And The Tucker ain't an antisemite, no matter how much you and your Hamas-loving buddies in the Western Media lie about it. 
Posted on 11/25/2023 8:29:28 AM PST by marcusmaximus
The ideological sewer known as social media was alight this week with the latest escalation in a feud that has been brewing for months, if not years: the Candace Owens versus Ben Shapiro showdown. This particular chapter began after Shapiro was recorded describing Owens’s weeks of “faux sophistication” regarding the Hamas terrorist attacks on Oct. 7 as “disgraceful.”
Owens apparently then cracked open Google and frantically copied and pasted a verse from Matthew that ends with, “You cannot serve both God and money,” to which Shapiro responded , “Candace, if you feel that taking money from The Daily Wire somehow comes between you and God, by all means quit.”
Now, one of the primary criticisms of Candace Owens’s rhetoric since Oct. 7 is that it’s intentionally vague, with carefully worded pseudo-analyses designed to either enrage or delight its readers without having to stand by a specific viewpoint or principle.
And as her amazingly timed interview with Tucker Carlson showed, she learned from the best.
During her interview, which began with Carlson comparing the treatment of Candace Owens to Galileo, the pair touched on a number of controversial subjects, including Ben Shapiro’s comments, Nikki Haley’s attitude toward free speech and Israel, and predictions for the 2024 election.
But the glue that held each of these segments loosely together was Tucker Carlson’s own brand of vile, conspiratorial, and often antisemitic garbage, masked using his trademark strategy of fake cluelessness and supposedly good-natured questions.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonexaminer.com ...
Tucker isn’t an anti semite but he is a kook on foreign policy.
I feel the same way about Ben Shapiro.
Pretty much
Now I’ll call him to say hello for the 2nd time in two days.
Hope he doesn’t think it ominous
LOL
Why did Tucker boycott his own Mom’s funeral?
I don’t know, but what I do know is that it is none of my, or your business.
“If you seriously believe that Tucker Carlson doesn’t understand the difference between supposed support or apathy toward racist policies in academia — which, no, do not amount to white genocide — and the torture, rape, mutilation, burning alive, kidnapping, and murder of over a thousand Jews (at least 31 of whom were American citizens) in just eight hours on Oct. 7, then you must believe Tucker Carlson is stupid.”
NO, the stupid person is the one who wrote that piece. He entirely missed Carlson’s point. There were no contradictions in Carlson’s reasoning.
“Anyone who doesn’t know by now Tucker Carlson is a soulless piece of dung is irredeemable.”
Really??? Anyone who doesn’t know you are an imbecile is hopeless.
Hey I just noticed this thread looking to cancel Tucker, who is pretty much the person closest to Freeper ideology on many issues.
So I was thinking, why not cancel everyone?
It would save us a lot of typing if there was no point in doing so because everyone was already cancelled.
Maybe we could replace this forum with an AI bot that posts messages that everyone only says things motivated by money and opportunism.
Our brave new future awaits!
Tucker was a collaborator in The Steal.
REVELATION 2:9
I know thy works, and tribulation, and poverty, (but thou art rich) and I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan.
Because conservatives are stupid.
Not the way leftists think we are stupid
But in our own special way.
That is why Alinsky’s rules live on. He could see how to destroy us.
Saul Alinsky’s Rules from Rules for Radicals
Saul Alinsky describes 24 rules in Rules for Radicals. Of those 24 rules, 13 are rules of “power tactics”:
1. “Power is not only what you have but what the enemy
thinks you have.”
2. “Never go outside the experience of your people.”
3. “Wherever possible go outside of the experience of the
enemy.”
4. “Make the enemy live up to their own book of rules.”
5. “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.”
6. “A good tactic is one that your people enjoy.”
7. “A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag.”
8. “Keep the pressure on, with different tactics and
actions, and utilize all events of the period for your purpose.”
9. “The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing
itself.”
10. “The major premise for tactics is the development of
operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition.”
11. “If you push a negative hard and deep enough it will
break through into its counterside.”
12. “The price of a successful attack is a constructive
alternative.”
13. “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.”
The remaining 11 rules Alinsky describes are concerned with “the ethics of means and ends”:
1. “One’s concern with the ethics of means and ends varies inversely with one’s personal interest in the issue … Accompanying this rule is the parallel one that one’s concern with the ethics of means and ends varies inversely with one’s distance from the scene of conflict.”
2. “The judgment of the ethics of means is dependent upon the political position of those sitting in judgment.”
3. “In war the end justifies almost any means.”
4. “Judgment must be made in the context of the times in which the action occurred and not from any other chronological vantage point.”
5. “Concern with ethics increases with the number of means available and vice versa.”
6. “The less important the end to be desired, the more one can afford to engage in ethical evaluations of means.”
7. “Generally success or failure is a mighty determinant of ethics.”
8. “The morality of a means depends upon whether the means is being employed at a time of imminent defeat or imminent victory.”
9. “Any effective means is automatically judged by the opposition as being unethical.”
10. “You do what you can with what you have and clothe it with moral garments.”
11. “Goals must be phrased in general terms like ‘Liberty, Equality, Fraternity,’ ‘Of the Common Welfare,’ ‘Pursuit of Happiness,’ or ‘Bread and Peace.’”
I think if conservatives don’t press this point all week long that the man must resign, over and over and over, we are losers.
What happened here is that conservatives are being taught a lesson that they are less than human and deserve contempt. And leftists are being given training lessons on how to humiliate conservatives and if we let this happen they will be given a pass. This will be standard operating procedure.
Are there bigger battles? Yes.
But the Broken Window Theory works here. Stop letting this happen OR no conservative is safe.
Shut your babbling hole for a change - babbling ass.
Maybe she was a total POS... like you.
Tucker sued the estate of his dead mother. He wanted her money but refused to attend her funeral. Who’s the POS?
And The Tucker ain't an antisemite, no matter how much you and your Hamas-loving buddies in the Western Media lie about it.
I’m reminded of the maxim: “don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good”.
I looked in the Official Conservative Rulebook (LoL) and noticed that nowhere does it say that any of us have to be in virtual lockstep with anyone - we are free to analyze and opine of our own accord.
That said - let the Conservative circular firing resume!
Tell Tucker to return the $15 million he accepted from Iranian Muslim Omeed Malik and to stop pimping for Iran and RFK Jr.
Don’t know who he is, but I’ll go along with it.
She gave birth to him and Tucker is supposedly a Christian.
**********
So what? She also abandoned him and went flitting off to France. She was a cold narcissist who wounded a little child. Too bad about her. Why the hell should he care just because she birthed him? That does not make a mother. A mother stays with her child and nurtures and loves him.
Then why did Tucker sue the estate of his dead Mom ? He didn’t attend her funeral but he was entitled to her cash?
You're just dumb and trollish enough to believe that people on this forum can talk directly to The Tucker.
Why don't you tell your Biden to stop his antisemite dance, and buckle down to help the Israelis rub out Hamas?
Is it because your Media pals like Ian Haworth are closet antisemites who are hiding behind their criticism of The Tucker [who cucks them every day of the week]? He's an Oxford guy, is Ian - and they're a giant pack of Jew-haters.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.