Tucker Carlson

[Perknose]

I love good writing. This piece on this bow-tied bad boy from the Columbia Journalism Review is extremely well written, imho.

It begins thusly:

"TUCKER CARLSON IS SHOUTING when he tells me he isn’t shouting. The barrage of his voice has been relentless throughout the interview.

“I don’t want to be John McLaughlin yelling at people. Why would I want to do that? I don’t need to do that,” he insists. “I actually don’t think the audience likes that. I don’t like it. But the idea that I win debates because I yell louder, it’s, like, absurd.”

“I didn’t say you win because you shouted. I just said there is a lot of shouting.”

“There is not a lot of shouting. I do the show every night. I know what’s on it.”

“Okay,” I say, “but you are shouting right now.”

“It’s because I talk loud. I was shouting before.”

Sign up for CJR's daily email
I am confused. “You were definitely shouting before. That’s why this is funny,” I say laughing nervously. “Because you are like, “I AM NOT SHOUTING!”

Carlson then tells me how he is the loudest person in the restaurant. Just ask his family. I mean, sure he was shouting, but he’s a loud guy, okay?

We’ve moved from denial to acceptance in less than a minute. It’s pure Tucker Carlson, a move I’ve seen hundreds of times in the over 40 hours of Tucker Carlson Tonight clips I’ve watched on Fox News in recent months. Reporters go on his show believing they’ll be discussing health care or Donald Trump’s mental health, only to be met with the question, “Do you think you are practicing journalism?”

Reeling guests stumble and fall. “Answer the question,” Carlson demands. “Answer the question!” But the question is unanswerable."

WHAT HAPPENED TO TUCKER CARLSON? People in media ask themselves this question with the same pearl-clutching, righteous tone they use when discussing their aunt in Connecticut who voted for Trump."*

^^^ But it goes on. Take a little time. Read the whole thing.

It's . . . deft.

As our long ago, industriously prolific Hot Deals poster Jokersmoker used to say: Text. Enjoy.

















* Note: I now eschew the quote function for longer quotes, as our software "helpfully" truncates said quotes, leading you ADHD types to never read the entire quote before opining authoritatively.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Tucker, Tucker, that little... Carlson.

I watched a clip of him on climate change and his entire demeanor shouted "Today I bullshitted, again"

 

[MomentsofSanity]

Well that's an interesting...

squirrel!

 

[Paratus]

I love good writing. This piece on this bow-tied bad boy from the Columbia Journalism Review is extremely well written, imho.

It begins thusly:

"TUCKER CARLSON IS SHOUTING when he tells me he isn’t shouting. The barrage of his voice has been relentless throughout the interview.

“I don’t want to be John McLaughlin yelling at people. Why would I want to do that? I don’t need to do that,” he insists. “I actually don’t think the audience likes that. I don’t like it. But the idea that I win debates because I yell louder, it’s, like, absurd.”

“I didn’t say you win because you shouted. I just said there is a lot of shouting.”

“There is not a lot of shouting. I do the show every night. I know what’s on it.”

“Okay,” I say, “but you are shouting right now.”

“It’s because I talk loud. I was shouting before.”

Sign up for CJR's daily email
I am confused. “You were definitely shouting before. That’s why this is funny,” I say laughing nervously. “Because you are like, “I AM NOT SHOUTING!”

Carlson then tells me how he is the loudest person in the restaurant. Just ask his family. I mean, sure he was shouting, but he’s a loud guy, okay?

We’ve moved from denial to acceptance in less than a minute. It’s pure Tucker Carlson, a move I’ve seen hundreds of times in the over 40 hours of Tucker Carlson Tonight clips I’ve watched on Fox News in recent months. Reporters go on his show believing they’ll be discussing health care or Donald Trump’s mental health, only to be met with the question, “Do you think you are practicing journalism?”

Reeling guests stumble and fall. “Answer the question,” Carlson demands. “Answer the question!” But the question is unanswerable."

WHAT HAPPENED TO TUCKER CARLSON? People in media ask themselves this question with the same pearl-clutching, righteous tone they use when discussing their aunt in Connecticut who voted for Trump."*

^^^ But it goes on. Take a little time. Read the whole thing.

It's . . . deft.

As our long ago, industriously prolific Hot Deals poster Jokersmoker used to say: Text. Enjoy.

















