The goal [of the Democrats] is not to preserve Obamacare. Again: They voted to scrap Obamacare. The goal is to undermine the legitimacy of our system; in this case, of the Supreme Court; so that Joe Biden and Kamala Harris can pack the court full of partisan Democrats who will rubber-stamp their program. Again: It’s about power.

Tucker Carlson

During these troubled times there has been one strong, sane and steady voice on cable television: Tucker Carlson (of FOX NEWS). He comes on TV every weekday, hammers the left for their lies, exposes their lust for power, and demolishes their narratives. He does all this knowing they will come for him; knowing they will twist his words, boycott his sponsors and otherwise threaten him — professionally and personally. Yet he stays the course.

Here is an example of what the “mainstream” media says about Carlson. (Ask yourself if this is sufficiently nasty to destroy a person’s life.) According to National Public Radio’s website, NPR.org, “Fox News’ top-rated host [Carlson] has been repeatedly accused of anti-immigrant and racist comments, which have cost his political opinion show many of its major advertisers. Yet Carlson endures….” Consider the headline of a Huffington Post article by Ed Mazza, which reads, “Tucker Carlson Stuns Twitter Users With ‘Most Racist’ Thing He’s Ever Said.” (As it happens, that racist “thing” was when Carlson warned his audience that the Black Lives Matter “mob” is coming for them.)

Carlson said: “Imagine if the Black Lives Matter rioters had weapons and immunity from prosecution. That’s what they are talking about: partisan law enforcement.” Carlson then anticipated the mainstream media’s reaction to this commentary. He said we are not allowed to question Black Lives Matter, “in any way.”

It may be difficult to believe; but the mainstream media is larded with Marxist disinformation. Of course, Marxist disinformation does not come with a hammer and sickle warning label. Carlson criticizes Black Lives Matter because he opposes Marxism, not because he is racist. Marxism, of course, is communism, and communism is an ideology at odds with American culture and the rule of law. Wherever Marxism triumphs, freedom is destroyed; both economic freedom and political freedom. Carlson is criticizing Black Lives Matter because he is opposed to the organization’s totalitarian agenda. Shamefully, the mainstream media has been subverted by Marxism.

Carlson’s objections to Black Lives Matter are philosophical, not racial. Throughout his commentaries Carlson points to the left’s unscrupulous pursuit of power. He is also focused on their deceptive use of language. He knows that they will take a word and twist it, until that word means the opposite of what the dictionary says. Take, for example, the left’s charge of “homophobia,” often leveled against conservatives (and against Carlson). If we turn to the topic of “gay marriage,” we are encouraged to forget what the word “marriage” actually signifies. It is a word that has always meant (until recently) the union of man and woman; especially, for the purpose bringing children into the world (as its says in my grandfather’s 1943 Webster’s New International Dictionary). To give this word another meaning, is an attempt to sabotage the most important institution in society. No abuse of language could be more destructive. As of this writing, there is no special word which refers to the union of man and woman. The word “marriage” may now be used to signify the union of anyone with anything. Of course, as Richard Weaver pointed out in his 1948 book, Ideas Have Consequences, the destruction of words is at the heart of socialism’s “subversive activity” which also involves “the taking away of degree.” Weaver noted:

The fight is waged on all fronts, and the most insidious idea employed to break down society is an undefined equalitarianism. That this concept does not make sense even in the most elementary applications has proved no deterrent to its spread, and we shall have something to say later on about man’s growing incapacity for logic.

Carlson’s Fox News commentaries criticize the left’s insidious ideas. He knows these ideas are used to “break down society” into “an undefined equalitarianism.” He thinks in terms of right order, logic, proportion and degree. The left, in its degeneracy, has lost contact with all of these — having lost all sense of quality. Thus follows the left’s obsession with what it calls “inequality.” That is why the left sees order as “fascist,” logic as illogical, proportion and degree as “bigoted.”

Thus, if Carlson opposes illegal immigration the left-media says he is anti-immigrant. If he favors the nomination of Amy Coney Barrett, they say he opposes the will of the people. If he criticizes Black Lives Matter, then he is a racist. In every instance, the left masks its assault on ancient precepts of morality and political order with slanderous demagoguery. Of course, Carlson is not against immigrants when he opposes illegal immigration. He does not oppose the will of the people when he reminds us of the president’s constitutional power of appointing judges. He is not a racist for pointing out the hidden communist agenda of a particular advocacy group.

Tucker Carlson is vilified because he opposes an unscrupulous revolutionary cabal, “who attempt to hide their total want of consequence in bustle and noise,” to borrow a quote from Edmund Burke. It is a cabal that compensates for their lack of sense with “puffing, and mutual quotation of each other” while millions tune them out to watch Tucker. These millions show their contempt of the media’s leftist “grasshoppers … [who] make the field ring with their importunate chink” while Carlson’s ratings soar. We are not fooled by what Burke called “the little shriveled, meager, hopping, though loud and troublesome insects of the hour.” We the People are not the disciples of Karl Marx or Saul Alinsky. As Burke said of the Englishman of his day: “Atheists are not our preachers; madmen are not our lawgivers. We know that we have made no discoveries; and we think that no discoveries are to be made, in morality; nor many in the great principles of government, nor in the ideas of liberty, which were understood long before we were born….”

If the Democrats win control of Congress in November, and if they take the White House, then madmen will be our lawgivers. In that event, Tucker Carlson’s commentaries will be more necessary than ever. May God preserve him.


Notes and Links

Carlson in action

5 thoughts on “In Defense of Tucker Carlson

  1. I love Tucker and his show, but I have to DVR it and watch it in the morning. It is too upsetting to watch before bedtime.

  2. Tucker Carlson understands exactly what the left is doing. He dissects their motives with a scalpel. They want to fundamentally transform the Republic. We are in a disinformation war and the media are the useful idiots of those who are funding the destruction of America. Everything that America was built on, the values that made it into a great nation, are being torn down. The race grievance industry is just one way of promoting division. Another is by weaponizing words. By calling someone ‘racist’, they are shut down, end of argument. The playbook of the Left is Godless and Marxist. Its speciality is perversion of all that is normal and decent. This is a country that was founded on Judeo-Christian values. The Constitution and the Bible are the most precious documents we have. Unless Americans wake up they will be deemed to be terrorist insurgents in their own country. Winston Churchill said that courage is rightly esteemed the first of human qualities because it is the quality which guarantees all others. Tucker has the courage to speak the truth.
    And so do you JR Nyquist.
    Thank you for this piece.

  3. Tucker is great !

    Also I hope all the information on the “Biden Crime Family” can lead to something.

    Fox would be foolish to can him as he is extremely popular. But if they ever did he would do well elsewhere too.

    Intelligent, ethical and a good patriotic sense of America. He,s got it.

Leave a Reply