Here’s today’s right-wing LOL. Steve Bannon, formerly the head of Breitbart News, is now the Assistant and Chief Strategist to Donald Trump, and sits on the National Security Council. Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi is, of course, the leader of ISIS. As The Raw Story reports, Fox News was angered at a USA Today editorial arguing that both Bannon and al-Baghdadi “share similar world views,” harboring “apocalyptic visions of a clash between Islam and the West.” (To paraphrase Lyndon Johnson, when you’ve lost USA Today, you’ve lost America.) The editorial wasn’t that bad, as the shared vision of a religious clash is indeed a fact, though USA Today osculates Islam a bit too much for my taste. But Fox couldn’t stand it.
To retaliate, Fox News host Tucker Carlson invited David Mastio, editorial-page editor of USA today, onto his show to defend the editorial. The clip is below, which includes this hilarious checklist from Carlson’s game, “Who did it?” It proves definitively that Bannon and Baghdadi aren’t identical!
I thought that Mastio acquitted himself well, though I’m not sure I would have agreed to go on Fox News!
h/t: Grania
Bannon didn’t behead anybody? Wow, I feel so much better having him as president – I mean chief strategist.
“Ideologist-in-Chief”
I believe the correct term is “commissar”, or perhaps “Cardinal Richelieu”.
Bannon hasn’t admitted to or boasted of performing any beheadings. So far. That’s an obvious sign that he’s covering up his nocturnal decapitatory activities.
Where’s a Chthulu2020 image when you need one?
Carlson is an idiot and the graphic is pure sophistry. Comparing two individuals and pointing out similarities isn’t the same thing as equating them. They don’t have to have identical behaviors in every respect to have the same Manichean worldview.
I agree that this is clearly stupid comparison. But I think people should also consider in what atmosphere (country) and under what kind of laws these two act. If Bannon had the power and freedom of Baghdadi, he’d probably act differently.
Same applies to christians. Some people say that Christians went through modernization ( and in general, better than muslims) but it’s only true because of secularism, rule of law and strong governmental systems in the western countries where christians live. Believe me if there weren’t any rules and strong government in US you’d see some redneck conservative christians taking their guns to the street and going after Gays, ‘abortionists’, etc.
Just a perspective
agreed!
“If Bannon had the power and freedom of Baghdadi, he’d probably act differently.”
Don’t you mean “If Bannon had the power and freedom, he’d probably act the same way as Baghdadi.” ?
There, ftfy
cr
Yeah you are right.
I meant to say Bannon would act differently than he (Bannon) is acting right now.
Thanks for pointing it out.
Okay. Carlson cites the connection between the words “submission” and “Islam”. But he doesn’t understand it. “Submission” in this context means submission to god and god’s will. It doesn’t mean submission to any person or group here on earth. It’s directed at Muslims. It’s meaning isn’t that Muslims must make non-Muslims “submit”. So his argument there (which he focused on almost exclusively)is moot.
I also disagree with Mastio that Obama “screwed up” in leaving Iraq. Bush signed an agreement that US troops would leave Iraq at a prescribed date. Obama was simply complying with that agreement.
https://tinyurl.com/zrcfppb
I think this was more an ambush than an interview. Of course all the FAUX fans were nodding in agreement with the “game chart” because they don’t understand the difference between actions and ideology.
Excellent Post. The problem always with the characters on Fox news is that, after they have said something a hundred times, that makes it fact and true. Actually looking it up, well, who does that?
In a pre-election conversation with a senior relative, I spoke against Christian privilege and theocracy/dominionism. (He was hoping to upgrade his gun arsenal at Christmas, as he was fearful he might be involved in a standoff against ?) His only comeback to my arguments was: “Well, they’re not cuttin’ peoples’ heads off.” He expressed his admiration for Michael Savage as an oracle of truth, and also claimed Faux news was not “very conservative”. After he rubbed salt into my post-election wounds, I gave up and avoided him during the Holidays. The sad thing could be his claim that he was once a “proud Democrat.”
” But he doesn’t understand it. “Submission” in this context means submission to god and god’s will. It doesn’t mean submission to any person or group here on earth. It’s directed at Muslims. It’s meaning isn’t that Muslims must make non-Muslims “submit”.”
Terrorist Muslims disagree with you. I’m not a fan of Fox News or Trump’s Muslim ban, but you are playing the No True Muslim card by trying to argue what the “correct” interpretation of Islam is.
I think history shows a clear correlation between submission to g*d and forcing other people to submit to your g*d and to you (e.g. the Puritans).
I also think that the meaning of Islam (“submission”) should be stressed as often as possible because deceptive Islamists and the Ctrl-Left keep assuring us that it is “peace”.
Xtianity is a relgiion of submission too.
Are they both circumcised or not or is this yet another difference for the list?
President Bannon circumcised? That would be far too Jewish.
“Mass execution of Christians” gives up the game. ISIS also slaughters the wrong kind of Muslims and other minority religions. But I’m sure many fans of Bannon are hoping for the mass execution of Muslims, so you can’t list that.
