Carlson is out and politicians are happy
One would think that the reactions would be a mixed bag for Republicans and Democrats on Monday, after hearing that Tucker Carlson would leave Fox News.
However, it seemed that politicians on both sides of the aisle were happy, albeit for different reasons.
“I stand with tucker Carlson!” Rep. Lauren Boebert, R-Colo., tweeted.
A former Arizona candidate and television host, Kari Lake, congratulated Carlson on the move.
“The best decision I ever made was leaving Fox. Good for you, @ Tucker Carlson. You’re free & uncensored!” she tweeted.
Former Wyoming Rep. Liz Cheney was also happy that Carlson left, but not for the reasons
Bobert and Lake were.
Cheney said it was “about time” that Carlson departed after all his “lies and defamation.”
Other Democrats echoed a similar sentiment, characterizing Carlson’s departure as a win for democracy.”
“Crazy thought, maybe it’s time to face some consequences after blatantly lying to millions of Americans and actively eroding democracy for years,” Rep. Seth Moulton, D-Mass. tweeted.
Meanwhile, Rep. Bill Pascrell, D-NJ, tweeted that Carlson’s program was a “sewer of countless lies and hate spewed out every single night.”
He blasted the primetime host and continued with, “One of the leading election deniers and opponents of democracy in America and abroad will no longer have a
primetime platform. That’s a good thing.”
Carlson was a Fox News political analyst for 14 years and made a name for himself as a conservative firebrand.
He often created controversies that landed him in trouble with both Republicans and Democrats. Before his stint at Fox, he was a host for three years on MSNBC.
Among the hot topics Carlson recently addressed was the 2020 presidential election. In March, he claimed the election was “unfairly conducted” even though there was no evidence of interference.
He also expressed his support for Russian President Vladimir Putin and said, “Why do I care what is going on in the conflict between Ukraine and Russia? I’m serious. Why shouldn’t I root for Russia? Which by the way I am.”
He later claimed that he was only joking.
These aren’t the only hot topics Carlson has been in trouble for. In 2018, a number of advertisers cut ties with his program after immigration remarks in which said some lawmakers tell Americans that they have a “moral obligation to admit the world’s poor ... even if it makes our own country poorer and dirtier and more divided.”
Carlson’s departure comes shortly after Don Lemon announced that he was fired by CNN over “some larger issues at play.” Carlson’s departure comes less than a week after the Fox network agreed to pay $787.5 million to settle a defamation lawsuit brought by Dominion Voting Systems over coverage of former president Donald Trump’s false claims of voter fraud and the company’s software.
Earlier this month, Trump sat for an extensive interview with Carlson, in which he bashed Democrats and the media.
Regardless of whether one believes that he’ll no longer be prone to censorship, or whether they think Carlson’s departure will stop the erosion of democracy, it seems that folks are generally happy about him no longer working for Fox — this includes some Americans, too, not just politicians.
with city also about this activity.
This activity is illegal and a blight on neighborhood. Richard Schoengarth Lancaster
Iwrote, “...had the lion’s share of the wealth my labor power produced throughout my working life not been stolen from me through a bourgeois system of legality known as private profit, I would need neither pension nor Social Security payments.”
In reaction, Larry Kissam wrote, “Marsh’s April 5 letter ... was nothing but a ‘pity me’ trope because he has to live here and only enjoys the fruits of capitalism by default...”
Larry Kissam couldn’t logically refute that capitalists expropriate most of the wealth their wage slaves produce. So, he created a red herring, asserting that I somehow benefit from my exploitation, which is bizarre but unsurprising.
Kissam: “...his response was wrapped in his usual communist dogma.”
Marxism is anti-dogmatic. In its understanding of dialectics, Marxism recognizes that change is a constant. Marxists don’t consistently hold the same views because reality is constantly in flux, continually rupturing and changing. Throughout the decades, my writings have reflected that.
Larry Kissam: “That ... is the maximum depth of his philosophy that rests on the burnt pile of failed despotic economic systems in Soviet Russia, Cuba, and Venezuela.
I can only smile at Larry Kissam’s naivete toward Marxism’s deeply philosophical nature, particularly concerning dialectical materialism. And socialist experiments have been anything but failures.
On several occasions, I have shown the Cuban Revolution to have immeasurably improved the lives of Cubans, all of which have been strategically ignored by reactionaries. And the Chinese Revolution has nearly eliminated the extreme poverty that spurred the said revolution.
Those and other socialist experiments brought land reform and human services, including healthcare, education, and cultural enrichment, dramatically improving billions of people’s lives. That hundreds of millions of Americans have allowed themselves to be conditioned by bankrupted capitalist culture to believe otherwise isn’t something I have control over.