Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Liberal environmentalist compares Trump to Hitler, complains about “toxic rhetoric”

Liberal environmentalist compares Trump to Hitler, complains about “toxic rhetoric”

Another liberal lacking self-awareness sacrificed on Tucker Carlson’s altar.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wKZ159YR38U

If you haven’t already discovered Tucker Carlson’s new Fox News show, weekdays at 7pm, do yourself a favor and check it out.

This Insurrectionist says it’s the most entertaining conservative hour on TV. Carlson opens most shows with a left-wing guest whom he politely, but fearlessly, takes on. Tonight’s lib, environmentalist Erin Schrode, had, in response to Time naming Donald Trump its Person of the Year, compared Trump to Hitler.

When toward the end of the segment, Schrode decried Trump’s “name-calling and hate speech and toxic rhetoric,” Carlson pounced. “You just compared this guy to Hitler and then with a straight face you’re going to accuse him of engaging in hate speech?!! I’m sorry. I can barely hear. The irony alarm is so loud in the background.” Can’t remember the last time I saw a lefty so clearly confronted with her flaming hypocrisy!

Dare I say that, with his urbane, rapier wit, Carlson is a worthy heir to William F. Buckley, Jr., whose Firing Line forever set the standard for conservative TV?

TUCKER CARLSON: Time magazine just reminded us it exists by naming President-elect Donald Trump as the Person of the Year. Fair enough. Hard to think of anyone more newsworthy this year than Donald Trump. But to many on the left Time’s cover was a reminder that Trump is indeed going to be president, and was therefore a trigger. Here is one person who felt that way, Erin Schrode, she’s a Democrat, a former congressional Democrat from California. Erin, thanks a lot for joining us tonight.

ERIN SCHRODE: Thanks for having me.

TUCKER: So, the reason I want to talk with you is a tweet you sent out after seeing the cover I think on the Today show this morning and you wrote this “Adolf Hitler was Time’s Man of the Year in 1938. Donald Trump is Time’s Man of the Year in 2016. Discuss.” And I just saw the irony there, because comparing someone to Hitler, of course, is not an invitation to discuss. It’s the end of the discussion, isn’t it?

. . .

SCHRODE: Name-calling and hate speech and toxic rhetoric is how we have arrived at this point. We have a President-elect who has built a whole campaign cycle around it.

TUCKER: You just compared this guy to Hitler and then with a straight face you’re going to accuse him of engaging in hate speech?!! I’m sorry. I can barely hear. The irony alarm is so loud in the background. I don’t mean to be cruel to you. But I’m just saying, if you don’t recognize that.

Here is the entire segment:

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

and she totally didn’t get it

    Miles in reply to Frank G. | December 7, 2016 at 11:50 pm

    Of course she didn’t get it. She’s too stupid to get it.
    But that’s alright.
    Let her remain a stupid, clueless hypocrite.
    All that mattered was that Tucker’s primary audience got the point that the left is still populated with hypocrites like this and the 2018 and 2020 elections are in the bag for our side.
    Miss Smarmy Pants walked right into a trap and fell for it.

Another arrogant ignoramus.

Still, her and her arrogant ignorant friends must be very proud of her- in particular, her handlers, who send her emails every day, telling her how to think.

Maybe they are trying to make Hilter more acceptable by grouping him with a great American. They are the brownshirts in the streets.

    TX-rifraph in reply to Old0311. | December 8, 2016 at 6:57 am

    Isn’t it the left that has the Nazi ties via Soros funding and control? Isn’t the left that plays the brown shirt role at every opportunity?

Love Tucker

Nothing against Mr. Tucker, but he’s shooting fish in a barrel if she is a typical liberal guest.

    amatuerwrangler in reply to Henry Hawkins. | December 7, 2016 at 10:41 pm

    For the record, and in defense of Mr. Carlson, the Myth Busters did a segment dedicated to the “easy as shooting fish in a barrel” and demonstrated that it was not easy at all, at any rate not worthy as an analogy to “anyone can do it”.

    The sad thing is that these Dems cannot see the hypocrisy of their acts, even when clearly pointed out to them…

      Indeed. This is why we experienced barrel fishers use a half stick of dynamite, rather akin to what Mr Carlson has done here with this hapless fishy.

