Today, Dan and Jordan put present-day Alex in timeout, as they dip into the past to see how Alex was engaging with the 2014 midterm elections. It turns out, he gets super racist and interviews someone who would go on to become the Most Important Person In The World.
It's really good, and especially because it's in 1994 or whatever, and you listen to it now, and they're not fully formed as Godspeed yet, but it's just blowing you away.
It just so happens that the day of the election, the midterm election, November 4th, 2014, Alex's guest is the most important person in the world, Tucker Carlson.
So I thought it would be interesting to look at the dynamics of the midterm election in 2014 and also see how Alex related to the most important person in the world before he was the most important person in the world.
And I've got to tell you, I go around Austin and other areas of Texas.
I actually don't mind seeing diverse crowds of people.
I think it's interesting.
Except it's so overwhelming.
And it's so much faster than it was before.
And it's clearly organized and illegal.
I walked into a Walgreens at about 8 o 'clock last night, and it was like something out of an international airport in Bangladesh.
There were people in Arab dress, Indian dress, there were folks obviously from Africa not speaking English, and the people at the front counter barely spoke English.
And there were people clearly from Mexico in there.
And it's just a total, by design, flooding of the country with illegals.
I feel like that's a really good encapsulation of Alex's delusional position about integration.
He pretends that he has no problem with non-white people existing in the spaces around him, but at the same time, if he sees a few minorities in a store, he decides without any proof that they're all here illegally and it's part of an effort to flood the country.
This feature of Alex's racism operates very similarly to his story about getting terrified about seeing a couple You can hear this being expressed in the way he's saying that there were just too many minorities at this Walgreens that he went to,
as if to imply that he's a good tolerant white person who will put up with one non-white person being at the pharmacy, but there's a line.
If there are three non-white people there at the same time, that's evidence of a fucking invasion.
Alex has literally zero information about these people that he sees at Walgreens, other than that he can tell that they're not white and maybe he can hear them speaking in languages other than English.
From that, he determines that they're not supposed to be in the country and that their presence is part of a conspiracy against white people in America.
That's sick shit, and it's something that Alex is perfectly comfortable expressing as if he's making a legitimate point about some political position that he has that's sincere.
He has no information about the citizenship status of any of these people.
He has no information about whether or not they're immigrants.
He has no information about whether or not they even can or want to vote.
The only information he's operating on is that they're not white, and being around multiple non-white people makes Alex's white identity and the power that he feels entitled to because of that identity feel threatened.
Honestly, Alex is a way worse person now than he seemed to be in 2014, but this articulation of this deeply entrenched racism is something that's probably more explicit than he gets into today.
The single ideal of America that is unimpeachably great, the idea that anyone can come here and make themselves a life, is the thing that they hate more than anything else.
His experience is just that there was no fight, there was no, like, conflict or anything.
It was just his experiencing of what he determined to be too many non-white people existing in a space that he thought there should be more white people in.
I can't believe that, because if you just go there and you see, that's what I would...
That's what would blow my mind, is seeing all of those people from everywhere in the fucking world in the same place, knowing that if I flew anywhere, if I flew to any country in the world, I would see an infinitely more homogenous place in that Walgreens than I would here.
And the headline today is law enforcement defines elections as referendums, says Obama's amnesty means tidal wave of illegal immigration.
Listen, here's the deal.
The Democrats are talking about a revolution.
The Democrats are talking about tearing the country apart if they're not given total amnesty, and Illinois is trying to pass a law that's unanimously passed out of the Senate and passed out of the House to let foreigners vote.
If you can get here, you just can vote.
Do you understand that they can bring in an unlimited group and then have them vote as political clients?
For tax money they're given to do whatever the Democrats want, and the Republicans are bought and paid for by the same globalist interests, and they're going along with all this?
This is premeditated.
If India had the equivalent of hundreds of millions of people being brought in, because they're more populous, it would be a similar equation.
They bring in 40, 50 million, or 300 million.
Well, India's a billion, so you bring in a couple hundred million.
