WASHINGTON: Debating with backward thinking partisans is anomalous to a thoughtful conversation. As bad as some people are, modern pseudo-intellectuals have gotten worse. Almost as if armed with a club of talking points, they are eroding into cave-dwelling fools.
Tucker Carlson Tonight
One of the more straightforward hosts on the major cable news shows is Tucker Carlson. He seems thoughtful, clearheaded and most importantly, he seems willing to listen. Carlson is a talk show host. He is not an investigative reporter, and his segments are anchored in his opinion. Which some guests have been able to change.
In line with the Fox News motto, he invites guests to explain policies and positions he might not agree with.
Carlson will debate guests talking points. A favorite guest of the show is Cathy Aeru, the liberal sherpa. Carlson relies on Aeru to decode the liberal left.
Carlson is not a timid twit
As a talk show host, Carlson is willing to invite just about anyone to his show. But in addition to informing, his job is to entertain. Carlson will interrupt his guests when they wander to the ridiculous (in his mind). He will shout his guests down, dismissing them out of hand when they become too moronic.
Equally, he cannot restrain himself from laughing. In his defense, it is difficult to not laugh at some of his guest’s position. Particularly when he brings on people like Attorney Michael Avanetti:
“We shall soon be in a world in which a man may be howled down for saying that two and two make four, in which people will persecute the heresy of calling a triangle a three-sided figure, and hang a man for maddening a mob with the news that grass is green.” – G.K. Chesterton
Chesterton doesn’t conclude as to whether one should laugh at the new world he predicts. His background indicates he would pity it.
These arguments bring us to the real point. What do you do with people who are not merely of a different mindset? They are genuinely moronic, taking prevarication to another level.
Tucker Carlson Tonight and Professor Austan Goolsbee
Last night Carlson had a frequent return guest, Professor Austan Goolsbee. Goolsbee is an American economist who is currently the Robert P. Gwinn Professor of Economics at the University of Chicago’s Booth School of Business.
Notable is that Goolsbee is the former Chair of the Council of Economic Advisers and member of President Barack Obama’s cabinet.
The segment topic was the crisis of college loan debt.
Goolsbee, representing the University of Chicago. The University of Chicago enjoys an annual taxpayer-funded endowment of $8.3 billion.
Should higher education have more skin in the game?
Tucker Carlson’s position is that the ninety-nine American Universities with billion-dollar endowments should co-sign student loans. Carlson is saying it would undoubtedly reduce the loan debt problem if colleges have skin in the game.
Because if the institution is financing the student’s results, they would have more interest in the student’s outcome.
An outstanding and plausible point.
Professor Goolsbee could give no credible answer. In any event, the 5 or 6-minute segment went back and forth with Tucker asking “why not?”
As usual, as time ran out, Goolsbee could only offer the bromide “we have to agree to disagree.”
Carlson fades to the commercial with a smile of different interpretation: “Good grief! How can you argue with a moron or a liar?”