    Ragspierre in reply to Henry Hawkins. | December 8, 2016 at 3:40 am

    “Shooting fish in a barrel” refers to a barrel packed with salted fish, not a barrel with a fish or two swimming round in it.

    You can’t miss.

    Cripes…

    Mark Finkelstein in reply to Henry Hawkins. | December 8, 2016 at 6:44 am

    Later in the show, Tucker took on Adam Schiff, a 15-year veteran of the House of Representatives, and one of the more well-spoken Dems in congress. Yet Carlson left him sputtering in frustration and rage by the end of the segment.

The smug look on her face at the end (go to You Tube)m makes me think she left the interview, thinking she got the best of Tucker.

The 19th Amendment is a barrel of laughs.

She got that whole “queen of the dead” look going for her.

She should sue any institution of higher learning who took her money and told her she was educated.

“There’s a lot of lessons we can learn by looking at the 1930’s and Nazi Germany …”

uh … you mean like DON’T ELECT A SOCIALIST?

She’s a prime example of why I genuinely fear liberals, even though I agree with them on many issues: they believe that because they are “RIGHT”, they needn’t know the facts, or represent the other side of an issue accurately, or even be reasonably truthful. Furthermore, the possibility that they might be hypocrites neither occurs to them, nor would they be troubled in the least if they recognized how often they’re guilty of it. All that matters is their narrative.

It’s going to be a long 8+ years for clowns like her ????????????

Best.

Election.

Ever.

Talk about hearing de lamentation of de women … It’s almost worth watching TV again just to see it live.

Almost.

legalizehazing | December 8, 2016 at 6:09 am

I was a major doubter of his.. but he is pretty excellent. He wins the arguments. He must study the arguments pretty well. He set traps and crushes them.

He has an interesting rhythm.. a well timed story between commercial breaks. He hits hard and let’s them scramble and say their bit to where they feel they’re winning… then he shuts it down

Entertaining and interesting guy

The question that immediately jumps out at me is how long will it take before guests refuse to appear on his show.

Eventually even the most ardent partisan has to figure out, or be told, that this is NOT helpful to their cause.

After all it is the evil FOX, and now with Tucker: Fox on steriods.

    TX-rifraph in reply to Dr P. | December 8, 2016 at 7:22 am

    Except the leftist thinks Tucker is stupid because he is not a leftist. They also think they can win by intimidation, labeling, and lying. They “think” in narratives not in facts or logic.

    She really does “think” she won. A prime example of “stuck on stupid.”

    And, yes, she is filled with hate while accusing others of hate. After watching her, it is easier to understand how these leftists can execute their own citizens who challenge their enlightened leadership. Dangerous people.

    Mark Finkelstein in reply to Dr P. | December 8, 2016 at 8:00 am

    GMTA. Dr P. I was thinking the same thing. I have a hunch that many higher-level liberals will shy away from appearing for fear of being destroyed by Tucker.

    But there will always be others who in their hubris think they can defeat him. And yet others who might suspect they’ll be in for a drubbing, but that it’s worth it for the exposure.

    One thing is for sure: if you’re going on with Tucker, you better do your homework, or expect to be eviscerated!

Unfortunately, to these people, “hate speech” is when you say something they don’t like. My experience is that, when you try to pin them down and ask for specific examples of this “hate speech”, the most common response is “Well, everybody knows…”

I get a similar response when I ask for examples of Trump’s “racism”: “He said mean things about Mexicans so he must be racist.” The last I heard, Mexican is a nationality, not a race.

    Milhouse in reply to joe.butin. | December 9, 2016 at 1:11 am

    Nationalities are races, and bigotry on the basis of national origin is just as bad as on the basis of race. But I don’t recall him saying anything mean about Mexicans. Can anyone cite such a statement? All I remember is something he said about the kind of people the Mexican government is sending over the border; it may be true or false, but how is it anti-Mexican?