Imagine bringing in a couple hundred million people, say, from China, and then just saying, you can vote in Indian elections.
Indians would burn their cities to the ground.
And, quite frankly, that's a normal instinct, because you're being usurped, you're being conquered, you're being taken over.
These talking points are the stuff of white supremacist message boards, and it relies on the same underpinnings as the great replacement conspiracy theories that have inspired mass murderers like Brendan Tarrant and Patrick Crucius.
This is 2014, Alex, long before he had any connection to the Trump community, and back when he was trying to pretend that he was above the left-right paradigm.
The game was always to present yourself as being against both parties, to trick people into thinking that you're in the middle, while in reality you're just trying to lure unsuspecting, politically disillusioned people towards the extreme right in opinions like this.
See, when you read something like that with quotes after each word, that's a straw man.
That's not what I said.
I said Obama and MSNBC created a racial climate where there's a green light to go out and attack white people, just like there was a green light before it was decried and prosecuted for whites to go out, groups of gangs, and attack black people.
And I said black gangs all over the U.S. attacking white people, it's a well-known phenomenon all over local news around the country, is the equivalent.
Of people that, well, I'm not a criminal, but I do go roll, you know, gays.
They use another word.
And then because you don't like someone, you go and two black guys, two white guys, whatever the case is, it's done in all cultures, go beat up some guys coming out of a gay bar that look like they're physically weak.
That's predator activity.
But it's okay because they're gay, so you're allowed to physically attack them.
No, you're not.
So it's wrong when the Klan does it.
It's wrong when people go out and roll queers, is what it's called.
Did this headline actually mischaracterize Alex's words or is he just engaging in a stupid racist backpedaling spin designed to justify his bigotry and malign anybody who would seek to call it out?
So Alex doesn't get into this sort of commentary immediately, so I was like, well, I might as well pull some clips of things that are interesting along the way.
I can't count the number of times he's yelled about how the world leaders listen to him because it's the most important analysis of world issues, and Brian Stelter has no viewers, and CNN is failing.
Tell us specifically what's going on at the apartment complex.
unidentified
They've brought in people from Liberia.
They have a specific classroom here in the office.
Where they bring them in, they kind of go over what to say, what kind of paperwork to fill out, Liberia, Africa, all these different places where they come in and they literally, they're teaching them what to say, what to write.
Like, half these people don't even know how to write their own name on their own.
I mean, definitely not the exact same thing in terms of like...
You know, saying that people were actors and their kids didn't die.
But the behavior of acting in such a way that would lead to targeted harassment of people, whether it's the people who live in these apartment complexes, refugee or otherwise, or the people who run these apartment complexes, you're putting people at a risk.
And the ethical implications of having this guy say the name of the apartment complex on the air is staggering.
And creating it as a pattern also makes it a feedback loop where the more you tell people to go send, we're going to send people out there, the more people are going to call in and say, I'm at blah, blah, blah.
Like, even if slavery was fine in the United States because everyone else was doing it, we still should talk about it and try and undo the societal impact that it had on black people in America.
The issue of blame is irrelevant, and it's a distraction at this point.
It's really a matter of recognizing the generations of stolen wealth, the generations of denied access to many parts of the market and the economy, and how these things have affected communities to this day, and what we can do to address these problems moving forward to make a more equitable society.
Alex keeps the conversation on the level of slavery wasn't that bad if you look at the world at the time, because it keeps people distracted from the real reason that many of these conversations linger into the present, and that is these generational deprivations.
That we are living in a world where it's fine for Alex to just put that out there, and then for us to just be like, well, it was socially accepted at the time, as opposed to rewriting our entire understanding of history to be like, this motherfucker said it was bad in 1700s!
If people, and this is the simplest way to do it...
If people took pages out of their Bible to give to slaves so the slaves didn't understand that the Bible said it was cool to kill your slave masters, then you knew it was wrong.
But if we would just wake up to it, we could turn it around so quickly.
I don't get up here and say these wild things to be sensational.
I say them because it's true.
They're building a world where we're not part of it.
They're phasing humans out.
