Oh Tucker
by digby
I’m sure you’re all aware of the fact that Tucker Carlson’s Daily Caller has been caught with its metaphorical pants down for breathlessly “reporting” the phony Menendez prostitute story. (If you haven’t heard, you can read all about it here.) Anyway, I came across this piece in The Atlantic from a couple of weeks ago that cracked me up:
In 2007, when Louisiana Sen. David Vitter’s phone records connected him to Deborah Jeane Palfrey, the D.C. Madam, Carlson was appalled anyone would write about it. Take the July 11, 2007 edition of MSNBC’s show Tucker, in which he scolded Michael Rectenwald of Citizens for Legitimate Government, which reported on Vitter and hookers. Carlson’s first question was, “How could you justify doing something like this? Why is it your business?” Carlson explained that Rectenwald merely disagreed with Vitter’s policy positions, but instead of attacking those, he was attacking his private life. “I don`t know anything about you other than you are holding up this guy`s sex life to public ridicule,” Carlson said. “And you ought to be ashamed of yourself. You have no justification.”
Then both men insisted they would behave the same way if the senator in question were a high-profile Democrat:
CARLSON: If this were Russ Feingold…
RECTENWALD: I don`t care.
CARLSON: I would be up there making the same argument that Russ Feingold`s personal …
RECTENWALD: So would I.
CARLSON: …ought to be off limits from creeps and scandal mongers like you…
RECTENWALD: We`re not scandal mongers.
CARLSON: …who profit from digging into other people`s sex lives. You ought to be ashamed of yourself Mr. Rectenwald.
Carlson didn’t let it go! On the July 13, 2007 edition of Tucker, he said the crime was minor:
CARLSON: It`s against the law in the sense that double parking is against the law.
And again, he appealed to a higher power to bring him a Democrat with a hooker problem so he could prove his core principles:CARLSON: I wish David Vitter were a Democrat. I wish he were a liberal Democrat. I wish he were Russ Feingold, because then I would defend him every bit as zealously as I am defending not what David Vitter did, but his right to be unbothered by the rest of us for something that`s none of our business.
I don’t even think you can call this hypocrisy. He’s always been a worm who just said whatever was convenient for his argument at the time.
Here’s Tucker talking about Menendez:
O’REILLY: …How do you know the woman is telling the truth? I mean I just — I want to give all Americans the benefit of the doubt and the presumption of innocence.
Carlson: Sure.
O’REILLY: And when a journalist parades somebody through, it makes a heinous allegation about a public figure.
CARLSON: Right.
O’REILLY: And that person is pretty much protected, they are anonymous. I don’t know. It makes me a little queasy, Tucker.
CARLSON: I get it. This is one of the basic conundrums of journalism it’s something we deal with every day. People come forward and make allegations. Can you know the metaphysical truths of them?
Oh Dear Lord, he’s a funny one. Always has been.