• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

The Fox News Presidency

Hey, are we talking about how Tucker Carlson was just caught defending child rape and calling a bunch of women the C word? Because it seems like maybe we should.
 
Travis said:
Hey, are we talking about how Tucker Carlson was just caught defending child rape and calling a bunch of women the C word? Because it seems like maybe we should.
Click to expand...
There was also a recent case where Fox host Jeanine Pirro got criticized for attacking Congress-critter Ilhan Omar, suggesting that because she wears a hijab she is in favor of sharia law and against the U.S. constitution. (It actually caused fox news to issue a statement indicating that they don't agree with her.)

I guess they wanted a fig-leaf over their bigotry.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/10/media/jeanine-pirro-ilhan-omar/index.html
 
So, Fox news has:

- Pirro's bigotry exposed
- Tucker Carlson's misogeny and defense of child sex exposed
- Laura Ingraham has lost sponsorship over the past few years over her attacks of survivors of a Florida school shooting.
- Hannity has been tied (marginally) to Cohen, and spoke at a Trump rally (which of course illustrates that he cannot be considered an unbiased newscaster)
 
Network executives called Carlson into the conference room and sat him down: "Tucker, we don't like to do this but... we're giving you a raise."
 
Segnosaur said:
Hannity has been tied (marginally) to Cohen, and spoke at a Trump rally (which of course illustrates that he cannot be considered an unbiased newscaster)
Click to expand...


Cohen had THREE clients.

1) Trump.

2) Trumps fundraiser Elliott Broidy.

3) Sean Hannity.


In what universe is Hannity marginally tied to Cohen??
 
This is The End said:
Hannity has been tied (marginally) to Cohen
Click to expand...
Cohen had THREE clients.
1) Trump.
2) Trumps fundraiser Elliott Broidy.
3) Sean Hannity.
In what universe is Hannity marginally tied to Cohen??
Click to expand...
While Cohen considered Hannity a client, as far as I know it has not yet been revealed what exactly Cohen did for Hannity. He may have been acting as Hannity's "fixer" as well, or their actions may have been minimal.

Since we don't know the depth of their relationship, that's why I used the phrase 'marginally'... as a way to say "I just don't know how dirty he is".
 
Segnosaur said:
So, Fox news has:

- Pirro's bigotry exposed
- Tucker Carlson's misogeny and defense of child sex exposed
- Laura Ingraham has lost sponsorship over the past few years over her attacks of survivors of a Florida school shooting.
- Hannity has been tied (marginally) to Cohen, and spoke at a Trump rally (which of course illustrates that he cannot be considered an unbiased newscaster)
Click to expand...
So Fox gets even more column-inches and sound-bites while people discuss these issues. Free advertising! RESULT!
 
Norman Alexander said:
So, Fox news has:

- Pirro's bigotry exposed
- Tucker Carlson's misogeny and defense of child sex exposed
- Laura Ingraham has lost sponsorship over the past few years over her attacks of survivors of a Florida school shooting.
- Hannity has been tied (marginally) to Cohen, and spoke at a Trump rally (which of course illustrates that he cannot be considered an unbiased newscaster)
Click to expand...
So Fox gets even more column-inches and sound-bites while people discuss these issues. Free advertising! RESULT!
Click to expand...
They still have to get companies to purchase advertising time on their network. Even if they end up with higher ratings as a result of these controversies, companies may not be associated with bigots, regardless of how many people see their ads.

"Welcome to fox news, where we think only white christian people are relevant. Now a word from our sponsor..."

If this keeps up, about the only company willing to advertise on their network will be laundry detergent companies, and they'll only want to do so because they can appeal to KKK members trying to get their robes as white as possible.
 
Hilarious response from Carlson today about the clinton grifter Media Matter's hit piece quoting 'otrageous" things said a decade ago on a shock jock's call in show.

Man those clinton grifters are soft
 
The Big Dog said:
Hilarious response from Carlson today about the clinton grifter Media Matter's hit piece quoting 'otrageous" things said a decade ago on a shock jock's call in show.

Man those clinton grifters are soft
Click to expand...
What exactly does he think is unfair about the piece?

Is he claiming that his comments were somehow fake? I've seen no evidence of that (nor have I seen any claim of that from him.)

Is he complaining that the comments were so long ago that they should be ignored? (Remember conservatives had no problem criticizing Al Franken even though the pictures that lead to his downfall were taken years ago. Smf Carleson has already lost advertisers over other bigoted comments in the past couple of years, so rather than being a trait he had in the past and he grew out of, it seems like nothing has changed.)

Is he complaining that we should ignore the comments because they were on a 'shock jock' radio program? (Strangely enough, most political people manage to avoid calling in to such programs, so no reason to give him the benefit of the doubt here.)

Is he complaining because he doesn't think his comments were "outrageous"? Well, he certainly has the right to hold whatever opinions he wants. But I don't think defending statutory rape and calling women the C-word is really going to be seen as positive by anyone who's not a bigot.
 
Segnosaur said:
What exactly does he think is unfair about the piece?

Is he claiming that his comments were somehow fake? I've seen no evidence of that (nor have I seen any claim of that from him.)

Is he complaining that the comments were so long ago that they should be ignored? (Remember conservatives had no problem criticizing Al Franken even though the pictures that lead to his downfall were taken years ago. Smf Carleson has already lost advertisers over other bigoted comments in the past couple of years, so rather than being a trait he had in the past and he grew out of, it seems like nothing has changed.)

Is he complaining that we should ignore the comments because they were on a 'shock jock' radio program? (Strangely enough, most political people manage to avoid calling in to such programs, so no reason to give him the benefit of the doubt here.)

Is he complaining because he doesn't think his comments were "outrageous"? Well, he certainly has the right to hold whatever opinions he wants. But I don't think defending statutory rape and calling women the C-word is really going to be seen as positive by anyone who's not a bigot.
Click to expand...

He didn't even whine about it being unfair, i mean why bother? Hell he didn't even complain about it. It ain't like he hid the fact that he called, and did some bits with "Bubba the Love sponge."

It is soft and silly and a decade ago and brought by a literal political hit machine. It is silly and he ain't folding despite the snowflakes melting down about it.
 
Segnosaur said:
Is he complaining because he doesn't think his comments were "outrageous"? Well, he certainly has the right to hold whatever opinions he wants. But I don't think defending statutory rape and calling women the C-word is really going to be seen as positive by anyone who's not a bigot.
Click to expand...

It's this. From what I saw, he is claiming that if you are on the radio long enough, you are bound to say something outrageous, so you shouldn't be held accountable for it if you do
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom