CBH1926 Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 2 hours ago, Sabrefan1 said: They'd be upset about a journalist doing journalism? The Putin interview wasn't bad. It's interesting to see it from the other side's perspective whether you agree with the Russians or not. Personally I don't, but it was still interesting. Carlson also all but begged Putin at the end of the interview for him to release a jailed New York Times journalist, in jail for espionage, so he could bring him back home to the US. Putin told him that there were already talks between the US and Russia's intelligence services for a deal. I don’t considered Tucker a journalist, he is modern day propagandist, pushing political views his entire career. Sadly lot of so called journalists are doing the same on all sides. At this particular moment, this helps Putin and his regime who are desperately trying to divide us. Putin might even release the NYT journalist to score political points. 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 11 hours ago, Super19 said: It's almost like the US and Israel are allies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 11 hours ago, Ghostsof1915 said: Why, Harris is probably more competent than Biden or Trump. What's wrong with her as VP? She's extremely unpopular. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RupertKBD Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 11 hours ago, Ghostsof1915 said: Why, Harris is probably more competent than Biden or Trump. What's wrong with her as VP? She got stuck with the Border gig when she first became Veep and it didn't go well. She hasn't been able to shake that first impression. 10 minutes ago, Bob Long said: She's extremely unpopular. So is Brad Marchand. Doesn't mean he isn't a good hockey player.... 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CBH1926 Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 11 minutes ago, Bob Long said: She's extremely unpopular. Yup, her approval rating is around 23% which is the lowest number amongst VP in recent history. Even Dick Cheney had 30% approval rating back in 2007. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RupertKBD Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 Remember all the pearl clutching about liberals wanting to indoctrinate children? Florida has their own plans.... https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/politics/florida-schoolkids-may-have-to-study-threat-of-communism-in-the-us/ar-BB1i1G4g?ocid=hpmsn&cvid=df14470925944f39ac23cb161f97c95d&ei=102 Quote The new bill, introduced by the Republican state congressmen Robert Brannan and James Buchanan, would introduce required curriculum about communism for the first time below seventh grade. It has progressed to the pre-kindergarten-through-12th-grade appropriations committee, and faces one more stop in the education and employment committee before a full House reading. It will require students as young as five to learn about “atrocities committed in foreign countries under the guidance of communism, the philosophy and lineages of communist thought, including cultural Marxism, [and] the increasing threat of communism in the US and [to] our allies through the 20th century”. ....but students can't be taught about the atrocities committed by Americans during slavery, because that might cause them "distress".... 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
112 Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 (edited) 15 minutes ago, RupertKBD said: Remember all the pearl clutching about liberals wanting to indoctrinate children? Florida has their own plans.... https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/politics/florida-schoolkids-may-have-to-study-threat-of-communism-in-the-us/ar-BB1i1G4g?ocid=hpmsn&cvid=df14470925944f39ac23cb161f97c95d&ei=102 ....but students can't be taught about the atrocities committed by Americans during slavery, because that might cause them "distress".... What about atrocities committed under the guidance of capitalism? e: sorry, didn't realize you made the same point as me. This is going to lead to a lot of people distrusting social/welfare programs. Edited February 9 by 112 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 44 minutes ago, CBH1926 said: Yup, her approval rating is around 23% which is the lowest number amongst VP in recent history. Even Dick Cheney had 30% approval rating back in 2007. @RupertKBD Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RupertKBD Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 29 minutes ago, Bob Long said: @RupertKBD That's not a revelation. Nor is it a reason why she is "bad" VP. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 1 minute ago, RupertKBD said: That's not a revelation. Nor is it a reason why she is "bad" VP. It is to stick with her as a choice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabrefan1 Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 1 hour ago, Bob Long said: Just giving a bastard like Putin a platform is bad. There's no journalism there. There's a difference between an interview and a platform. If Putin had a direct line to an internet site to post whatever he wanted, whenever he wanted, he'd have a platform. Answering questions during an interview controlled by said journalist is called journalism. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 4 minutes ago, Sabrefan1 said: There's a difference between an interview and a platform. If Putin had a direct line to an internet site to post whatever he wanted, whenever he wanted, he'd have a platform. Answering questions during an interview controlled by said journalist is called journalism. no, not in this case. Giving this bastard even a hint of legitimacy is just wrong. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DSVII Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 (edited) 5 minutes ago, Sabrefan1 said: There's a difference between an interview and a platform. If Putin had a direct line to an internet site to post whatever he wanted, whenever he wanted, he'd have a platform. Answering questions during an interview controlled by said journalist is called journalism. Considering this president is from the nation that is famous for killing any journalist that writes anything negative about the regime, I highly doubt that the interview or the questions were even miniscully controlled by Tucker. He just read them like a good toddler. