23 Replies to “The Perfect Candidate for Canada’s Human Wrongs Commission!”

  2. So we bring in low IQ people from Bongo Bongo lands around the world, then they and we pretend we can teach them some things about how and why our civilization is so successful.
    This is what we get. Not so much evil as bonehead stupid.

  3. Verbal diarrhea going full throttle, after the tongue flapping he did reveal who he is. Scary part is he’s been “educated” in the US and is “teaching” in a university.
    Hope Trump will bring more of them out of the woodwork.

  4. Actually, in my opinion Tucker Carlson in no way “destroyed” the grad student. He gave the student a platform to argue his viewpoint, which the student did with the usual tactics “progressives” use: talking over their opponents, not answering direct questions, and making inaccurate claims. Merely laughing dismissively is not “destroying” an opponent.
    The grad student claimed that his op-ed was “altered” & “suppressed”. One of those supposed suppressions was a sentence he included in his op-ed about advocating violence towards cops. If Carlson had read the op-ed more carefully, he could have challenged the grad student, quoting from the op-ed the very sentence the latter claimed had been suppressed. It clearly was not.
    http://www.nyunews.com/2017/02/09/nyu-should-shut-down-the-college-republicans/
    “Would [NYU President] Hamilton be as diffident if an anti-racism campus group invited a speaker who denounces police officers who have killed civilians and avoided indictment through the justice system?”
    Why didn’t Carlson insist from the outset the grad student answer his initial question, i.e. “What democratic values specifically are you referring to?” when the grad student said “… beyond our sense of democratic values”?
    Another statement Carlson could have challenged is this gem from the op-ed: “The leftist groups have not attempted to bring such controversial subjects to campus, because progressive politics remain dedicated to rational dialogue.” !!! Berkeley a shining example of “rational dialogue”, right?
    And this, which our own MSM has repeated:
    “Less than two weeks ago, a white college student — who I believe was emboldened by the speech of far-right French politician Marine Le Pen — walked into a mosque in Quebec City and killed six people.”
    Few reports have mentioned that the alleged killer’s FaceBook page also “liked” the NDP & Jack Layton, neither of those being “far-right” purported influences.

  5. “‘Less than two weeks ago, a white college student – who I believe was emboldened by the speech of far-right French politician Marine Le Pen – walked into a mosque in Quebec City and killed six people.’
    Few reports have mentioned that the alleged killer’s FaceBook page also ‘liked’ the NDP & Jack Layton, neither of those being ‘far-right’ purported influences.”
    In addition to these, Bissonnette “liked” quite an eclectic range of people and things, including the late Pope John Paul II, Marilyn Manson, Adele, the Parti Québécois, Senator John McCain and the Laval chess club.
    Seen in this context, his Facebook page shows he was all over the map in his enthusiasms. Gosh, maybe he was actually driven to attack the mosque after listening to “Remedy” by Adele while in a sulk?
    “I remember all of the things that I thought I wanted to be
    So desperate to find a way out of my world and finally breathe
    Right before my eyes I saw, my heart it came to life
    This ain’t easy it’s not meant to be
    Every story has its scars”

  6. The subjectiveness of progressive thought is deliberate ploy to avoid accountability. When Carlson tried to mail down specifics the follow simply diverted the conversation to classic extremes to place the interviewer into an extreme position.
    The education system is dominated by the very types Carlson interviewed. Until their grip over the system is eliminated there will be no progress. I would suggest that grip or dominance will actually grow. Trump was elected by a disenfranchised population which sends its youth into this educational indoctrination machine. IMHO radicalization will increase.

  7. Tucker did great.
    By letting that clueless weasel drivel on, he simply let the idiocy expose itself.
    Another fine example of what academia values.
    Six impossible things before breakfast, is a feature of the “Progressive Mindset” the only cure is exposure to ridicule.
    If the population is too stupid to enjoy such a gift?
    Oh well, welcome to Canada.
    Remember; The beatings will continue until moral improves.

  8. All the more reason for not being dismissive of opponents but rather countering arguments with iron-clad facts. The grad student’s complaint that his sentence about ” … a speaker who denounces police officers who have killed civilians and avoided indictment through the justice system?” was suppressed should have been challenged. It was there in black & white in his op-ed for anyone to read, yet in the Carlson interview he claimed that “what I wrote was actually altered and suppressed”. So, in effect, was he not also arguing for untrammeled free speech — his own — which he claimed was suppressed by the NYU newspaper? Carlson’s response to the grad student’s question about where he stood on free speech, i.e. was Carlson a free speech “fundamentalist”, to which Carlson responded “I’m an American” was a weak response, IMO.