* Note: I now eschew the quote function for longer quotes, as our software "helpfully" truncates said quotes, leading you ADHD types to never read the entire quote before opining authoritatively.

That’s why I use VBstyle. Got tired of clicking on all the quotes.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Well that's an interesting...

squirrel!

Where???

Tucker has a style that's unwatchable unless you are into unwatchable stuff, which apparently many are. "The Big book of Effer Carlson Lies", obviously my quotes, was a nice touch.

 

[Blackjack200]

This is perfect.

Like many white male journalists, Carlson used to idolize Hunter S. Thompson. And his own early journalism is indeed gonzo-like: freewheeling, voice-driven, squibbish narratives. It is as if Thompson donned a bow-tie, and thought maybe poor people should work a little harder.

 

[soundforbjt]

Tucker always looks like he's constipated.

 

[fskimospy]

I think he's finally found a formula that gives him the TV success he's clearly been chasing for most of his adult life. I never got the impression he was a racist himself but I think he's responding to incentives from the right wing base which is in fact very, very racist. He doesn't want to believe the success he's found comes by pushing white nationalist, screaming bullshit because I think on one level he probably always thought he was better than that.

Guess what Tucker, you aren't!

 

[Blackjack200]

It's amazing how conservative white men in media fail upward.

That analysis launched the CNN show The Spin Room, co-hosted by Carlson and Bill Press. It aired at 1 in the morning, then 11 and 11:30 at night, before finally coming to rest at 10:30. The show was short-lived, and little-loved: “Press is a hopeless, dithering wimp who makes Carlson’s bow-tied twit look like The Rock,” wrote a critic in Entertainment Weekly in 2001. “Between them, Carlson and Press would be hard-pressed to win a debate with network weatherman Flip Spiceland over whether or not the sun is out in Atlanta.”

But somehow, despite the cancellation of his debut show, Carlson’s career as player in political TV was on.

I think he's finally found a formula that gives him the TV success he's clearly been chasing for most of his adult life. I never got the impression he was a racist himself but I think he's responding to incentives from the right wing base which is in fact very, very racist. He doesn't want to believe the success he's found comes by pushing white nationalist, screaming bullshit because I think on one level he probably always thought he was better than that.

Guess what Tucker, you aren't!

It seems quite clear to me that he's racist.

In this article, Carlson all but accuses Sharpton of reverse racism. His argument in the article, 15 years ago, will sound familiar to anyone who watches his show today. “The idea that I’d be responsible for the sins (or, for that matter, share in the glory of the accomplishments) of dead people who happened to share my skin tone has always confused me,” he wrote. “Racial solidarity wasn’t a working concept in my Southern California hometown. Most people barely had last names, much less ethnic identities. I grew up feeling about as much connection to nineteenth-century slave owners as I did to bus drivers in Helsinki or astronomers in Tirana. We’re all capable of getting sunburned. That’s it.”

All the tropes are there
- I wasn't a slave owner
- I don't see race
- Black people that complain about racism are reverse-racists

 

[Jaskalas]

It seems quite clear to me that he's racist.

All the tropes are there
- I wasn't a slave owner
- I don't see race
- Black people that complain about racism are reverse-racists

That's what stood out to you? Those "tropes" are nothing, that's called being white.

What I found remarkable is this:

But then he traces the roots of the decline to the desegregation of DC schools. The kicker of the article reads, “By heeding its past, Dunbar could once again inspire greatness.”​

According to Carlson, desegregation meant the loss of rich black people in the city. These black aristocrats, Carlson notes, “had both light skin and...​

 

[UberNeuman]

Ah, Tucker.. Another self made man whose DaDa married into the Swanson frozen food family and their fortune. Lol.

 

[Blackjack200]

That's what stood out to you? Those "tropes" are nothing, that's called being white.

What I found remarkable is this:

But then he traces the roots of the decline to the desegregation of DC schools. The kicker of the article reads, “By heeding its past, Dunbar could once again inspire greatness.”​

According to Carlson, desegregation meant the loss of rich black people in the city. These black aristocrats, Carlson notes, “had both light skin and...​

Yeah, that too.