It was announced in 1999 in the April issue of Wired Magazine by Bill Joy, a billionaire who went to a private globalist conference of 200 top tech owners, Google, Microsoft, Amazon, Apple, and they had a meeting and decided after two days that the plan was to bring in the world government and reduce population down to almost zero.
They said...
Do we just let people play games all day, you know, fantasy games, World of Warcraft, and Second Life, and Hurt the Earth?
Where these people don't matter, do we basically phase them out?
And the consensus was, phase you out, and Bill Joy wrote a cover story warning you!
And in case there are new listeners, just the brief version of this is that there is a passage in that article where Bill Joy is quoting the Unabomber.
I don't think he's able to engage with and navigate the things that come with living in a city, which is, unfortunately, there is some structural shortcomings.
Yeah, or you could go hog wild and really get a lot of groundswell behind the idea of taking money away from the cops and giving it to the people who are panhandling, you know?
And six black males come over to him, pull a knife out, and basically say, give us your woman, she's an attractive lady, his girlfriend, or we're going to stab you.
And they kept just menacing him, and they said, you're not going to do anything, and there were police about 100 yards away, but they didn't see it, and began punching him, and he has bruises on him, and then he just said, yes, you're right, you win, you're wonderful, and they didn't stab him to death.
So I just have to give an advice to everyone listening in Austin, Texas.
You cannot go anywhere downtown except for the police patrol heavily around the W and other areas.
Anywhere on 2nd Street down, 6th Street, I-35, anywhere into East Austin where they gentrified it.
So I think the Raw Story headline is absolutely accurate.
Alex spent about 20 minutes rambling about how a bunch of imagined racial attacks he and his friends had suffered in downtown Austin happened, and then, introducing this Ben Stein clip, he says that Obama greenlit and encouraged this kind of shit.
The headline itself has to do with a kidnapping.
And the story about Anthony Gucciardi's girlfriend was 100% an attempted kidnapping based on the way that Alex tells the story.
So this is absurd, and it's not meant to make sense.
Alex has weirdly added two more black guys to the story about Anthony Gucciardi, but also pay really close attention to the comparison he's making about racial issues.
On the one hand, he has some guy coming up to him and maybe aggressively asking for money and then walking off with no real need for aggression or violence.
Alex just didn't respond, and he says the guy stomped off.
Alex has imagined that this was done because the guy was black and Alex was white, but there's no proof of this outside of Alex's imagination.
It's very possible, and perhaps even likely, that this guy aggressively asked a black person for money that same night.
There's nothing except for Alex's imagination that makes this a racially motivated thing, and I'm not entirely sure what the reality with the Gucci-arty story is, because it's second-hand and the details keep on changing.
So, this is being compared to racists dragging a black man to death behind their truck.
Alex is referring to the 1998 murder, or you could call it even a lynching by truck, of James Byrd Jr.
The three men who carried out that act, John William King, Lawrence Russell Brewer, and Sean Allen Berry, picked up Byrd when he was hitchhiking and then mercilessly beat him and dragged him for over three miles behind their truck.
Before the killing, they defecated and urinated on him.
After killing this man in one of the most disgusting and horrific ways possible, they left his body in front of the cemetery of a black church and then went to a cookout.
The killers were members and associates of white supremacist groups, and their motives were abundantly clear.
Sure.
tattoos and shit.
Sure.
unidentified
Two of them got the death penalty and have been executed.
Some guy yelled at Alex that he wanted money, and then Alex stood there and the guy left.
That's as much of a violation to Alex as what happened to James Byrd Jr.
I guess Gucciardi's story is more severe with the threats about kidnapping, but...
You'll notice that even though Gucciardi was super outnumbered, he didn't get stabbed and his girlfriend wasn't kidnapped, if that story happened at all, there's absolutely no doubt that Byrd's murder was racially motivated.
It was an act that is very clear.
The stories Alex is telling may be real if I'm being generous, but there's no indication that they were racially motivated crimes.