  9. Gabby, I didn’t watch the video because of the header “destroyed by Tucker Carlson”.
    9 put of 10 times when I click on “destroyed by” bait I find no destruction.
    I completely agree: why give the idiot a platform?
    There is no give and take issue advancement in this kind of “interview”.
    And rioting is not free speech.

  10. I watched maybe half the vid, all the while yelling “Get to the ferkin point!” at the guest…..then I switched it off.

  11. I watched that “interview” where the professional student tried to control the content, talking over Carlson who was quite patient with that lunatic.
    His attempts at moral relativism are as old as Marxism. Carlson continually asked him what his point actually was, and was never given a cogent answer.
    We are free to say what these mental midgets think, whether it be counterintuitive or simply falsifiable.
    Republican students in universities are the problem, not rock throwing fascists.
    What these types do when confronted is to simply project their nonsense on argument antagonists, while their thugs default to violence and insults.
    “Argument” by flipping the coin, soon followed by shouting down, censorship and often violence. Accuse opponents of your bigotry and violent mindset.
    I offer an example that cannot be interpreted as “backing your guy” to anyone who knows me and my disdain for our present PM, from Rex Murphy
    At a Toronto BLM rally, Justin Trudeau was called a “white supremacist terrorist” by those who extol violence, who’s fascism is on display:
    “Now even in a post-fact world, it’s a exertion beyond my limits to see Justin Trudeau as a “white supremacist,”  and adding “terrorist” to the chain of abuse overloads the poor neural network altogether.  Justin Trudeau — him — a white supremacist?”
    Projection, mirroring, flipping the coin, employing the Pee Wee Herman philosophy of “I know you are, but what am I.” Response: what you just called me.
    IOW, a black supremacist terrorist enabler is calling our PM, who is a lot of things, but not a white supremacist, is herself a race fascist.
    The irrationality of this tactic often catches rational people off guard.
    We need to understand their “ideas” are based on emotion, envy, hatred and prejudice, of them, rather than those they hate.
    I agree not all the loonies resort to hyperbole, censorship and violence. Carlson later interviewed a prof who was quite polite and engaging, also with an idiotic idea – just give everybody a job at $23K a year, because apparently 10 people look for every 4 jobs. Carlson pressed him somewhat, but never challenged the prof’s conclusions, or asked him where the money comes from, given it’s not available at the moment. Hmm, tax for jobs, which destroys jobs, which creates the need for more jobs, more employment market distortions at a time of looming labour shortages. Government comes into the game late, with “solutions” for problem the market has sorted out already, re-inflating the problem, in this case unemployment.
    Taxation causes unemployment and poverty. No solutions, just problems. Trump is president due to this ignorant apparatchik arrogance of defying voters.
    http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/rex-murphy-exploring-the-new-meaning-of-words-with-our-post-fact-post-truth-activist-warriors

  12. Carlson would have done much better if he were a free speech absolutist. By agreeing with the Supreme Court interpretation he was basically in agreement with the academic leftist censor, disagreeing only on who gets to censor and for what. By allowing all speech it becomes exposed to daylight whether “inciting’ or merely “advocating”. The left “incites” continuously while if someone from the right merely “insults”, the left goes ballistic.
    The argument that no one has the right to scream fire in a crowded theatre is over-used and fallacious. If there is a fire it is one’s duty and if not, one could be sued for malicious damages. It has nothing to do with free speech.
    I agree with Gabby, Carlson didn’t win, he just controlled the mic. Fascism is still alive and well on campus.

  13. I did too. He never answered the first question and the rest of it was totally unintelligible. Twice I’ve watched a video which claimed he a guest was “destroyed” by Carlson and they weren’t.
    Bill O’Reilly makes that claim for himself and he never “destroys” anyone’s argument either.
    The left all need to take an imodium for their verbal diarrhea before an interview.
    And, people like the grad student shouldn’t be invited because no one ever learns anything.