 

[Blackjack200]

The end is so frustrating:

I am trying to listen. I am trying to understand. I want to understand. If I can figure out what happened to Tucker Carlson, how he went from successful magazine writer to contrarian journalist to raving Fox News host, I believe I will understand what happened to my country, my life even. What happened to make a rich white man the vox populi? How did I, a mom in the Midwest who can’t afford health care, become the humorless, censoring, liberal elite? How are the winners still insisting they are losers? What happened to this whole mess of a world? So I listen and listen. But I get no answers. Most of the quotes I get don’t make any sense. And I’m no closer to an answer now than when I started.

All I know is, he was definitely shouting.

What's to understand? He's a racist reactionary who is serving up red meat to his core audience. That's it. He has a format that allows him to be dishonest and difficult to rebut on the spot, but that's not different than Rush, O'Reilly, Hannity, etc.

You think you're going to solve the riddle of Tucker Carlson and figure out the magic words that will make his viewers understand you? Jesus Fucking Christ, are you 12 years old? They hate you, they think you're a loser, a liar, boring, and humorless. Fucking forget them. Forget them. Don't go on his show, don't spend 7,000 words trying to capture his essence, don't wring your hands. He has 3 million viewers. Great. That's 1% of the country. Who. Fucking. Cares.

 

[Jaskalas]

The mystery of Tucker Carlson

The end is so frustrating:

What's to understand? He's a racist reactionary who is serving up red meat to his core audience. That's it. He has a format that allows him to be dishonest and difficult to rebut on the spot, but that's not different than Rush, O'Reilly, Hannity, etc.

You think you're going to solve the riddle of Tucker Carlson and figure out the magic words that will make his viewers understand you? Jesus Fucking Christ, are you 12 years old? They hate you, they think you're a loser, a liar, boring, and humorless. Fucking forget them. Forget them. Don't go on his show, don't spend 7,000 words trying to capture his essence, don't wring your hands. He has 3 million viewers. Great. That's 1% of the country. Who. Fucking. Cares.

The end is fascinating to me. I finally understand the purpose, and point, of the article after making it that far.

This is not about Tucker Carlson. It's about America. How did we collectively lose our minds? You say he has a mere 1% following. I disagree. He represents the Trumpets who WON the election. That's nothing to scoff at or ignore. That is the new Republican Party. Tucker is their voice. He gives them a narrative on his show, and those 1% lemmings spread the gospel to others.

In this right wing blowhard, an accurate successor to Bill O'Reilly, you see the heart and soul of Trump voters. You see victim mentality, while wielding great power. You see detachment from reality. And this article has a writer who is examining one of them in a public manner, to try and understand it all. Because if you cannot figure out Tucker Carlson, then you won't understand one half the nation. A half which controls the Presidency, the Congress, and the SCOTUS.

Who. Fucking. Cares? Everyone should. The party in control of our government doesn't stop tomorrow. We'll be mired in this conflict for at least the next decade. How could we even begin to struggle to overcome Trumpism, if we do not at least understand it? They are not as simple as your cheap caricature as racists and haters. We must delve deeper than that if we are to pry independents away from them. You cannot simply say !@#$ them and keep a functional democracy.

If their side is the problem, ours must be the solution.

 

[dank69]

The mystery of Tucker Carlson



The end is fascinating to me. I finally understand the purpose, and point, of the article after making it that far.

This is not about Tucker Carlson. It's about America. How did we collectively lose our minds? You say he has a mere 1% following. I disagree. He represents the Trumpets who WON the election. That's nothing to scoff at or ignore. That is the new Republican Party. Tucker is their voice. He gives them a narrative on his show, and those 1% lemmings spread the gospel to others.

In this right wing blowhard, an accurate successor to Bill O'Reilly, you see the heart and soul of Trump voters. You see victim mentality, while wielding great power. You see detachment from reality. And this article has a writer who is examining one of them in a public manner, to try and understand it all. Because if you cannot figure out Tucker Carlson, then you won't understand one half the nation. A half which controls the Presidency, the Congress, and the SCOTUS.

Who. Fucking. Cares? Everyone should. The party in control of our government doesn't stop tomorrow. We'll be mired in this conflict for at least the next decade. How could we even begin to struggle to overcome Trumpism, if we do not at least understand it? They are not as simple as your cheap caricature as racists and haters. We must delve deeper than that if we are to pry independents away from them. You cannot simply say !@#$ them and keep a functional democracy.

