoiding the question of precedent. Your side did something the Republicans have NEVER done and you just want to pretend it is fine and dandy. This is how democracies die. Admit it, Pelosi went full dictator.

 

[W.TN.Orange Blood]

Not only did she have the right to do it, she had the responsibility.
Things will operate much better moving forward if the most radical are left off of important committees.
I view it kind of like lawyers being able to pick jurors.

Remember, whatever the democrats do can comeback & hurt their feelings like right now.
Democrats hate to hear the real truth coming from another political party they hate.
Nobody is allowed to disagree w/democrats on any topic or they will be canceled or called all kinds of despicable names because democrats want to control the narrative on all subjects. No body has a say on any topic bc the democratic cult believes they're the only truth bearers.

 

[luthervol]

Never. Happened. Before. In. The. History. Of. The. Republic.
Please continue trying to defend the indefensible
If you are going to break all previous tradition and precedent, you better be able to come up with a DARN good reason
(„But Trump…..“ is NOT sufficient)

The reason is that it makes things less partisan and divisive. It will lead to a much more efficiently running government.

 

[OrangeTsar]

Remember, whatever the democrats do can comeback & hurt their feelings like right now.
Democrats hate to hear the real truth coming from another political party they hate.
Nobody is allowed to disagree w/democrats on any topic or they will be canceled or called all kinds of despicable names because democrats want to control the narrative on all subjects. No body has a say in any topic bc dems think they're the only truth bearers.

The loss of Twitter as uncontested propaganda ground hit them hard. They are rapidly losing whatever small semblance of sanity they had remaining. I have never seen a political party descend into abject madness in such a rapid manner

 

[W.TN.Orange Blood]

The reason is that it makes things less partisan and divisive. It will lead to a much more efficiently running government.

This is what republicans are trying to achieve in doing. Thanks for agreeing.

 

[OrangeTsar]

The reason is that it makes things less partisan and divisive. It will lead to a much more efficiently running government.

Says who? You? Pelosi? If only we had a word for a single person or political party deciding what was best for the entire country

 

[luthervol]

Says who? You? Pelosi? If only we had a word for a single person or political party deciding what was best for the entire country

Did she do something illegal?

She accepted 3 of 5 and was willing to accept any of 180 others to fill those two spots.

The better question is why the repubs thought is was so important to have those two rabidly partisan loud mouths over any of the other 180 more rational repubs.

What she did was much more justifiable than the way the repubs handled the supreme court nominations over the past few years.