  14. I believe Tucker is doing, verbally, what Zombietime has done -visually. That is to expose to the public, the TRUE voice and belief of the American Left. To reveal to middle America, just how degenerated the political left has become. Consider Barrack Hussein Obama … none of the TRUTH of his core beliefs were ever widely dispersed so voters could actually see his core beliefs. None of the Final Exam questions he crafted for his law students were revealed. If they had, then I believe the American voter would have rejected him as an unhinged extremist. I did read his final exam questions, that HE wrote … and they perfectly predicted – Black Lives Matter, the beer summit, a so-called Justice Dept. that was preoccupied with race, an EPA run-amok, facilitation of ISIS, enabling of Iran, etc. it was ALL there in the test questions fabricated by Obama. All of Hussein’s HATRED of American values and institutions were there in his adjunct law professor final exam questions.
    http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/files/conlaw3.obama.1996.fall.pdf
    If Tucker does no more than EXPOSE the true words and beliefs of the left … he will have done his job well.

  15. Tucker Carlson hosts a delightful program.
    He doesn’t ‘destroy’ his guests, rather he’s very charitable towards them, if not the views they espouse.
    What his program resembles at times is a “Gong Show’ featuring guests such as the raving schoolaholic.
    More important than that schoolyard bully is the message bearer he insists be kept away from his neighbourhood.
    Gavin McGinnis is a Can-American New Yorker who entertains and educates with tongue, keyboard, costumes and body language.
    Gavin interviews Nero:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5TQXTt_eGBQ

  16. Kenji, well said.
    Carlson doesn’t necessarily destroy others’ arguments, he lets them destroy their own arguments, embellished by projection and totalitarianism.
    Good enough for me; forget trying to convince the irrational with rational arguments. They want to be the enemy of freedom, let them answer for that
    The voter has already noticed. As countries such a Germany take a hard look at their misguided refugee policies, judges try to make law to usurp legislatures and presidents, providing so-called protection for due process abuse, with no examples provided, for harm not specified or described, based on fallacious ideas the seven name countries were ever, or are a threat, to give standing to states who couldn’t come up with a single example of their interests being challenged, and thus their standing with the court. Instead we get lunatic judges injecting their political opinions into clear authorities, defying not just the leadership of the country, but those who elected them.
    If one terrorist succeeds as a result of their invalid “judgments,” these judges, along with other apologists for fascists will rue the day they interfered.
    If one American life is lost through their negligent inattention to the security needs of the nation and people, it must be shouted from the rooftops, that this activity of legitimatizing the POTUS, of PC fascism, has endangered the citizen and the body politic to satisfy their narrow political ends:
    “By accepting the use of preelection statements to impeach and limit executive policy, the 9th Circuit is taking a dangerous step. The states’ argument is in essence that Trump is a bigot, and thus his winning presidential campaign in fact impeaches him from exercising key constitutional and statutory powers, such as administering the immigration laws.”
    This would mean that Trump is automatically disbarred, from the moment of his inauguration, of exercising certain presidential powers, not because of his actions as president, but because of who he is — that is, how he won the presidency.”
    Dangerous for them and their careers, I would argue. There’ll be no winners, even if they are exorcised from influence as the price of their negligence.
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2017/02/09/the-9th-circuits-dangerous-and-unprecedented-use-of-campaign-statements-to-block-presidential-policy/?utm_term=.c842b7b561ad#comments

  17. Discordant nutterism is not exactly a debating position, even if a “grad student” is its high priest.

  20. We don’t prosecute the mentally insane, unless their words result in some other person committing treason.. She is not arrested.. YET
    Why do all the wrong folks fail to consider the abortion option…that guy is totally dysfunctional, moral ethics are not just consistency of thought…babble by a 12 year old moron

  21. Actually it’s 86% of their decisions appealed to the SCOTUS that are overturned, IOw, the important decisions which nearly 90% of the time they misjudge.

  22. “We’re all created equal” means we all have equal rights, freedom of speech being one of those rights, so the dweeb is contradicting himself by then refusing that equality to Gavin McGinnis, or whatever his name is.

  23. Now I remember why I don’t watch any of the news networks. Carlson had the clown on for ratings and pretended to be nailing jello to the wall for the entire ‘interview’. Of course it wasn’t an interview it was red meat for the base that convinced no one and changed 0 opinions.
    IOW there is 10 minutes I won’t get back again.

Proudly powered by WordPress & Skyrocket Themes

MENU

Navigation