If a black person mugs a white person, that wasn't necessarily done because of racial animus, but when three white supremacists drag a black man to death because he's black, and then they say that's why they did it, it's a racially motivated crime.
part of Alex's political project, which is rooted in white identity.
He's a flagrant racist and deserves, if anything, far more shit than he gets on that front.
And there is something very specifically intentional about this, trying to compare horrific, very clearly racially motivated crimes against black people to, to something like what Alex experienced.
You know, I think another part of it, I was just thinking about this recently, I think another part of it is when I was thinking about describing, like, Oh, this is what Alex said on his show.
If I really put that into a headline of something that we talk about on a daily basis that's totally normal to us, it would sound fake as shit.
And I think that's part of the, like, I don't know if it was fully intentional, but that's part of the reason that, like, our episodes are just a date.
Yeah.
unidentified
As the title and the description of the episode is never Yeah.
Alex, famous Christian zealot says that we are energy beings vibrating between multiple dimensions and that is how we'll accelerate our growth to the next plane.
Two wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
The problem with pure democracy is in Greece they had pure democracy in some of the city-states and they would have one bucket of black rocks and one bucket of white rocks and then the establishment higher class order was allowed to vote.
You could be voting to their club.
That was the first democracy.
It was more like an oligarchy.
And they would call them up and they would say, yeah, we think this philosopher has been rude to us.
We're going to have a vote on throwing him off the cliff.
Or sometimes we're going to make him drink Hemlock.
These are real cases.
And then they would vote.
They'd say, yep, there are ten more black rocks than there are white rocks, so we do not vote to kill you.
Oh, there are seven more white rocks than there are black rocks.
Those are a yes vote.
We're going to throw you off the cliff.
Guards, march him up to that 1,000-foot parapet and throw him off.
So Alex is just talking about Athenian issues here.
He doesn't have any idea about anything else that was going on in any other city-state.
He can tell this because of the use of some specific words that he's using that are very clear indicators of where the ideas are coming from.
The sentence of being thrown off a cliff or drinking poison were means of capital punishment, but because Alex uses the term hemlock, you can kind of get the picture.
That's where the knowledge begins and ends.
Athenian democracy was rooted in a system of largely independent entities.
There was the boule, which was a body that included representatives from all the tribes in Athens.
Then there was the ecclesia, which was kind of like our Senate.
So they had the ecclesia, which is sort of like a legal arguing body, and then there was the dicasteria, which was the judiciary, more or less.
In addition to this, Athens had a tripartite executive branch, with three archons forming a council that presided over the city-state.
There was the polymarcos, who was in charge of the military issues of the state, the eponymous archon, who was the chief legal figure, And then Basileos, who did a bit of the religious pomp in that sort of world.
These positions were not democratically elected, as we understand them, as they were always members of the aristocracy.
And there wasn't a legitimate vote that put anyone into the position of being archon.
If Alex were talking about elections of archons as being something that was really just a function of the in-crowd and the oligarchy, that would be fair.
But that's not really true of the broader popular votes that would take place within Athenian democracy.
There were many things that all male, non-slave, non-indebted Athenians could vote on in just the way that Alex is describing, with colored rocks or often broken pieces of pottery called ostraca.
It is true that there are a lot of things, like proposed laws, that Athenians were allowed to vote on, but the specific stuff that Alex is talking about, those weren't...
Public votes.
Like, he's very clearly talking about Socrates, and his trial was carried out by the Dicasteria.
Like, Socrates stood accused of crimes against the state, so his trial was a little bit more serious.
But there were often votes related to ostracism, like where someone could end up getting banished from the city-state by a vote.
The term ostracism comes from the ostraca, the broken pieces of pottery.
This was a process, though, that was initiated by the Ecclesia, and then voted on by all voting-eligible public, so that might be what...
Alex is conflating.
The ability to ostracize someone from the city-state is being conflated with Socrates' trial where he was sentenced to death.
I'm being a little bit pedantic, but the point is that Alex is using this very flawed understanding of Athenian democracy to uphold his stupid and racist ideas about modern voting and immigration, which I think it makes it important to talk about a little bit.
