Tucker Carlson and Avenatti go at it

The Off-Topic forum for anything non-LDS related, such as sports or politics. Rated PG through PG-13.
Post Reply
_Kevin Graham
_Emeritus
Posts: 13037
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 6:44 pm

Re: Tucker Carlson and Avenatti go at it

Post by _Kevin Graham »

Doctor CamNC4Me wrote:I literally told you why I asked the question. If you're not going to participate then we'll just chalk it up to your timidity.

Also, I probably wouldn't have used the term "slut" to describe Stormy Daniels, and I find it odd that you and EAllusion are so comfortable with the word that you'd use it so cavalierly. But whatever. You guys do you.

- Doc


I'm not going to participate in your attempt to make the thread about my wife getting into porn. There is no need for it so stop pretending this must be entertained first, otherwise I'm unwilling to discuss the issue.
_subgenius
_Emeritus
Posts: 13326
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2011 12:50 pm

Re: Tucker Carlson and Avenatti go at it

Post by _subgenius »

Kevin Graham wrote:
Blackmailer? Please elaborate because Trump is the one who tried to keep her quiet with money.

do you not understand how blackmail works?...keeping someone (eg a blackmailer) quiet with money is almost always the prime ingredient for a blackmailer to cook with.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/pol ... edf94ae3c0
https://www.vox.com/2018/5/3/17314586/t ... mail-tweet
https://www.msnbc.com/am-joy/watch/stor ... 6?v=raila&
Seek freedom and become captive of your desires...seek discipline and find your liberty
I can tell if a person is judgmental just by looking at them
what is chaos to the fly is normal to the spider - morticia addams
If you're not upsetting idiots, you might be an idiot. - Ted Nugent
_subgenius
_Emeritus
Posts: 13326
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2011 12:50 pm

Re: Tucker Carlson and Avenatti go at it

Post by _subgenius »

EAllusion wrote:Saying something is an attempt at slut shaming is not calling the target of that slut shaming a slut. The term does not refer to shaming people who are sluts. It refers to condemning people for not behaving or dressing according to expected sexual norms (when doing so is victimless).

Your reasoning is based either on dishonesty or ignorance of what the phrase even means.

The term 'slut' should never be used with a negative connotation because it discourages that sort of behavior.
Seek freedom and become captive of your desires...seek discipline and find your liberty
I can tell if a person is judgmental just by looking at them
what is chaos to the fly is normal to the spider - morticia addams
If you're not upsetting idiots, you might be an idiot. - Ted Nugent
_SteelHead
_Emeritus
Posts: 8261
Joined: Tue May 17, 2011 1:40 am

Re: Tucker Carlson and Avenatti go at it

Post by _SteelHead »

When you try to slutshame the girl your client was banging you reveal 2 things -
2: Gender bias around sexual behavior is still a very real thing.
2: You are a hypocritical asshat.
It is better to be a warrior in a garden, than a gardener at war.

Some of us, on the other hand, actually prefer a religion that includes some type of correlation with reality.
~Bill Hamblin
_canpakes
_Emeritus
Posts: 8541
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2011 6:54 am

Re: Tucker Carlson and Avenatti go at it

Post by _canpakes »

subgenius wrote:
Kevin Graham wrote: And like constantly pointing out Trump screwed a porn star without a condom while his 4 months old son was nursing. Carslon didn't deny it and actually said he believed it to be true.

And while that may seem "newsworthy" to you...it does not exclude the notion that Avenatti is exploiting Stormy.

... claims the dim witted Fox show host that is using the subject of Stormy Daniels to entice viewers to tune in. ; )
_Doctor CamNC4Me
_Emeritus
Posts: 21663
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 11:02 am

Re: Tucker Carlson and Avenatti go at it

Post by _Doctor CamNC4Me »

EAllusion wrote:Saying something is an attempt at slut shaming is not calling the target of that slut shaming a slut. The term does not refer to shaming people who are sluts. It refers to condemning people for not behaving or dressing according to expected sexual norms (when doing so is victimless).

Your reasoning is based either on dishonesty or ignorance of what the phrase even means.


Aaaaand there it is again. I wonder why using a negative perjorative to describe someone is used as the device to shame them, and then THAT is somehow acceptable to use by anti-moralists (or nu-moralists)?

Next thing we know EA is going to be slinging around terms like k***-shaming, f*****-shaming, n*****-shaming, because, you know, the word slut is such an acceptable insult to just be typing out over, and over, and over again.

damned Christ, this guy.

- Doc
In the face of madness, rationality has no power - Xiao Wang, US historiographer, 2287 AD.

Every record...falsified, every book rewritten...every statue...has been renamed or torn down, every date...altered...the process is continuing...minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Ideology is always right.
_Doctor CamNC4Me
_Emeritus
Posts: 21663
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 11:02 am

Re: Tucker Carlson and Avenatti go at it

Post by _Doctor CamNC4Me »

Kevin Graham wrote:I'm not going to participate in your attempt to make the thread about my wife getting into porn. There is no need for it so stop pretending this must be entertained first, otherwise I'm unwilling to discuss the issue.


I'm not asking if your wife is going to get into porn, ya goofball. I'm asking you how you'd feel if she decided to become a pornographic actress. That's all. It's a very simple question to answer, but you somehow can't wrap your mind around simply sharing how you, KG, would feel if she were to choose to do that.

