MSNBC cancels Tucker Carlson


Word came today that Tucker Carlson’s show on MSNBC has been canceled. Hallelujah! Thank You, Jesus. No word or term adequately describes how much I loathe Tucker Carlson. He reminds me of the grade school classmates that I despised as a child. Their privilege and disdain of Negroes was some kind of a birthright that they wore proudly on angelic faces that showed me nothing but expressions of contempt.

I rarely call adults significantly older than me by their first names. Living in the south for more than 15 years has intensified that trait. I use Ms. or Mrs. or slap Mr. or Ms. in front of a first name. I can recall going home to the Midwest once and going to the grocery store my semi-retired grandma worked in as a demo-lady and came across some teenage boy calling her by her first name. It was like fingernails on a chalk-board. I almost lost it before grandma shooed him away. Mama confessed that she didn’t like children in the store calling her by her first name, but had resigned herself to that Midwestern habit.

I told grandma that I considered it HIGHLY disrespectful and hoped that she would say something. It was all I could do at the time to keep it together and not go off on the kid. Nothin’ makes me see red quicker than oblivious or deliberate disrespect. All of that brings me to Tucker Carlson, the subject of this post. He reminds me of that boy in the grocery store: disrespectful and oblivious.

Tucker Carlson is the kind of smug prick that causes sweet, Christian ladies like my grandma to bake up sumptuous batches of homemade cookies laced with rat poison and offer it to him with honeysuckled sweetness. Tucker ain’t got no home training and is contemptuous and disrespectful of any and everything black, or anything which could level the playing field. In short, he is addicted to white supremacist notions of superiority and is in desperate need of an intervention.

I know what you’re thinking, “Skeptical Brotha, that’s kinda strong isn’t it?” Sadly, no, Carlson is an unrepentant critic of Affirmative Action, Black politicians, Democrats, or anybody else more liberal than a movement conservative with an affinity for the confederacy.

Four years ago he asked Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton the following question about the University of Michigan case, “At the heart of one of these cases is a story of a woman named Jennifer Gratz. She applied to the University of Michigan. She had a 3.8 grade point average and she didn’t get in, partly because she was white. Now if your daughter was applying to college and she didn’t get in part because she was black, meaning her race counted against her, I think you would call that what it is, it’s racism. And I think you’d call it that. Why not call it that here?”

Where to begin? First, Tucker


Second, you should discard these antiquated and illogical fallicies about Affirmative Action. He wouldn’t know what was fair if it came up and bit him. It is supremely insulting that anybody could actually say with a straight face that stealing someone’s labor for two centuries and actively discriminating against them for another 75 years doesn’t merit some form of recompense. It’s completely absurd.

The U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, before it was denatured and de-fanged with the addition of a stable of right-wing Handkerchief Heads, wrote, “Discriminatory actions by individuals and organizations are not only pervasive, occurring in every sector of society, but also cumulative with effects limited neither to the time nor the particular structural area in which they occur. This process of discrimination, therefore, extends across generations, across organizations, and across social structures in self-reinforcing cycles, passing the disadvantages incurred by one generation in one area to future generations in many related areas.”

“These interrelated components of the discriminatory process share one basic result: the persistent gaps seen in the status of women and minorities relative to that of white males. These unequal results themselves have real consequences.”

Tucker Carlson fails to recognize the context of America’s persistent inequality and fixates on the fiction of “reverse discrimination” to the exclusion of the routine “every day” racism which genuflects to white privilege and grants him two shows on two different networks to disseminate his ignorance to an unsuspecting public.

Lastly, Tucker has a rather odd fascination with the United Church of Christ-or rather Barack Obama’s church. It seems that Obama’s membership in a mainline protestant denomination is troubling to the Episcopalian Carlson. Senator Obama himself has said, “Commitment to God, black community, commitment to the black family, the black work ethic, self-discipline and self-respect. …Those are values that the conservative movement in particular has suggested are necessary for black advancement.” He added, “So I would be puzzled that they would object or quibble with the bulk of a document that basically espouses profoundly conservative values of self-reliance and self-help.”