If there's someone with an actual background in something from history that implicates current day issues, it's usually a good idea to consider what they're saying, and that's the very thing that Alex is trying to hijack here.
He's trying to pretend that he knows things about history that give him a better understanding of things happening in the present, but everything he's talking about is really surface level at best and wrong at worst.
but translating the original text was pretty eye-opening as an experience.
For one thing, in many English translations, it doesn't come across fully how much Socrates was absolutely begging them to kill him.
Yeah.
unidentified
Not in the sense that he was suicidal, but just that he was such a cocky asshole that he was showing as much respect for that Yeah, literally most of it, if I recall correctly, was them being like, please, just go away or shut up.
So there's also a political aspect to the trial, as Socrates was an associate of a group of oligarchs called the Thirty Tyrants.
These dudes were pieces of shit, and they presided over the killing of between 5% to 10% of the Athenian population in a very short rule that they had that was less than a year.
There was an uprising that took them out of power in 403 BC, and four years later is when Socrates was tried and sentenced.
Socrates, who is such a friend of his that one of Socrates' dialogues is named after him, and he appears in at least two others.
Whether deserved or not, the public was not hot on people who were friends with the 30 after their ouster, and that may have played some part in the targeting of Socrates for trial.
Even so, according to the apology and the later dialogue credo, Socrates could totally have not been a dick at trial and been given a lighter sentence, or he could have escaped to exile.
Most Greek philosophers weren't killed by the state.
For instance, Plato and Aristotle both died of natural causes.
Epicurus died of a urinary stone and Heraclitus died from dropsy.
This is an example of Alex's, one of his favorite tricks, and that's that he takes a little piece of trivia that he knows about one thing and then he pretends it applies to a broader context and then he presents that as truth to his audience.
I'm sure it's fun for him and it kind of probably feels like improv, but it's just lying.
The notion that...
People who were philosophies, who were thinkers, who questioned the state, were put to death in Athens.
It's not really held up by...
Some of the more notable and larger philosophers of the time.
Now, that's not to say that throughout history there haven't been people who were like revolutionary thinkers that were maligned for their revolutionary thought.
But the way that Alex is trying to present this as it relates to philosophers in the city-state of Athens is not fair.
He's just making shit up because he knows a little bit about Socrates.
It's also about a divide and conquer, the old Tower of Babel story.
Where there were so many nationalities from so many countries that moved there, none of them could communicate anymore, and basically things fell apart.
It's one thing if you're in India, and it's 95% Indians.
It's a culture, you can adopt it, you know what it is.
You're in China, 90-something percent are Chinese.
You can adopt it, you can learn to navigate it.
Or Mexico, you go down there, 90-something percent are Mexican.
You can get it, get into it.
I mean, I like other cultures, but when it becomes a Star Wars space bar, like Walgreens was last night, I mean, I walked in this Walgreens, and it was like...
I mean, it was like a gallery of every country in the world.
And what I find really interesting, too, is the distinction between this, like, when he was talking about the Muslims in the pool supply shop, that was just sort of like, he doesn't like to see indications that Muslim people can actually engage in culture normally, just like everybody else.
That was threatening to him in terms of that function of integration.
I went in and voted today for what good it's worth, and I live in a little town called Fort St. Lucie, Florida, just on the East Coast, north and west of Palm.
And when I went in there, just out of curiosity, now don't get me wrong, I don't have a problem with the ID thing.
And I even had my ID out.
But when I went in there, I asked them, I said, they said, okay, we need to see your driver's license.
I said, okay, can you show me the Florida law that says, you know, you have to have it.
And he says, well, I don't know the law, but the law is, you know, you can't vote here unless you have a photo form of ID.
And he said, my guidelines are, and I interrupted him, I said, well, your guidelines do not supersede.
It's important to train everybody that you're going to show me the law and you're going to be specific about it so that these people start learning to actually look at the law.
It's important to train everybody that you're going to show me the law and you're going to be specific about it so that these people start learning to actually look at the law.
You're right.
unidentified
Right.
And then I said, well, if I was a piece of shit, I'm sorry, what?
Will in Virginia, what's your take on election 2014?
A major realignment?
Or just more business as usual?
And what do you expect the Lord and Savior, Obama, Lord Obama, Lord Ebola, what do you expect him to do after he's a lame duck and he's got that pardon power?
unidentified
Well, I have two points if I could, Alex.
I'm a naturopathic doctor in Virginia, and I don't know, also in a small company, Zoetix.
We make nanotubra-based products.
But basically, I want to say that...
Your X2 and your DNA force, we've been having amazing results with those.
The DNA force helping with epilepsy patients, coupled with their change in diet and detox in the body, but also the X2, just amazing what it's able to do to actually repair the thyroid and not only protect it, we're seeing young kids reverse homosexuality over a course of six to nine months.
I'm taking higher doses than you guys recommend, so it's great stuff.
So, here's another clip where Alex is sort of, again, condemning his future self.
This has to do with a headline that he has kept reading over the course of the show, and that is a comment from an ex-Nixon aide who thinks that the GOP would be unwise to deal with a tea party.
If the polls hold, 2014 should be a banner year for Republicans.
But John Huntsman Sr., a self-described lifelong Republican and former special assistant to President Richard Nixon, is looking ahead with concern about the grand old party's 2016 prospects.
The Tea Party has completely captivated and ruined the Republican Party.
Oh, you're scared, aren't you?
Today, and they'll show this in 2016, says Huntsman, author of Barefoot to Billionaire.
Unless a Jeb Bush comes in or a John Huntsman Jr., the Republicans don't have a prayer.
So, one of the things that I find really fascinating about this interview between Alex and Tucker is that I think Tucker says some fairly prescient shit, but in the wrong way.
There's a lot of movement just beneath the surface in American politics, I think in American society, I think globally, actually.
And that's evidence that things are realigning.
And we're right in the middle of it, so it's hard to see.
It's hard to step back and get perspective on what's happening.
But the world is going to look a lot different in two years.
assumptions now that Hillary Clinton is going to run against Jeb Bush, I think all of them will be proven wrong in the end as people start to move to places politically they never thought they would be.
And to your point, I think this next clip that I actually think is really prescient too is another indication of his awareness of what he's doing in the present.
I have no idea what his true beliefs are, but it's very clear.
They've made it as clear as it's ever been in the last two weeks that they're willing to use race to divide the country and get out the vote and use race.
You know, out to the polls.
And I think it's effective.
It works.
Fear works.
It works for me, by the way.
I'm motivated.
When I'm afraid, it motivates me.
I think human beings are all that way.
But in the case of racial division, there's a consequence that lasts far beyond Election Day.
You stoke people up along racial lines, you get ethnic politics.
Through the course of this, and through just awareness of other things that Tucker's said in other interviews that he's done in the past, I think he's a piece of shit.
I think he's actually a really bad person, and a lot of the politics that he's expressing now are actually things that he believes.
This white nationalist nonsense that he does on his show, I do believe that there's an opportunistic aspect of it that is like, hey...
We're seeing kind of libertarian, patriot-type, paleoconservative sites like DrudgeReport.com, DailyCaller.com, and others rising in a climate of where pretty much all the Democratic Party-type sites.
We see precipitous drops.
To the point they've now rigged Alexa to show our ratings dropping while our internal ratings show were skyrocketing.
Alex is someone who will never be invited back on any show because he can't control himself and starts screaming at people whenever he's allowed on any TV show.
He's a hostile, abusive asshole who ramps up his intensity in order to turn an interview into a publicity stunt every time.
It's a tacky and desperate strategy, and folks other than Rogan have caught on to that dynamic, so Alex has a real chip on his shoulder about the media and how no one wants him around.
On the other side, Tucker seems to be pretending that he wasn't let go by both CNN and MSNBC prior to his time at Fox.
At CNN, like you brought up, this disastrous Crossfire interview with Jon Stewart led to the show being cancelled, Tucker being publicly humiliated, and then CNN deciding not to renew his contract.
