Tucker Carlson Tells the Ugly Truth About Pandas

For the better part of a decade, I’ve been warning you people about the insidious panda menace. (Seriously. Google it!) Those bamboo-binging abominations are just the worst. Everybody loves them, and as usual, everybody is wrong. Pandas stink, and not just literally.

I’ve never understood the big deal about those two-tone vermin. I don’t get why the human race wastes so much time and effort trying to rescue those mistakes of nature, just because they’re “cute.” Why are we working so hard to keep a bunch of bumbling lumber munchers from going extinct? Why do we care if Ting Ting and Bao Bao and the rest of them live or die? We should just let them waddle off into oblivion and leave the rest of us alone.

If there’s anything I hate more than pandas, it’s modern journalism. And my least favorite genre of journalism is “Here’s What the News Outlets We Hate Are Covering, Instead of What They Should Be Covering.” Everybody does it (I do it too), and it always sucks.

In the latest example, our moral, ethical, and intellectual betters in the press are aghast at this item from the very end of Monday’s Tucker Carlson Tonight:

Tucker isn’t making it up. The WSJ really did report on this — “The Un-Cuddly Truth About Pandas” — and the story has at least as much impact on your life as Michael Cohen’s office getting raided, or Stormy Daniels’ latest tweet, or whatever else we’re told is “news” these days.

I’m glad my friend Tucker Carlson is addressing the important issue of panda mendacity. It’s never a bad time to remind America just how dangerous and evil those repulsive beasts are. I’ve been spreading the word for years, but I’m just a humble blogger and I can only do so much. Tucker reaches millions of people, and they deserve to know the truth about those ursine undesirables.

But people don’t want the truth. They’re afraid of it. So they lash out at anybody who reminds them that the world isn’t what they want it to be:

Why Is Tucker Carlson Talking About ‘Sex-Crazed’ Pandas? (New York magazine)

Tucker Carlson reports on “sex-crazed pandas,” ignores Michael Cohen news (Salon.com)

Tucker Carlson is here to remind America of the real threat: angry, sexy panda bears (AV Club)

i am speechless… i am without speech pic.twitter.com/JzCG3PZx1t

— David Mack (@davidmackau) April 10, 2018

Wait, was there a fucking panda bear in the offices of the President’s attorney when federal agents came charging in with that warrant? Or is Tucker Carlson the exact opposite of a journalist and his broadcast the Platonic ideal of gibbering insanity? https://t.co/2GloibNl1K

— David Simon (@AoDespair) April 10, 2018

For those still in disbelief that Tucker Carlson was talking about pandas instead of Trump’s attorney getting raided by the feds pic.twitter.com/UP0IaappUA

— Timothy Burke (@bubbaprog) April 10, 2018

And of course, #Resistance leader Stephen Colbert did a segment on it, which I’ll never watch but I’m sure was incredibly funny.

Tucker is now lashing back against the backlash, telling The Washingtonian:

People don’t understand the nature of the panda. We’ve infantilized them… We’ve turned them into anime and in so doing have sapped their life force… When they rise up as the vanguard of the Chinese subsumation of America we’ll be brave enough to say so. They’re obviously the shock troops.

Damn straight. Will all these pathetic panda huggers wake up before it’s too late?

I wouldn’t count on it. You people will keep frittering away your precious time on those wanton wicker wasters. You actually watch live panda cams on the Internet, for Pete’s sake. If I wanted to see a bunch of fat, useless idiots lolling around wasting everybody’s time, I’d watch Roseanne.

“Durrrrrr, I’m a panda! Guess what I’m eating AGAIN? Doyyyyyyy” pic.twitter.com/VduxIUcNyo

— Jim Treacher is a dumb pseudonym (@jtLOL) April 11, 2018