If their side is the problem, ours must be the solution.

You go ahead and keep trying. Keep putting effort into it and then be surprised when you are done, the response, even from the independents, is "fuck you."

 

[Jaskalas]

You go ahead and keep trying. Keep putting effort into it and then be surprised when you are done, the response, even from the independents, is "fuck you."

What are you looking for, second amendment solutions to it?

 

[dank69]

What are you looking for, second amendment solutions to it?

nope. get out of the way and let them run things until they're all dead.

 

[brycejones]

Tucker always looks like he's constipated.

He is full of shit.

 

[Blackjack200]

The end is fascinating to me. I finally understand the purpose, and point, of the article after making it that far.

This is not about Tucker Carlson. It's about America. How did we collectively lose our minds? You say he has a mere 1% following. I disagree. He represents the Trumpets who WON the election. That's nothing to scoff at or ignore. That is the new Republican Party. Tucker is their voice. He gives them a narrative on his show, and those 1% lemmings spread the gospel to others.

There is nothing new about this. Racist reactionaries have been the base of the Republican party since the Southern Strategy. When are people going to wake up and realize that Trump is just a cruder, more direct version of the same Republicanism that's been around since at least Reagan?

In this right wing blowhard, an accurate successor to Bill O'Reilly, you see the heart and soul of Trump voters. You see victim mentality, while wielding great power. You see detachment from reality. And this article has a writer who is examining one of them in a public manner, to try and understand it all. Because if you cannot figure out Tucker Carlson, then you won't understand one half the nation. A half which controls the Presidency, the Congress, and the SCOTUS.

No, not half the nation. Closer to a third. A third that is absolutely irrelevant to any realistic plan to retake power and implement a progressive agenda. They simply have no role.

Who. Fucking. Cares? Everyone should. The party in control of our government doesn't stop tomorrow. We'll be mired in this conflict for at least the next decade. How could we even begin to struggle to overcome Trumpism, if we do not at least understand it? They are not as simple as your cheap caricature as racists and haters. We must delve deeper than that if we are to pry independents away from them. You cannot simply say !@#$ them and keep a functional democracy.

If their side is the problem, ours must be the solution.

Sorry, but you're acting like Trumpism is some kind of puzzle wrapped in an enigma. It's not. It's various flavors of conservatism, racism, fascism, and resentment. It's been around since forever and its never going away. You defeat it by offering an alternative. A progressive agenda that promises to meet peoples basic needs: health care, jobs, housing, education, etc. The Democrats did a shit job of that in 2016. Understanding that would do a world more than trying to peel back the layers on a fruitcake like Carlson.

 

[Jaskalas]

nope. get out of the way and let them run things until they're all dead.

In what scenario is a "they" not also a "we"? Do you not live in the US?

Those of us who do are bound to face the consequences of Trumpism.

 

[dank69]

In what scenario is a "they" not also a "we"? Do you not live in the US?

Those of us who do are bound to face the consequences of Trumpism.

That's the price we have to pay.

 

[Moonbeam]

That's the price we have to pay.

That's the assumption rage will unconsciously make is how I see it. Just imagine the mess you'd be in if you hated rage, say in deplorable people. If rage is deplorable you might miss seeing yourself among them.

But then perhaps I'm not being fair. You may have enough rage to lust to see them fuck themselves, but mine is such that I want to do it for them.

 

[paperfist]

I used to listen to him then one day he turned into Hanity.

 

[Moonbeam]

I should think it obvious that Tucker the Fucker was fucked by his parents from the day they named him. With a name like Tucker Carlson they might as well of tied pink bows in his hair before sending him to school. The guy is going to ooze insecurity. At least they didn't go with Moonbeam. What an even bigger mess that would have been.

 

[trenchfoot]

Just to think that conservatives need to have the likes of Tucker and Hannity to make them feel good and right about themselves is so interesting in a "watching the Titanic slowly sink into the drink" kind of way.

But wait! There's the rush to Rush and the stampede to Conservative AM radio and comforting words of imperialist snide, diatribe and deride from Coulter, Malkin and Pirro that soothes the conservative soul and fulfills their need to be the victims of oppression even as they own and run the go'vt from top to bottom.