His MSNBC show got cancelled for having low ratings and got replaced by Rachel Maddow.
And look, Tucker is a fucking thirsty asshole in terms of public approval and attention.
After MSNBC...
But before Fox, he went on Dancing with the Stars, which isn't something that a person who has a legitimate...
companies that's not what they would do who wouldn't go on dancing with the stars no they'd go on the masked singer we all know this also he was the first celebrity kicked off that season hey there's an unspoken reason that these two guys shouldn't necessarily be considered the most unbiased sources on the media and that's not even considering that they're both people who have a deep financial incentive to demonize the media alex's show only really has a reason to exist if the media sucks and tucker's daily caller also benefits from people becoming disillusioned with actual
Overall, though, I was pretty surprised to find this interview was so much about just bashing the media.
Like, it's supposed to be election day coverage, but instead of a lot of hypothetical coverage about how the media's gonna cover things.
As much as it's important to recognize how much of a piece of shit Alex is, and that's the theme of our show, more or less, Tucker is more than on board with this whole thing about immigrants voting away his precious white freedoms.
As for California being a one-party state, it's fair to say that the state generally swings to the left, but just a few years prior to this, the governor of the state was Arnold Schwarzenegger, who's a Republican.
The state is considered a safe bet for Democrats in the general presidential election, but that wasn't the case in fairly recent history.
Republicans carried the state in every election from 1968 to 1990.
Elected representatives are mostly Democrats, but there's still plenty of Republicans in the state assembly as well as the state senate.
There are even 10 members of the House of Representatives from California who are Republican, including the minority leader Kevin McCarthy.
The logic just doesn't work to make this about immigration either, because the exact dynamic you see in California where most officials are Democrats, but there are a number of Republicans in there too, that exists in the reverse in Texas.
Most elected officials are Republican, but there are some Democrats.
Just like California.
And it borders Mexico, just like California, with a bunch of immigrants.
This legitimately is just white grievance obsession being treated as if it's actual politics, and it's something that Tucker's been on board with and arguing in favor of since before Trump was around and before he even got a show on Fox.
I still think Tucker's a fraud, but like I was saying, I think he means a lot of this racist shit.
Like, he would go away for a little while and he'd repackage, like a wrestler who his gimmick just decided, this isn't going to work anymore, let's try a new character for you.
That's what you do.
But underneath, I do think that Erase a Shoe would still exist.
That's just cover for his actual position, which is that he wants to disenfranchise non-white people from their right to vote.
There have been many studies about how discrimination is baked into many of the various voter ID requirements that states have implemented.
One of the main ways this was achieved was by making seemingly arbitrary decisions about what forms of ID would be considered valid for voting, with states like North Carolina allowing various types of ID that were disproportionately held by white voters and not allowing ones that were disproportionately held by non-white voters.
Studies have been done that also have shown that voter ID laws are not applied universally and have a discriminatory bias in how they're enforced.
There was a Caltech MIT study done about the application of voter ID laws.
What?
Right.
Tucker understands all this shit, but in order to make his position socially acceptable to hold, he has to pretend that he doesn't understand any of this, and that voter ID requirements are perfectly fair, perfectly effective as a means of stopping in-person voter fraud, which also basically doesn't ever happen.
According to the ACLU, between 2000 and 2017, quote, there were only 31 credible allegations of voter impersonation, the only type of fraud that photo IDs could prevent, during a period of time in which over 1 billion ballots were cast.
This is a non-existent problem that Tucker and Alex are trying to solve because the solution they're advocating actually serves their real agenda, which is disenfranchising the voting rights of non-white Americans.
That's basically the whole song and dance.
If someone were truly dumb or uninformed on issues...
Then I might believe that they've heard somebody say that there's no reason to oppose voter ID laws except for if you want to abet voter fraud.
Mary in Pennsylvania, you're on the air with Tucker Carlson.
Go ahead.
unidentified
Hey, Alex.
I have to apologize because I want to depart from the topic of the election for a moment because there's something I've always wanted to ask of Tucker Carlson.