- Doc
In the face of madness, rationality has no power - Xiao Wang, US historiographer, 2287 AD.

Every record...falsified, every book rewritten...every statue...has been renamed or torn down, every date...altered...the process is continuing...minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Ideology is always right.
_Kevin Graham
_Emeritus
Posts: 13037
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 6:44 pm

Re: Tucker Carlson and Avenatti go at it

Post by _Kevin Graham »

Doctor CamNC4Me wrote:I'm not asking if your wife is going to get into porn, ya goofball. I'm asking you how you'd feel if she decided to become a pornographic actress. That's all. It's a very simple question to answer, but you somehow can't wrap your mind around simply sharing how you, Kevin Graham, would feel if she were to choose to do that.

- Doc


I'd feel sad doc. Really really sad.

Your point now?
_Kevin Graham
_Emeritus
Posts: 13037
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 6:44 pm

Re: Tucker Carlson and Avenatti go at it

Post by _Kevin Graham »

subgenius wrote:
Kevin Graham wrote:
Blackmailer? Please elaborate because Trump is the one who tried to keep her quiet with money.

do you not understand how blackmail works?...keeping someone (eg a blackmailer) quiet with money is almost always the prime ingredient for a blackmailer to cook with.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/pol ... edf94ae3c0
https://www.vox.com/2018/5/3/17314586/t ... mail-tweet
https://www.msnbc.com/am-joy/watch/stor ... 6?v=raila&


Yes, dumbass, I know how blackmail works. The definition is:

"the action, treated as a criminal offense, of demanding money from a person in return for not revealing compromising or injurious information about that person."

Stormy Daniels never demanded money. Money entered the equation when Trump tried to buy her silence and none of the links accuse her of blackmailing Trump, they're only saying this proves how easy it would be for someone to blackmail Trump because he gives in. You just googled "blackmail" and "Stormy" and figured the links must be connecting the two. What an idiot.
_Doctor CamNC4Me
_Emeritus
Posts: 21663
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 11:02 am

Re: Tucker Carlson and Avenatti go at it

Post by _Doctor CamNC4Me »

Kevin Graham wrote:
Doctor CamNC4Me wrote:I'm not asking if your wife is going to get into porn, ya goofball. I'm asking you how you'd feel if she decided to become a pornographic actress. That's all. It's a very simple question to answer, but you somehow can't wrap your mind around simply sharing how you, Kevin Graham, would feel if she were to choose to do that.

- Doc


I'd feel sad doc. Really really sad.

Your point now?


THANK YOU.

I assume, and you can correct me if I'm wrong, that you'd feel sad because you view the work as dishonorable? Or immoral? Whatever word you want to use to describe your feelings on the work itself probably carries a negative connotation for you.

See. You're in a pickle here when making a value judgement against Tucker Carlson:

Tucker truly is human garbage. Now he's pretending he cares about Stormy and wanted to protect her from Avenatti's exploitation.

...

And like constantly pointing out Trump screwed a porn star without a condom while his 4 months old son was nursing. Carslon didn't deny it and actually said he believed it to be true.

OK, so why the effing hell is he focused on attacking Avenatti for representing a Porn Star, and not interested in criticizing President whom he believes committed adultery with her? Which is the more newsworthy story? He kept going on and on with nervous laughter, saying Avenatti is wearing expensive clothes while Stormy Daniels is still stripping. WTF? That's what she WANTS to do. Good God.


You seem to want both to use Ms. Daniel's chosen profession as some sort example of a disgust (Trump had sex with her without a condom implies venereal disease, thus Ms. Daniels is a diseased woman, and she's diseased because she's a whore) and then in the same post you flip and imply that it's totally cool because that's what she wants to do.

So. Which is it? Is Ms. Daniels an untouchable or is she pursuing an honorable profession that she wants to pursue as a free woman?

You also impugn Mr. Carlson's reputation because he's expressing outrage, or whatever, that her attorney is using her to further his own agenda. The thing is you're doing the same thing, just on a smaller scale. You're using Ms. Daniels as a moral cudgel with which to batter Trump's reputation, but at the same time you're defending her immorality.

So. Here's the pickle.

You clearly view Ms. Daniels' profession as problematic, and perhaps disgusting. You wouldn't approve if a loved one chose the same career field. So. We have the following:

1) Carlson is a degenerate because he pretends to care about Ms. Daniels, but is presumably disgusted by her.

2) Trump is a degenerate because he had unprotected sex with Ms. Daniels, more so because she's a porn actress.

3) Avenatti, who is using Ms. Daniels to further his career merits no value judgement on your part.

4) You hold contradicting opinions about Ms. Daniels and her profession which undermine your moral value judgement against Trump, who is a known adulterer, but you seem fixated on the relationship he had with her.

In other words, your OP doesn't make any sense regarding your value judgement that Mr. Carlson is human garbage because he takes the lawyer to task for using Ms. Daniels to further his own career because you and Mr. Carlson both share a disgust of Ms. Daniels and you both are using her to further your own political agenda.

-Doc
In the face of madness, rationality has no power - Xiao Wang, US historiographer, 2287 AD.

Every record...falsified, every book rewritten...every statue...has been renamed or torn down, every date...altered...the process is continuing...minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Ideology is always right.
Post Reply