The greatest Fox News interview

GroupDIY Audio Forum

Help Support GroupDIY Audio Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
I really try to stay out of "The Brewery".  I couldn't help myself. If only Fox viewers could be forced to watch this. I'm sure it would be regarded as "fake news". Trump would say it was edited in post(just as my horrible neighbor claimed in court while maliciously trespassing on video).
 
living sounds said:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6_nFI2Zb7qE
Tucker Carson is a political commentator, people often conflate commentary with news reportage, when criticizing Fox. Unfortunately a lot of straight news reporting everywhere these days is laced with political bias, while claiming not to be.

I avoid echo chambers from both the right and the left. I do not watch the Carson show because I do not find it entertaining or informative. I can imagine some on the right like his format of debating with left leaning spokespeople. I suspect most exchanges do not end like that.

What were we supposed to get from that video other than the Dutch man was able to make Carson lose his temper? Everybody has a bad day. He probably should have aired it with the profanity bleeped. Might help his ratings.

Sadly this political division has spread into more aspects of our daily lives. Just wait until 2020, still over a year away.

JR
 
living sounds said:
The political devision is a result of the lopsided distribution of wealth created by the people "the Dutch man" criticizes.
There has always been an uneven distribution of wealth, because people are different.

This is used for political advantage because there are fewer rich people.

JR
 
JohnRoberts said:
What were we supposed to get from that video other than the Dutch man was able to make Carson lose his temper? Everybody has a bad day. He probably should have aired it with the profanity bleeped. Might help his ratings.

Sadly this political division has spread into more aspects of our daily lives. Just wait until 2020, still over a year away.

JR

Edit required. I only posted JR's quote:

I did not pen the saying, "the truth hurts". I felt as if the Dutchman may have hit a sore spot with Tucker. Anyway, and by no means am I trying to bait you, do you think it will get better or worse in 2020?
 
iturnknobs said:
Edit required. I only posted JR's quote:

I did not pen the saying, "the truth hurts". I felt as if the Dutchman may have hit a sore spot with Tucker. Anyway, and by no means am I trying to bait you, do you think it will get better or worse in 2020?
I cannot imagine it getting much worse, but we have survived much worse division as a nation before and survived (like our own civil war).  That was based on actual substantive issues, not just team politics like now.

Regarding 2020 it is starting already and there is a lot of interest from many new candidates (a good thing) and some of the same old ones (not as good). 

Bernie is back. The democrats have changed a few rules since the last time. Reducing the power of super delegates, that hurt Bernie the last time. Another Bernie related change is that candidates must join the democratic party to participate in the democratic primary, I guess we can call that the "Bernie rule" since he has declined to join so far, while actively raising money for 2020. Maybe its just me but I get a little uneasy when he talks about "revolution"  :eek:.  Joe Biden has not announced, because he doesn't have to yet. He has plenty of name recognition but arguably missed his window last time.

Lots of new talent, some with a history that will serve them better in a full election than the democratic party primary when they have to position themselves to the left of AOC.

JR

PS: One guy has announced for the republican primary but he seems unsure whether he is republican or libertarian.  ;)
 
JohnRoberts said:
There has always been an uneven distribution of wealth, because people are different.

This is used for political advantage because there are fewer rich people.

JR

Not like this in the modern era. We've been there before, but you're welcome, I will educate you once again:

income-inequality-usa-05.jpg



The "good old days" with the high taxes  for the wealthy and the thriving middle class...
 
While I do agree with the points he made at Davos. In the Carlson interview he was next level annoying. Also, if you are accusing someone, bring evidence.
It is a shame really, whatever the message, the way it is delivered does matter, and I do not think he choose the most effective way. And now he also gave Carlson an easy out, "can't air it because of profanity". Horsecookies of course, but that's to be expected, good that it is out there anyway.
 
It is interesting that more and more people are seeing the curtain pulled back on the wealthy swamp dwellers that are orchestrating things.

These people are encouraging the team politics, us vs. them mindset, that let's them continue to give tax breaks to the wealthy etc etc.
The idea of Roscharch tests, identity politics, are all just getting the sheeple to view ads and give the worst actors in the media the ratings and revenue it wants.
Why anyone would watch cable news shows like Carlson is beyond me.

There certainly are great journalists doing great work in media - as there are great individuals in politics trying to do great things. But there are a whole lot of disingenuous, manipulative, selfish actors out there too, sucking up a lot of oxygen.

 
Tucker Carlson is a weenie. Sometimes he makes the most disingenuous arguments. Arguments so full of contradictions that I have a hard time thinking he actually believes them. I'm saying that from a debate club perspective. I can respect a well argued position I disagree with. Some of the commentators on Fox I don't mind but he is foul.
 
living sounds said:
Not like this in the modern era. We've been there before, but you're welcome, I will educate you once again:




The "good old days" with the high taxes  for the wealthy and the thriving middle class...
Keep trying... but you know what they say abut old dogs.... 8)

JR
 
According to an article in a dutch online newspaper, 'twas a cunning plan, and mr.Bregman realises that he was being a pedantic ass, but still felt it needed to happen this way, as he knew in advance Fox was going to try and use him for their own purposes.
So yeah, well played, still not sure how effective it will be in the long run, Fox fans will still see it as an attack by the fake media.
To those versed in the incoherent mess that is our (the dutch) language:
https://www.bd.nl/binnenland/nederlandse-journalist-zette-fox-show-expres-op-stelten-leek-wel-een-verwaande-kwast~afcab82f/
 
Jarno said:
According to an article in a dutch online newspaper, ...

Possibly Rutger Bregman didn't want to stir things up a bit more tonight on Dutch TV, when he was interviewed by Matthijs van Nieuwkerk.

Matthijs van Nieuwkerk  is most likely is a good citizen, so pays his taxes  - but he works for a Dutch public broadcast corporation and by doing so he collects €580.000 each year, which is the highest salary in Dutch TV-land, so this remains a touchy topic.

I figure Van Nieuwkerk was relieved that the interview ended without a reference from Bregman to his own salary, since it's well above the so called 'Balkenendenorm' (=law) we have here in The Netherlands, which states that nobody paid from public funds should earn more than 130% of €187.000.
 
I don't enjoy playing political games (like wealth shaming), but for extra credit whataboutism count how many new candidates (so far) are millionaires or better.

IMO this does not disqualify them for about the most important executive job in the world, but we might want to ask how public servants became millionaires on modest salaries.  ::) ::) At least that starbucks guy earned it the old fashioned way...

JR
 
Back
Top