I know that will not sit well with many of his most devoted fans. But I tend to prefer those who can advance compelling intellectual argument in support of conservativism rather than go for the jugular with hyperbolic analyses.
While I tend to agree with his GENERAL conservative views, I found him unpleasantly smug, arrogant and condescending – the triple crown of personality traits I find repulsive. I also find his spin on many of the issues to be beyond credible and needlessly provocative – giving those on the left too easy a target to malign conservatives across-the-board. In my judgment, Carlson too often makes contemporary conservativism look bad.
I was shocked that the honchos at FOX decided to give him the primo spot – replacing Bill O’Reilly. Since I need to explore ALL the news, I do occasionally tune into Carlson. I rarely find anything he says to be helpful. And too often, I find myself wincing.
Yes, I know he has a huge audience. I do believe that it has as much to do with the time slot and personal popularity – which automatically is the most popular time for cable television commentary. If Carlson was replaced, his successor would inherit the bulk of that audience automatically – as he did from O’Reilly.
Carlson also benefits because of the competition on the left. I mean, Anderson Cooper on CNN and Chris Hayes on MSNBC? Really? While the left-wing elitists control most of the mainstream cable content, the general American audience has always shown a preference for conservative programming.
Remember when the left tried to resurrect Phil Donahue? Failed. When they put together a show featuring former New York Governor Mario Cuomo and former Texas Governor Ann Richards? Failed. And when they launched the radical left network Air America? Failed.
One only need check out the ratings between FOX and the network’s chief antagonists, CNN and MSNBC – two stations that have made destroying FOX a major part of their daily programming strategy. Talk radio is dominated by conservative programs because liberal talk is not very popular.
Recently, Carlson went completely over the edge. In essence, he said the non-mask wearing folks should accost mask wearers in public. We should claim that seeing those masks makes us uncomfortable and uneasy. Conservatives are not that fragile. He further recommended that if you see parents with masked children, you should call the police because that – in Carlson’s opinion – is child abuse. That is just plain nuts.
Carlson seems to forget that one of the major tenets of conservatism is individual choice. “Free to Choose,” as Nobel Laureate Milton Friedman titled his seminal book on American freedom. I pushed back against the self-righteous on the left who confronted non-masked citizens and want government imposition – and I have no more tolerance for Carlson’s approach.
If you follow my writings, you will know that I have been a critic of unnecessary mask-wearing. Anyone who is vaccinated does not need to wear a mask because the chance of getting or giving Covid-19 is EXTREMELY unlikely – close to zero. As one doctor noted, the odds are so long that it would have to be expressed with several zeroes after the decimal point.
But I do recognize that a lot of people feel better if they wear masks. Some do not follow the science and have excessive fears. Others may see it as a symbolic gesture in support of those unvaccinated. And yet others may fear being shamed or criticized by the activist mask-wearers. They may see it as a political statement since the whole thing has been sadly politicized for more than a year.
Even if I think it is unnecessary, I still hold to the fundamental conservative position that others are free to choose without government or individual interference. There is no real harm in wearing a mask, so let them.
To promote in-your-face confrontation over the question … to mask or not to mask … is not only silly, but potentially harmful to improving the civic comity we should all like to see more of.
And to say that having one’s child wear a mask is child abuse – and the police should be summoned – not only dilutes the seriousness of real child abuse, but it creates unnecessary inter-personal conflict and unnecessary burden on the police – who are already reeling by the left’s defunding campaign.
Personally, I do not like to see young boys with teenage hairstyles – such as Mohawks. But I would not charge their parents with child abuse.
We can only hope that no one will take up Carlson’s counterproductive call-to-harms. But I fear that the left-wing media will dig out some rare examples to further demonize all conservatives with the broad-brush of propaganda. Thanks a lot, Tucker.
So, there ‘tis.