And I just wanted to say that the Daily Call website is really an aberration in conservative media in terms of the disrespect towards women that it has on its website.
It's essentially a race to the bottom with the left with its policy of contributing to over-sexualized atmosphere that we have.
Yeah, it's really fascinating as a thing to see how defensive Alex got and how quickly it went down.
This caller has a question about the sexism with the Daily Caller, and in order to protect Tucker's feelings and to make sure the audience doesn't take this caller's point seriously, Alex tries to immediately find a way to distort her point into being somehow about how just the existence of men is sexist.
This obviously isn't what she's saying, but the goal Alex is shooting for is for her to take the bait and respond to this dummy argument instead of sticking to her initial point, which is threatening to Alex and Tucker's self-image.
You see this kind of thing with Alex all the time, because his actual positions are mostly indefensible.
That's why if you wanted to argue about refugee or immigration issues with him, he'd just yell back at you something like, so you support illegal immigrants coming here and killing U.S. citizens?
It's an attempt to hijack a conversation and drive it into territory where he feels more secure and where there's no real chance of anything productive being discussed.
The reality is that the Daily Caller is a long and pretty noted sexism problem.
One example of this was in 2013, prior to this episode, when Ashley Judd was considering running for the Senate, and they published an article with the headline, quote, In an attempt to preemptively delegitimize her as a potential candidate, they used Mr. Skin as a resource to document the times that she's been nude in movies, which is a pretty shitty way for someone to act when they're pretending to be a news site.
So there are plenty more examples of this in the Daily Caller, but I think the actual larger problem I would have is Blake Neff, the lead writer for Tucker's Fox show, who had to resign after it came out that he'd been posting vile, racist, and sexist shit online for years, was also a prolific writer at the Daily Call.
having almost 2,000 articles on the site with his byline.
One of them that was particularly shitty was from October 2016, and it's described in a Media Matters article like this.
Neff described a driver running over a group of Native Americans protesting Columbus Day as a reenactment of the conquest of America.
The article ran with a sub-headline that read, The Daily Caller is a pile of shit publication that produces the exact kind of racist and sexist content that Alex wants to see in the world and also has the veneer of like, oh, we're kind of joking.
And so if this caller rightly brings some of this stuff up, then it's Alex's job to run interference and create straw man arguments to try to get this caller off balance.
You'll notice that Tucker didn't say anything.
That was all just Alex feeling the need to defend Tucker lest they both end up looking bad.
Yeah, I think you do have to do some pretty hard soul searching.
If you have somebody who's a flagrant racist posting horrible shit online consistently, and it turns out he's been writing for you for years, he's your lead writer on your TV show, and he has over 2,000 articles on your website, you really should open the box up and see how much that...
How much it impacted his coverage?
How much it impacted your show that he was the lead writer for?
But you don't do that because that was part of why he worked there.
So, unfortunately, I have bad news, and that is that this caller actually has a different point than the real argument about sexism at the Daily Caller.
It's not surprising that Tucker loves Jeff Sessions, considering he's a huge racist and has a record of consistently opposing the Voting Rights Act and has open hostility towards non-white voting rights.
voting rights asshole that when he was nominated for a federal judgeship by Reagan in 1986, he was rejected due to concerns about his comments on race.
Yeah.
unidentified
For instance, he said that quote, He also said that organizations like the NAACP, quote, force civil rights down the throats of people.
I found this to be a little bit of an underwhelming episode from the standpoint of learning about the midterms and seeing some kind of a good dynamic between him and Tucker that might tell us something about the future.
I think the only thing that you could take away from this as it relates to what you would expect to see in the future is that these guys do have a bit of philosophical alignment vis-a-vis.
Right, but the ideological patience that people seem to have with a lot of these incredibly intolerant ideas that necessarily lead to the things that we see happening.
And I think that recognizing exactly what is being conversed about behind the flimsy arguments about, like, We really should have voter ID because it'll make things more secure, blah, blah, blah.
Behind that is a guy who's saying that too many minorities at a Walgreens is Mos Eisley Cantina.