TTyler

[TTyler @GenUnDialectic]

I mostly agree. I think its possible that he realizes that he took the BYU-Utah rivalry too far and maybe he wants to change now that he has a fresh slate. As a BYU fan, I love hearing it, and i'll be rooting for him and Michigan.
Maybe he also realizes that it didn't give him any advantage either. Especially considering that Kalani has been saying what Kyle is saying now and Kalani has won the last 3 rivalry games.
I appreciate your take. Its nice to see that X isn't only toxic, immature takes.

[TTyler @GenUnDialectic]

For all the BYU fans that find this quote a bit rich, maybe show a little grace and allow the guy to change. Maybe he is realizing that he took the Rivalry too far while at Utah. Also realize that what he is saying is essentially what Kalani has been saying about the Utah rivalry for years, and who has won the last 3 games?

[TTyler @GenUnDialectic]

@ActuallyDSW Love Kalani and love his response to whatever the question was.

[TTyler @GenUnDialectic]

Yeah! All that’s happening is they’re nearly naked, grinding and groping each other, simulating sex as realistically as the camera requires—stopping only at the one technical act that would make it “unprofessional.” Then they hire intimacy coordinators to script and supervise every touch so the whole thing can be declared totally fine and “artistic” 👌

[TTyler @GenUnDialectic]

@Macmondaze @OptimismOrDeath @rixlerr *said Judas when asked why he betrayed Jesus… 🙄

[TTyler @GenUnDialectic]

@TheMovieBuddies @OptimismOrDeath @rixlerr So if you get paid to do something regularly (I.e. it’s your “job”) then it’s morally okay? That’s what your statement there implies, and it makes zero sense

[TTyler @GenUnDialectic]

It’s not BYU FANS job to hold anyone accountable. How do you propose that FANS hold a player accountable? By trashing them on social media? By booing them? No. As a FAN, I can’t, nor should I do anything except wish the best for him and be grateful that no one (including him) was hurt

[TTyler @GenUnDialectic]

@UteOutsider @CriddleBenjamin You're upset that he posted a link to video where Ephraim and his family tell part of Ephraim's story? If Ben posted a GoFundMe link for Ephraim I'm sure you'd still find a way to be outraged and frame it as Ben doing it for selfish reasons.

[TTyler @GenUnDialectic]

@KSLSportsZone @CoachJayHill @PKKinahan @RileyJensen @kslsports Love Jay! Rooting for Michigan this year

[TTyler @GenUnDialectic]

True — he’s done interviews with leaders from Iran and Russia where he barely pushed back. Even then, the conversations were still interesting and forced me as a listener to try to sort out what was true. Bad people can still say true things.
I can’t speak to the Churchill episode since I never listened to it. On Charlie Kirk, I’m not a regular listener of Tucker’s, so I may have missed relevant comments. From what I’ve seen, he’s expressed care for Erika and people at TPUSA.
On capitalism: I rank social conservatism higher than economic conservatism. People who share basic Christian values can reasonably disagree on economic policy details. There are legitimate critiques of different versions of capitalism, including the American one. That doesn’t make someone “not a conservative” in my view.
Anyway, thanks for engaging. I enjoy these kinds of discussions.

[TTyler @GenUnDialectic]

If by “wrong” you mean he sometimes gets facts wrong, then sure — he does, like almost everyone who talks for hours every week. But a lot of what people call “wrong” is just Tucker’s value judgments or his interpretation of events. I don’t agree with him on everything, but I think some of his interviews have been genuinely strong journalism.
Two examples that come to mind:
In the Ted Cruz interview, Cruz cited the Bible (“those who bless Israel will be blessed…”) and Tucker pressed him on basic follow-ups — which book is that from, and does “Israel” in that verse refer to the modern nation-state? Cruz struggled to answer cleanly. That’s a fair line of questioning.
In the Mike Huckabee interview, Huckabee appealed to the biblical land grant. Tucker pointed out that the territory described (from the Nile to the Euphrates) is far larger than modern Israel and kept pressing until Huckabee said he would be fine if Israel took all of it. Forcing the guest to own the full implications of their own argument is good interviewing, whether or not you share Tucker’s conclusions.
is there anything in particular that Tucker has said that you find so morally wrong, @LukeFHan? or what do you mean that he isn't a conservative?

[TTyler @GenUnDialectic]

You’re right that he criticizes the left more readily — but the cases aren’t symmetric.
Even when Vance condemns certain left-wing ideas more forcefully, I think that’s still prudent. The positions in question (treating political violence against conservatives as acceptable, or mutilating children) are extreme enough that those people were never realistic supporters. Criticizing those views costs him almost nothing with his own coalition.
I also don’t think he’s out there calling AOC or Ilhan Omar “evil” simply for holding bad policy preferences. He criticizes their ideas and the real-world consequences of those ideas. He’s been clear about where he stands without constantly performing moral denunciations of individuals.
What bothers me more is the pressure campaign itself. Demanding that Vance (or anyone) publicly condemn certain podcasters or commentators starts to look a lot like the loyalty-test dynamic people on the right usually claim to hate: “Say these specific words or we’ll treat you as outside the movement.”
Condemnation is easy and usually worthless. The harder and more useful work is explaining why certain ideas are wrong in a way that might actually change someone’s mind. “Candace is bad and you’re bad if you listen to her” accomplishes nothing except tribal signaling. If someone has a real argument, they should make it. Otherwise the constant demands for public shaming aren’t doing much.

[TTyler @GenUnDialectic]

@LukeFHan https://t.co/hH8JOVtwvh

[Thomas Sowell Quotes @ThomasSowell]

JD Vance: “The coalition that made Donald Trump the President of the United States … It was Megyn Kelly and Tucker Carlson and Joe Rogan. It was also Mark Levin.”

[TTyler @GenUnDialectic]

But what good would come of him publicly condemning Tucker Carlson’s critiques of Trump, conspiracy theories, or anything else? Do you really think it would change anything? I don’t. So why should he go out of his way to denounce a large group of people who hold certain ideas if it won’t make a difference, especially when there’s no reason to believe he shares those views?

You also treat the fact that he won’t do something because it would hurt him politically as a red flag or a sign of corruption. I see it as prudence. Needlessly alienating people whose support you want is rarely smart politics. JD summed this principle up pretty well in this clip from his interview with Megyn Kelly:

On the foreign policy point: if the criticism is that he hasn’t closed a durable Iran deal, I’d say the process has struggled for reasons mostly outside his control. Israel has continued strikes (especially in Lebanon) that keep reigniting fighting and undercutting the ceasefire framework, and Iran has repeatedly acted in bad faith — including attacks on ships in the Strait of Hormuz. The goals Vance has pushed for still seem sound to me: pressure Iran into more reasonable behavior and, if they comply, allow gradual economic reintegration. That’s a better long-term approach than endless military escalation.

[TTyler @GenUnDialectic]

First, I just like him as a person. He seems real and not afraid to answer tough questions (like going on Rogan recently and taking questions about Epstein). I have some critiques of him, but I think he’s in a tough spot and doing the best he can with a bad situation he probably disagrees with. His answers generally land well with me. Rubio seems fine, but I don’t really know him outside of politics.

Second, I generally agree with what I’ve heard of his foreign policy. His Munich speech about shared values of free speech and free thought — and calling out European countries that are abandoning them — stuck with me. On Israel and the Iran situation, I agree with his basic approach: Israel is an ally, just like France or Britain, but our interests sometimes diverge and it’s okay to say so. I also like that he’s willing to say the quiet part out loud — that Israel can’t simply kill its way out of every problem, especially when strikes on civilian areas in Lebanon kill a lot of people who have nothing to do with the terrorists they’re targeting.

I’m sure I generally agree with Rubio on most foreign policy too. I just prefer Vance because he seems real and resonates with me.

[TTyler @GenUnDialectic]

Maybe another way of putting it:
The fundamental sin is loving anything more than God. That’s why the greatest commandment is to love God above all else. Sins vary in seriousness according to how thoroughly they elevate something above Him.
Denying the Holy Ghost is the most extreme form of that rebellion—exalting oneself against God after knowing Him.
Greed is another clear and common form of the same disorder: putting money, comfort, or possessions above God.

[TTyler @GenUnDialectic]

Why was Sodom destroyed according to Ezekiel? Ezekiel 16: 49 “Behold, this was the iniquity of thy sister Sodom, pride, fulness of bread, and abundance of idleness was in her and in her daughters, neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy.”

What about the people in the days of Jeremiah, when Lehi and his family fled from Jerusalem? Jeremiah 5:26–29: “For among my people are found wicked men: they lay wait, as he that setteth snares; they set a trap, they catch men.
As a cage is full of birds, so are their houses full of deceit: therefore they are become great, and waxen rich.
They are waxen fat, they shine: yea, they overpass the deeds of the wicked: they judge not the cause, the cause of the fatherless, yet they prosper; and the right of the needy do they not judge.
Shall I not visit for these things? saith the Lord: shall not my soul be avenged on such a nation as this?”

Isaiah 3:14-15 “The Lord will enter into judgment with the ancients of his people, and the princes thereof: for ye have eaten up the vineyard; the spoil of the poor is in your houses.
What mean ye that ye beat my people to pieces, and grind the faces of the poor? saith the Lord God of hosts.”

You get the point.

[TTyler @GenUnDialectic]

@ThoughtfulSaint I’d say it’s close. Most of the major sermons I can think of in the Book of Mormon, tons of teachings of Jesus in the New Testament, and lots of major sermons in the old testament also talk about greed being a major reason why the community is under condemnation