His attacks on Obama’s “separatist” faith and the black church are tinged with the acceptable racism of snarky disdain and contempt I felt from my white peers many moons ago. Coupled with the right-wing inspired Muslim smear and fear bomb, they are a potent cocktail too strong for the average member of the white working class and bedrock of the GOP coalition.

Thanks be to God that the preppy klansman no longer has two mainstream media perches from which to spew his racist condescension and religious bigotry. I know Grandma is just as pleased as I am. Perhaps now that MSNBC has finally given Tucker the boot, they can find a woman or person of color ” to diversify their all white-male line up.

20 thoughts on “MSNBC cancels Tucker Carlson

  1. NuPolitico

    Aaaah. The Affirmative Action debate. Affirmative Action is to White Privilege as a 25 cent coupon is to a blank check.

    Affirmative Action should NOT be phased out until this country has come to terms on race in America. There is NO such thing as reverse racism. Racism = prejudice + power.

  2. NuPolitico

    By the way,

    Barack Obama being elected to the presidency _in of itself_ does NOT equal redemption for America’s past wrongs. It is more analogous to Jackie Robinson breaking the color barrier in MLB.

  3. Marla K.

    Thank you MSNBC and Skepticalbrotha. I dont know why many of those who call themselves “conservative” whom are actually overt racists and facists, are allowed to publicly promote themselves as practioners of the “Christian” faith without question. “Yeoshua is love.”

    Also, court cases charging ” reverse discrimination” have actually been more successful than actual “racial discrimination against minorities” cases have been in the courts. I believe this is due to the requirement to be able to afford to purschase some justice in our courts. Given our history as you so effectively point out SB, while we have no inheritance to bring forward from our ancestors’ hard labor and as we are continually being discriminated against in the past and presently, we are generally not able to afford the kind of representation in our courts that will provide us justice in affirmative action laws being successfully applied. Those concerned about affirmative action laws providing African Americans opportunities that circumvent their access to employment are crying over an idea, not over something that is in fact occurring to any real extent….I say to Jesse, Arffirmative Action cannot be phased out because it was never really phased in. In fairness…. it should be phased in.

  4. Someone needs to ask Tucker why, when he was “assaulted” by a perv when he was 16 in a public bathroom in Rock Creek Park here in DC, why he went and got another person to go back to the bathroom, allegedly where the perp was still waiting for another victim, to double-team and beat the pervert up?

    Oh, yeah. HE MADE THAT SHYT UP.

    The real miracle was how long he lasted on MSNBC before Dan Abrams finally decided to pull the plug on him.

  5. Being opposed to affirmative action does not mean that someone is a racist– if you think the guy is racist, fine, but you’ve got to have better evidence than that.

    Many black people are against affirmative action, Arthur Ashe for one (he spoke against it in his autobiography). The civil rights leader Bayard Rustin spoke against such a program in the ’60s, and Nelson Mandela spoke against such a program for South Africa. JFK also said that he thought that black people themselves would find such a program to be racist. The person who originally proposed affirmative action, Walter Young of the Urban League, said it should only last 10 years. (When he proposed the plan, his (black) board of directors at the Urban League revolted and refused to accept the idea as valid.)

    These were all smart black people who all rejected the idea of affirmative action. Were these early civil rights leaders racist? Only if you answer “yes” to that question can you call Tucker Carlson a racist simply for being against affirmative action. (If you have other reasons, let’s hear them.)

  6. Hmm. Where to begin.

    You write:

    It is supremely insulting that anybody could actually say with a straight face that stealing someone’s labor for two centuries and actively discriminating against them for another 75 years doesn’t merit some form of recompense. It’s completely absurd.

    I agree. So too is it supremely insulting to accuse someone who didn’t “steal your labor” or discriminate of against you for any period of time, let alone for you to demand “recompense” from those parties.

    There is no question the injustice you cite cries out for “recompense”. But both the victims and criminals are dead, and you seek to punish a group of individuals not guilty and “compensate” a group of individuals based on a criteria that isn’t even a good measure of whether the injustice was actually perpetrated against one’s ancestors (for example, recent African immigrants with black skin, Hispanics, women, and certain asians receive preferences — all so the political group receiving the benefit is large enough to maintain the preference).

