The Strategy Liberal Activists Are Using to Attack Tucker Carlson’s Fox News Show

Why? Tucker isn't entitled to be on TV. He has no right to be there, he has to earn that opportunity just like any other opportunity in life. And if he says things people don't like, and they are able to leverage that to get him off the air, that's perfectly fine. Tucker can still SAY those things, no rights have been removed. He has NO RIGHT to be on TV.

 

You are only saying this because right wingers like Hannity are supporting an effort to drive liberal opinions off the airwaves.

https://thehill.com/homenews/media/335785-conservative-groups-targeting-maddow-advertisers

 

It’s all about the left’s intolerance of free speech.

 

He does have a right to be on TV just as much as liberals at CNN

You cant argue with him on the issues so you want to drive him off the stage

 

No different than the right's.

https://thehill.com/homenews/media/335785-conservative-groups-targeting-maddow-advertisers

Or what you mean to say is that both sides don't tolerate the other and use their rights to have a debate in the public forum to present their arguments? Frankly, if you think what's happening to Tucker is unique, new or only coming from the left, you are deceiving yourself.

 

Leftwing extremism leads to extremism on the other side

This is not good for America

 

The trouble is your side started it

 

No, he doesn't. No one has any right to be on TV. It's a job they have to earn and keep.

I can argue with him easily on issues. Arguing is simple, I'm arguing with him via proxy with you right now.

Tucker's notion that immigrants are all dirty, poor, and terrible people is wrong. See? I just argued. Proof? My best friend from college married a non-poor, clean immigrant. He's an electrician now in this country. See? Argument won. Tah dah!

 

Nice try. You guys are all good guys until someone else MAKES you a villain. Whatever happened to personal accountability being a hallmark of conservatism? Nope, I dismiss this BS statement out of hand. YOU are responsible for your own actions just as extremists on the left are responsible for theirs.

 

Did they? Are you so certain about that? And also, that argument works in pre-school.

Nixon wanted to ban comedians and newspapers he didn't like from being able to report on him. That was BEFORE Tucker's time. And I"m sure there was a liberal or progressive group who did something like that before Nixon, and so on and so on. No, you are wrong. This has been happening since the beginning of time. It's human nature to argue and reason against something you don't agree with.

 

Tucker does not say all immigrants are dirty or terrible

But most of them are poor and do not deserve to be in the US

And that goes double for illegals

Tah dah yourself

 

Carlson is not a villian

And neither am I

There are good reasons to oppose mass migration of foreigners to the US

 

You did not go back far enough

Woodrow Wilson signed the Sedation Act in 1918

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sedition_Act_of_1918

 

Neither did you!

https://www.freedomforuminstitute.o...ted-lincolns-tolerance-for-free-speech-press/

 

I never said you were nor him.

What are those good reasons? Please list them and we can discuss if you want.

 

I did not use that one because lincoln was a republican and I had to leave some bread crumbs for you

 

We have too much poverty in America without importing more

 

Why do they not deserve to be here?

What's wrong with being poor? Migrants, legal or otherwise, might be poor, but they are DOING something about it by taking action to risk their lives to find work that is thousands of miles from home. YOU have never taken such a risk for work and neither have I, which only shows how charmed we have it. To say that they are less deserving or to worry about them being poor is just a cover for you not liking them for some reason. What reason is that? And I don't see you worrying about the great white border up north despite the smuggling and illegal crossings that go on up there all the time these days.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/mexicans-crossing-us-canada-border-immigration-1.4760153

And illegals are ONLY illegals because of artificial quotas that harm the free market. Labor should be free to migrate to where the opportunities are. That's the best way for the market to self-regulate and bring prosperity for all, per Adam Smith the guy that wrote the Wealth of Nations.

 

I appreciate it but I'm going low carb. Just kidding, I LOVE carbs!

 

We don't have this kind of poverty, but more importantly, these people risked their lives for the opportunity to end their poverty. Why WOULDN'T we reward that effort?

 

What kind of poverty do we not have?

America is not and cannot be the homeless shelter for the world

 

Why not counter the free speech directly with whatever opposing points of view you may have rather than running to Mommy?

 

Whose mommy?

Your argument is false. Carlson Tucker has a TV show with a camera where he can present his views to millions of people. Individuals don't have that tool at their disposal. So they band together and annoy the sponsors into dropping Tucker. That's the tool they have.

The real question is if these sponsors were so convinced and believed in Tucker, why are they abandoning him? Because they know his views will hurt their business, so they are making their own choice to let him go. If it was in their interests to stay, they would. That's their right to "free speech" thanks to the conservative courts who equate money to speech.

 

They are not only trying to ban free speech and an exchange of ideas, they are trying to ban Tucker Carlson from voicing his opinions, whatever they may be. In other words it's a personal attack.

Their anger and frustration and having to take this route seems a result of liberals tending to lose their arguments against a more conservative point of view. That's also why MSNBC and CNN seldom have diversity in their programming.

 

We have pretty good problems in this country. Our poor aren't nearly as poor as others. We don't have the hunger issues they do. Yes, we have hungry people in this country, but it's not on the same scale.

Who says we would be? If you let labor move freely across borders, it will go until there is no more opportunity. Then it will stop. Let's say you and I both lose our jobs tomorrow. The next day, we learn there is one and only one job in New York. We both go to get that job in New York in person and migrate there. You get the job. Do I say in New York? Or do I head to Florida where I hear there are three jobs open? The same is true for migrants. If we simply let them in to fill the available jobs they are willing to do, equilibrium will be reached. Americans will get work done and taxes paid on that work to add value to the economy and our infrastructure. Once there are no more available opportunities, they won't keep coming. It's not a doomsday scenario, it's called a free market.