JD Vance Said Tucker Is Just A Political Disagreement. Is He Wrong.

I jumped on for a bonus live stream because this couldn't wait. A clip of JD Vance at the RJC is circulating, he's asked about Tucker Carlson and his answer is that we should be able to remain friends with people we have political disagreements with. I have a problem with that framing. The objections to Tucker are not political disagreements. We're not arguing about tax rates or military policy. We're talking about lying, simping for Putin, calling Hamas a political organization, smearing Ben Shapiro as a dual-loyalty Jew who can't be trusted, Holocaust revisionism, confusing an entire generation about who the good guys are. Those are ethical disagreements. Behavioral disagreements. And framing them as simply political is either deeply confused or a deliberate dodge. I also get into what happens to a movement when it refuses to draw ideological borders, look at what happened to the left and the rise of the DSA. Conservatism means conserving something. You can't do that while giving cover to the people actively working to destroy it. This one had to come out. I'll be back for a full episode soon.Become an honored guest on Patreon for exclusive content and Q&As, link in the description. Grab your mug at KozakStore.com