Besides the obviousness of his excellent skills, what Tucker Carlson is really doing is clearing showing the world the terror that is liberalism. When you have liberal after liberal come onto the show and Carlson destroys their argument time and time again, you get this feeling of “Finally, someone is standing up to them and pointing out the obvious”.
>
The real feeling that sinks in after a while is how scary this all really is. Think about it. Carlson is exposing the liberal ideology just about every night for being the extraordinarily hypocritical tripe that it is, for having no logical or rational underpinnings, and to be based almostly exclusively upon emotional thinking and name calling. What is so terrifying about this is that night after night, more liberals come onto the show, blindly defend the indefensible and get shredded in the process. When these guests leave, they do so angry and even more entrenched in their liberal ideology.
>
What kind of people are they that, when they are clearly shown how wrong they are, they uniformly dig their heels in deeper to become even more devout believers? This tells us that they are not only irrational thinkers, but that they believe so deeply in their highly flawed ideology that nothing will change their minds. They are more than ideologues; they are or are becoming fanatics.
>
If you take this to the next step, ask yourself what happens when people such as these modern day liberals, who believe so strongly in a given ideology, are attacked and that ideology is shown time and again to be wrong? They respond by becoming militant and violent for, if they cannot win by merit, they will try to win by force. While this may explain all the hysterical behavior (to show how rational they are), calls for anarchy (in the name of democracy), and violence (in order to obtain fairness, justice, and peace) over the last year or so by the liberals, it portends a very unsettled future for America and much of the rest of the world. This is not going to end well.

    CloseTheFed in reply to Cleetus. | December 8, 2016 at 8:16 am

    Insist California leave the U.S.A., becoming it’s own country – or at least southern California. Then let them live in the “Detroit” of their own making….

    And leave us to live a normal life.

The Left makes ‘astute observations’. Everybody else is just calling names.

I have enjoyed the Tucker show but if he doesn’t raise the level of guests on his show it will become a mockery. It’s one thing to display his superiority against college students night after night, but he will have to get some heavyweight leftists if he wants to continue his success. Someone above noted that the number of important guests willing to come on his show is rapidly dwindling. Can anyone blame them? The difference between what Carlson does and a network show on cnn or msnbc is that he uses logic and reasoning to embarrass his guests. On the left wing shows they use personal attacks and smug wisecracks to humiliate their guests.

I was going to attribute it to age difference, but then I remember that a lot of LI commenters are older than I am. Anyway… please recall that what’s being said about Tucker Carlson now was previosuly said about so many conservative talking heads… Ann Coulter, Sean Hannity, Bill O’Reilly, Michelle Malkin, etc., etc., and also about (presumed) conservative politicians… Chris Christie, Marco Rubio, etc., etc., and also Ben Carson.

There comes a brief ascent and then a long slow return to Earth and, too often, banality.

    Wrathchilde in reply to Henry Hawkins. | December 8, 2016 at 12:52 pm

    Tucker’s actually been around for a while now, and has only gotten better and sharper. When he first began to get notice he was the “young kid with the bowtie”.

    Only time will tell how his career will turn out, but it’s looking good so far.

People like this woman will hang onto her delusions like grim death for one big reason: their egos.

They’d rather destroy themselves and take the rest of us with them rather than admit the fact they are actually ignorant and the facts they tout – and their ideas – are wrong.

This illustrates a characteristic common to all utopia movements, Nazis, Communists, Muslims and Progressive Fascists. They believe that their goals are so good that there is nothing that isn’t justified in order to achieve them. That’s why Hillary’s lies, corruption and betrayal of or country are irrelavent. Why Tyrant Obama the Liars lies, Hitler like fomenting of racial hate and violations of the constitution are embraced . Why the Germans accepted Hitler’s slaughter of 12 million innocents and his wars of conquest. Why the Communists accepted the murder of 10s of millions. Why Muslims embrace the slaughter of innocents and Muhammad’s demand for world conquest. The ends justify the means for these movements. They seek absolute power with the intent to do good but with the willingness to do evil if it becomes necessisary to achieve their utopia.

Liberalism is a mental disorder. Maybe that’s why the mental health side of health care was gutted; to keep the Democrats voting block in public and allowed to vote.

https://www.google.com/amp/nypost.com/2016/06/09/science-says-liberal-beliefs-are-linked-to-pyschotic-traits/amp/

tolyarutunoff | December 8, 2016 at 2:19 pm

she’s really cute when she’s mad

I wonder how long it took to rebuild the set after she had her off air temper tantrum? If that was MMA they would have stopped it after the first rational beat down. All she had was talking points and hand jestures, she couldn’t even explain why she was against anything. Wow.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend