Tucker Carlson, who inherited Bill O’Reilly’s time slot on Fox News, has several things in common with his predecessor host. They’re both angry white male chauvinists with little to offer the public beyond white supremacist talking points. They’re boorish, uncouth towards guests with decent opposing viewpoints. Repeatedly and irritatingly, they interrupt their guests to throw them off their thought processes. They’re also arrogant, Carlson more intellectually so, and, because they’re in control of the mic and programming, waste no time in cutting off their guests once they sense their guests had turned the table on them. And they play by the rule of the jungle by ambushing you over something you least expected. In only one way, outside of the age differential, are both men remarkably different. Carlson is smart and quick on his feet; O’ Reilly not so much.
So, when Michael Avenatti accepted Carlson’s invitation to appear on his show Thursday night, my hope was that Avenatti, a very smart courtroom lawyer and prime-time television interlocutor, had done due diligence by equipping himself with researched material about Carlson to put him on the defensive just in case the exchange went awry. More important, I expected Avenatti to be ready for what was evidently the major sleazy, mean-spirited charge Carlson was going to hurl at him: the allegation that Avenatti was using Stormy Daniels to feather his own political nest. This, after all, was what the entire twelve-minute segment was all about. Avenatti had his answers to all those, although I didn’t think they hit home strongly enough, or succeeded in making Carlson look defeated and stupid. Avenatti called the host a “hypocrite” and wondered why he had a television show, besides other counter-charges he threw in for good measure.
In response to Avenatti profiting off a porn actress (according to Carlson), how about countering that Carlson was a shameless racist making millions of dollars off seemingly naïve, gullible Fox viewers with his third-rate commentaries? How about accusing Carlson of being a neo-Nazi sympathizer, which he seems to be, judging by his relentless defense of nationalist/nativist principles?
Avenatti should have known not to ask Carlson repeatedly for the chance to respond or complete an answer to his question. The rule of thumb is this: give no quarter. If your host is interrupting and talking over you, you interrupt and talk over him. If your host resorts to ugly name-calling, you follow with ugly name-calling. Measure for measure. Carlson deserves neither honor nor decency because Carlson is neither honorable nor decent as a television host. He never used to be this bad; the man is deteriorating fast. He needs help.
I applaud Avenatti for going to Fox News to debate the cantankerous Carlson, and the charismatic lawyer did indeed rout the host on other scores during that duel. It is called bearding the lion in his den, although Carlson is not exactly a lion. He is a paper lion. And the one person who has proved that is Mr. Eric Swalwell from the California 15th congressional district who, time and again, put Carlson in the shade with superior intellectual heft. And the dude knows how to handle Carlsonian interruptions pretty damn good. Please go to YouTube to watch some of those exchanges.