You're telling me that there is no debate on his show due to want of effort on the left? :lamo Sure.. :roll: ...
We aren't in the basement.
appeal to authority noted.
I am telling you what I stated: he has offered to debate his media critics, and to date no one has accepted. As you haven't provided a thimble of evidence to the contrary, none have the spine ask to appear, period.
By the way, 'the basement' was not an allusion to the forum basement, its an allusion to the dark mental bunker where you have fits of "lamo" and uncontrolled "eyerolls" as your primary form of counter-argument.
Nor am I appealing to authority (although the law is a greater authority on the law than your delusions), I'm appealing to a legal reality, that Tucker is not atrocious or outrageous in his view of Jeffs legal situation in the original case - unless that Utah Supreme Court and County District Attorney are also just as atrocious or outrageous.
During the 2009 comments from Tucker Carlson, Jeffs had been indicted for child rape. And I don't agree with Tucker's previous legal analysis from 2006 for two primary reasons:
1. The girls objected to the marriage and told Jeffs they did not consent.
2. Jeffs was the leader of the cult and exercised supreme authority of the goings ons within the compound.
Pretty much the same arguments as the prosecution.
Fine, you don't have to agree. But just because you don't agree with Carlson, the Utah Supreme Court, or the County Prosecutors final determination that they misused the law, your disagreement doesn't support ANY of your crazy accusations regarding Tucker's character.
And Tucker was correct August 27, 2009 when he said:
“He’s in prison because he’s weird and unpopular and he has a different lifestyle that other people find creepy. He's like got some weird religious cult where he thinks it's OK to, you know, marry underaged girls, but he didn't do it (rape the bride). Why wouldn't the guy who actually did it, who had sex with an underaged girl, he should be the one who's doing life?”
AT THAT TIME that was the reason he was serving a prison sentence, not because he got charged in 2008 for an alleged rape and had yet to come to trial.
Calling Iraqi's primitive monkeys and telling women to be quiet is bigotry and misogyny. Sorry your having a tough time with that.
I'm not, but I am finding it pointless to destroy your major complaint only to see you keep flinging mud hoping that something else sticks. And so you provided us a another canard:
In 2008 Carlson and Bubba the Love Sponge were riffing in a tongue and cheek exchange on Canada, deciding which of them like Canada and if it should be invaded - a country that Tucker has joked about before.
BUBBA THE LOVE SPONGE: ...I love Canada. They're great people up there. Tucker feels that you guys are a bunch of assholes.
TUCKER CARLSON: I totally disagree (about not liking Canada). If I didn't like Canada, I wouldn’t consider it worth invading. I mean, Iraq is a crappy place filled with a bunch of, you know, semiliterate primitive monkeys -- that’s why it wasn't worth invading.
THE LOVE SPONGE: Keep burying yourself.
CARLSON: But Canada's a solid place with good-looking women and good fishing. We should invade.
THE LOVE SPONGE: You will never get a speaking engagement in Canada, I promise. If whomever's going to hire you, they need to call me first and do a little bit of due diligence because --
Now really Winston, do you honestly think this was a serious military policy discussion OR obvious mocking of countries as subjects of insult entertainment? And even so, in the riff about invading other countries, how is it that Iraq in 2008 wasn't exactly as most people perceived - a benighted bunch of knuckle dragging primitives who are incapable of doing anything more than killing one another in the name of "Allah" ? (a view later underscored when the hand built "democracy" began falling apart once more under a Shia sectarian Prime Minister and a resurgent ISIS encircling Northern Iraq.)
Nothing said in the exchange was not said or at least thought by most Americans, be it joking or serious.
[/quote]No, you have acted an apologist for Tucker because your hyper partisan viewpoint disallows you from seeing wrongdoing on behalf of one of your beloved mouthpieces. Carlson is running scared from debate because he knows he would go down hard and fast.[/QUOTE]
LOL...actually its the blessing of my sense of humor, disrespect for weasel talk, and my love of plain speaking that "disallows" me from inventing reasons to be offended in order to DE platform of unpopular views.
And in case you slept through civics, tolerance to hearing other viewpoints is what this country is supposed to be about.