The question was not about atrocities hoped for, but about ones actually done.
In fact I would suspect the number of Muslims killed by ISIS exceeds the number of Xtians by a hundred to one.
cr
So you are sure ‘many’ fans of Bannon are ‘hoping’ for mass ‘extinction’ of Muslims.
Then it is certainly true, therefore one is obligated to punch them, and if that doesn’t work punch harder and use bigger sticks, until they a a bloody pile on the ground.
And you righteous work is done.
They were mass murderers after all.
I heard someone was ‘sure’ of it.
Classic Fox News interview. The problem is the number of people that watch and believe it.
Wow, that was excruciating. Most of the interview consisted of Carlson demanding that Mastio explain why this editorial said X, when in fact it never made the claim X.
There may be much to criticize of that opinion piece, but this was straw-man cheap shots throughout.
I know where the straw-man cheap shots are.
OK, I’ll bite. Where?
I have no idea what Bannon thinks on the issue of Islam, but the discussion brings up a point that never gets a good hearing. The West as followers of enlightenment values and democracy, and Islam which is a 7th century framework for theocracy and despotism. I’m sorry that Mastio seemed to want to avoid the ideological clash which would have made Bannon’s supposed paranoia seem more reasonable.
Yes, exactly.
Sub
I occasionally pop the tube on in the evening to catch what the Donald refers to as “the shows.” When I do, I make it a point to flip over to Fox every so often to get their take on things. Rarely do I make it past the four minute mark before getting a bellyful of spin and reality-denial.
If I’m not mistaken, Tucker Carlson has taken over Megyn Kelly’s old time slot at Fox. In spite of myself, I kinda took a shine to Megyn in her later years at Fox, starting with election night 2012 when she frog-marched Karl Rove to the vice-principal-for-polling’s office after he balked at Fox calling the election for Obama. Then, last year, she and her bleeding wherever went and took on the Donald’s misogyny at the first GOP primary debate.
Of all the the hosts now on the Fox News nightly line-up — which includes the odious Bill O’Reilly, and Trump lick-spittle Sean Hannity — I harbor a special loathing for Carlson. He’s never outgrown the trapped-in-amber snotty-little-prep-school-kid persona he had when he arrived on the scene. Two minutes of him is about as much as I take before launching solo cups at the screen.
I don’t even know what channel it is here because a sudden illness comes on when thinking about these humans. You have a better stomach than I. What is really a sad story is how many people seem to know no other channel.
Luckily, the strict, mind-limbering drug regimen I’ve been on since the start of the 2016 presidential campaign includes a broad-spectrum anti-nauseant.
That way, I can watch Fox so you don’t have to.
Well it is good that you can make that sacrifice for others with less intestinal fortitude. Driving the porcelain bus has never been one of my favorites.
I have a fair amount of respect for Megyn K. Never watch fox, unless I’m stuck in a hospital waiting room.
This is an excellent meme opportunity.
Bannon v Jeffrey Dahmer
Bannon v Hitler
Bannon v Genghis Khan
Bannon v Caligula
Bannon v Idi Amin
Periodically we get a post about comity. “Can’t we all just get along?”
Then we get posts defending comparing your political opponents to mass murderers.
This is how you destroy civilized debate. I expect to be banned for this criticism, but that’s how you you destroy debate too.
Why isn’t it enough to attack Bannon’s bad ideas and bad arguments, which abound? Why must it always become a hate-fest.
Yeah, that was totally unfair … to Caligula. All he did was make his horse a Roman senator; Bannon helped make a horse’s ass the president.
🙂
Oh I agree. “Can’t we all just get along” is a complete waste of time when dealing with the Rethugs because they just don’t want to. Offer them an olive branch and they’ll just wipe their ass with it.
I say just take off and nuke them from orbit. It’s the only way to be sure…
(What, that’s not what you were saying? Pardon me…)
cr
I am struck once again just how much FOX news is aimed at adults who have the minds of children.
One thing that DumbTucker* left out of his comparison that Baghdadi and Bannon agree upon: both believe in establishing an autocratic theocracy in their respective lands
*sorry, couldn’t resist
The claim that
“Bannon and al-Baghdadi share similar world views,”
Is a typical left wing lie.
But notice how many of the regulars do not care. You can say literally anything about people you disagree with.
And then you get whines about why leftists and atheists don’t get no respect!
Since the OP linked to the editorial in question, I clicked over and read it (even though USA Today isn’t part of my daily fare.) Did either of you two?
Because the point of it was, what Bannon and al-Baghdadi have in common is that they both expect there eventually will be an apocalyptic clash-of-civilization battle between Islam the west. That’s it, period, amen. Which is true, as far as it goes, even if doesn’t go far enough to make for much of an editorial.
Also, USA Today is hardly anyone’s idea of a prime organ of left-wing intellection.
So your claim that it’s “a typical left wing lie” is wrong on both scores — the “lie” part, and the part about it being “left-wing.”
Any thinking person would be concerned about this:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/08/22/steve-bannon-trump-s-top-guy-told-me-he-was-a-leninist.html