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_journalists_killed_in_Russia It's an 'interview' yes. But has that context has to be in mind and everything said taken with a massive grain of salt. Especially with Putins revision of history from 800AD onwards (a curious choice) Edited February 9 by DSVII 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabrefan1 Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 1 hour ago, CBH1926 said: I don’t considered Tucker a journalist, he is modern day propagandist, pushing political views his entire career. Sadly lot of so called journalists are doing the same on all sides. At this particular moment, this helps Putin and his regime who are desperately trying to divide us. Putin might even release the NYT journalist to score political points. When he was on both CNN and Fox, he was a highly paid news actor with a loose script to follow. Whether you like him or what he's doing or not, he's doing actual journalism with his own network on Twitter/X. He doesn't have much other choice right now. Don't get it wrong though, if he was offered a news acting job at a salary of 10's of millions again, he'd likely accept it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabrefan1 Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 Just now, Bob Long said: no, not in this case. Giving this bastard even a hint of legitimacy is just wrong. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RupertKBD Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 4 minutes ago, Sabrefan1 said: There's a difference between an interview and a platform. If Putin had a direct line to an internet site to post whatever he wanted, whenever he wanted, he'd have a platform. Answering questions during an interview controlled by said journalist is called journalism. After Carlson claimed that no other journalists had even tried to interview Putin, Christiane Amanpour came out and said it was untrue and that her and several other journalists had requested interviews with him "multiple times". Carlson is the only one Putin agreed to be interviewed by. Why do you suppose that is? 1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 Just now, Sabrefan1 said: sorry Sabre, its not this. Putin does not have a legitimate "side". 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabrefan1 Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 1 minute ago, RupertKBD said: After Carlson claimed that no other journalists had even tried to interview Putin, Christiane Amanpour came out and said it was untrue and that her and several other journalists had requested interviews with him "multiple times". Carlson is the only one Putin agreed to be interviewed by. Why do you suppose that is? Because Tucker is a conservative and right or wrong, Putin likely believes that he'd get a less confrontational sit-down if interviewed by a conservative. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DSVII Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 2 minutes ago, Sabrefan1 said: That's a false equivalence here. Unless you're trying to equate the right with the guy who ordered cremation ovens into Bucha and Mariupol? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 Just now, Sabrefan1 said: Because Tucker is a conservative and right or wrong, Putin likely believes that he'd get a less confrontational sit-down if interviewed by a conservative. no, because Putin is happy to kill civilians with drones, and not as causalities of a conflict, on purpose. There's no "siding" this one. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabrefan1 Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 3 minutes ago, Bob Long said: sorry Sabre, its not this. Putin does not have a legitimate "side". But he has a side. Some people wanted to hear his side of the argument, including me. He mixed truth with what I believe are falsehoods, but I still wanted to hear what he had to say. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RupertKBD Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 2 minutes ago, Sabrefan1 said: Because Tucker is a conservative and right or wrong, Putin likely believes that he'd get a less confrontational sit-down if interviewed by a conservative. So you're of the opinion that he's the only conservative journalist that has requested an interview? I doubt that.....Putin agreed to the interview because Carlson has been pushing his agenda and he sees it as free propaganda. You're also being far too kind to Carlson by calling him a journalist. He's a professional liar and there are $780 million pieces of evidence to back that up. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabrefan1 Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 1 minute ago, DSVII said: That's a false equivalence here. Unless you're trying to equate the right with the guy who ordered cremation ovens into Bucha and Mariupol? Hitler would be the only recent historical figure that I wouldn't want to hear an interview with if I were alive in the 40's. The only reason why I say that is because he was never real when in the public eye. There was only one private recording of Hitler that ever got out to the public and he was soft spoken and didn't yell out scripted words. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 Just now, Sabrefan1 said: But he has a side. Some people wanted to hear his side of the argument, including me. He mixed truth with what I believe are falsehoods, but I still wanted to hear what he had to say. so you satisfying your curiosity is worth Putin potentially gaining some allies? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Heffy Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 2 minutes ago, Sabrefan1 said: But he has a side. Some people wanted to hear his side of the argument, including me. He mixed truth with what I believe are falsehoods, but I still wanted to hear what he had to say. He has literally no right to have his views heard. Why pretend there's any reason to treat either Carlson or Putin like anything more than the subhuman vermin they both are? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.