Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
No, he just wants them to actually answer the question instead of deflecting or putting up a straw man/red herring argument.
So many in the press let their guests filibuster their questions, it's actually a refreshing change to see a host that doesn't let then get away with it.
It's one of reasons why Carlson is so popular.
I can't say from first hand viewing experience if this is the one and only reason that Carson interrupts his guests when answering a question, but there are different ways to get people to answer a question and ultimately if someone doesn't want to answer your question, that too is in many ways answer enough, indicative of someone not wanting to be forthcoming. Also, some people are more comfortable with people acting rudely than other people. We see the same sort of thing in this forum all the time...
LOL okay... whatever you have to tell yourself to sleep at night.
You come and go with me like the opossum that shows up in our yard every now and then in the middle of the night...
Not sure where you're coming from most of the time, but I don't have these issues you are forever accusing me of having. Can you give that sort of nonsense a bit of a rest already?
I liked him back when he was on CNN with liberal co-host Paul Begala. In the same way I liked Hannity when he was co-hosting with Alan Colmes. What ever happened to having both a left and right personalities on cable news to give a balanced perspective? This wasn't that long ago.
Others could say the same for CNN Washington post etc and you'd discredit their differing opinion with buzzword buzzword faux outrage insult buzzword buzzphrase and conclude with why that opinion is wrong because feelz.
Of course and/or duh...
I've addressed this problem in this forum more times than I can count, always pointing at these traps of confirmation bias that tends to make victims of most of us if not all of us. Also as explained here in this thread again just a few comments back. I've even started a thread or two about media bias...
Something tells me you don't have the patience or inclination to consider these issues much further when instead you prefer to lob your peanut gallery comments to nowhere. Not sure where all your heartburn comes from, or maybe it's hemorrhoids, but please take something for your problem!
One way or another, got to hand it to Fox News as quite the source of interesting entertainment...
"A fixture of Fox’s primetime lineup, Carlson has been a gleeful scourge of liberals, a tireless disparager of social programs and a fierce critic of immigration. After he said in December that immigrants made America “poorer and dirtierâ€, more than two dozen companies dropped their ads from his show. In his jeremiad, however, Carlson sounded like Bernie Sanders. “For generations,†he declared, “Republicans have considered it their duty to make the world safe for banking while simultaneously prosecuting ever more foreign wars.†Americans “are ruled by mercenaries who feel no long-term obligation to the people they ruleâ€.
I guess he had to ditch that bow tie when he got the Fox News job and had to tailor his act to the older, angrier blue collar audience. Now he’s the average Joe version of George Will.
When I was younger, I couldn't stand Bill O'Reilly. Pompous, self righteous curmudgeon, who in fact, did what you accuse Tucker of doing.
As a matter of fact look at his last few shows in the Obama years... where he would openly agree with some of the stances Obama held. That he normally would have criticized to death with a vein poking out of his neck almost needing a bib and spit guard...
I watched O'Reilly to see what faux cause he stood for, because Think of the childrunzTM.
Good example. I couldn't stand O'Reilly (AKA O'Really?) for much the same reason. The man just rubbed me the wrong way and no matter whether he said something I liked or disliked, his pompous way of describing all through his eyes was off-putting to say the least. Plus, and again this is the big one for me, I don't much like listening to talking heads in general, because I can rarely get past their obvious bias to push whatever agenda they are known for. Mental inbreeding is what that is...
PS: You sure do love that "childrunz" business! Ad nauseum!
No surprise that statement coming from you... You'll notice, most who do watch fox/tucker, are not lemmings that need talking points regurgitated to them to form debate. That's projection. Proof positive is your claim-hearing what we want to hear.
Translation-avoid debate/argument can't handle when hearing something you don't like, write those off whole sale and discredit them to discourage others... because that's outside of your comfort zone. While you may only function in an echo chamber, others don't...
I could apply your logic against you, but it would be a lie for I have no problem nor am I uncomfortable with opposing view points.
Once that veil of die hard vehement repetitive talking point is removed, then you can get to the crux of the issue and more times than not, you'll find opposing views actually want the same things, just different ways to arrive to the same conclusion...
That is of course if you believe in thinking rather than feeling...
You sure seem to have a problem with my views!
Here too not sure what you are going on about or why, but I've pretty well established a fairly long history in this forum of engaging in debate/argument more often than not with people who express opinion different from mine. You seem wanting to argue I have trouble with "hearing something I don't like," but even with you I've exchanged opinion many times! Here again my better judgement that I'm just wasting more time.
Please spare me your many "translations" and instead, if I'm expressing opinion or making an argument you see as faulty, simply explain why without all your twisted iterations of what I'm explaining. Possible? You first need to be logical before suggesting you can apply my logic against me. You say you "have no problem" and are not "uncomfortable with opposing view points." Fine!
Not sure where all your angst comes from then, but I detect more feeling than thinking with most of your comments (that tend to run on a little too long).
I liked him back when he was on CNN with liberal co-host Paul Begala. In the same way I liked Hannity when he was co-hosting with Alan Colmes. What ever happened to having both a left and right personalities on cable news to give a balanced perspective? This wasn't that long ago.
If you like those sorts of people, perhaps the likes of Rush Limbaugh too, I suspect we can't have a "meeting of the minds" when it comes to what we should be paying attention to, but you touch on something I still enjoy when it comes to "having both left and right personalities to give a balanced perspective."
The PBS Newshour leans heavily on that approach to accomplish just that. Experts from both sides of the issue are often there to provide their point of view; head of the NRA, representative from the CATO institute, people from all sides of these issues. Often opposing members of Congress too. No commercials is an added plus I might add...
I liked him back when he was on CNN with liberal co-host Paul Begala. In the same way I liked Hannity when he was co-hosting with Alan Colmes. What ever happened to having both a left and right personalities on cable news to give a balanced perspective? This wasn't that long ago.
Because they would just be talking into an abyss, conservatives don't watch CNN therefore a conservative would never have an audience there and Liberals don't watch Fox News so a liberal would never have an audience there.
The PBS Newshour leans heavily on that approach to accomplish just that. Experts from both sides of the issue are often there to provide their point of view; head of the NRA, representative from the CATO institute, people from all sides of these issues. Often opposing members of Congress too. No commercials is an added plus I might add...
They did that in the past. But more recently it has been pretty much all PC all the time at PBS, especially when it comes to anything intersectionality-related. Something will be pushed as a concern of immigrants, women, blacks, Hispanics, Asians, Muslims, gays, trans people, etc. There will be a feature story and "experts", often members of the concerned group, will teach us about all the ways in which it is indeed quite concerning. This kind of thing represents the majority of PBS Newshour's content.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