    Want real “affirmative action”? Change focus from preference based on race, to fixing education (for everyone) and focusing on solving economic factors (and I’m not talking throwing more money at either – this takes real focus and local thought and action). Everything else is a facade designed to keep the dependent dependent.

  7. Here we go:

    Someone professing to know what the hell affirmative action is and opens their mouth and leave NO DOUBT that you don’t know what the hell you’re talking about.

    Affirmative action is not about quotas, or racial preferences.

    Affirmative Action is not about putting people of color, or women in places where they weren’t traditionally placed.

    It is about equalizing the playing field of competition. You allow fools like Ward Connerly tell you otherwise, especially since House Negroes like him were the first to benefit from the concept.

    White women are bigger beneficiaries of affirmative action than anyone else.

    And what do you say to collegiate programs that let dumb asses like GeeShrubya into elite programs like Harvard and Yale, and the only qualification for acceptance is that their parents were alumni of the college?

    That’s another form of Affirmative Action for white guys.

    Since I have worked in the field of Affirmative Action, Civil Rights, EEO, Diversity and Cultural Competency, I can and will unequivocally state, Libertarian Girl, that you don’t know JACK about Affirmative Action.

    But, then again, you believe there should be no government and paying of taxes, either, so it’s not surprising in the least that you would have an opinion such as yours on Affirmative Action. I’ve spent 20 years of my life educating people to the true concept, and many times, my students were educated dimwits like you.

    Go rent “The Color of Fear” and repeat this nonsense; see how far it’ll get ya.

    When Lyndon Johnson implemented ant-discrimination programs back in 1965, he stated that to prevent discrimination in employment, the agencies needed to take “affirmative” steps of action to prevent discrimination. That’s where the phrase “affirmative action” came from.

    He meant that selection process should be based on merit and qualifications, regardless of race, color, creed, religious or national origin, and gender. It meant that if you and a white guy were hired on the same day for the same job, you get the same pay. The same opportunities for advancement and promotion. EQUAL.

    No more and no less. But when people who don’t want to see a Black Man as POTUS, get threatened, you pull out the Affirmative Action theme song, which is as wrong as two left shoes. You lie about what affirmative action is, and scare everyone to death. You say it’s quotas and unqualified people getting the positions, when whites who are just as unqualified get hired somewhere every friggin’ day.

    We want the DOOR OPENED – once we’re in, we can get it OURSELVES. Affirmative Action is the key that opens that door. Nothing more or less.

    Stop lying about affirmative action. And if you don’t know, you better ask somebody who knows what affirmative action is. You’ve insulted everyone on this board with your remarks, which shows at best, a severe lack of research, and more reliance on what Ward Connerly wants you to believe, because if people of ethnic background could truly be assessed on their merit and qualifications, there never would have been wars, rumors of wars, slavery, and the need for women’s rights.

    Check yourself before you wreck yourself.

  8. TripLBee

    I’d like to add some clarity to the notion that the perpetuators of racism are dead, thus those who are advocating affirmative action are collecting a debt from those who do not owe it. That is precisely the argument you hear from the Israeli govt regarding the right of return for Palestinians. The logic goes something like this, “Well, my grandparents kicked your grandparents out of their house in Tel Aviv in 1948 and sure I live there now, but I didn’t steal it from you so you can’t have it back. I know that getting forced into a refuge camp was a tough way for your parents and for you and your siblings to be raised, but I didn’t force you into that refugee camp. And sure, it’s been nice living in a nice house passed down to me from my grandparents—a house they didn’t even pay for—but I had nothing to do with that. Tough luck buddy. Time to pull yourself up by your bootstraps.”

    Tucker Carlson is the embodiment of the unearned privilege that accrues to too many white Americans, especially men. (Actually, George W Bush is the embodiment of unearned privilege.)

  9. EZ

    I think it is sad the girl with a 3.8 didnt get in whatever the reason. Working hard should always have rewards regardless of race. Colleges make decisions by department and if that department she applied to was full its not a race issue. Its too bad Tucker uses her as an example of how affirmative action doesnt work but that is disingenuous since its not known why she was rejected and no school would reject someone because their grades were too good. Any of us who have gone to college know there are people with lower grades that get in so its ridiculous to blame race as an issue

  10. Jason

    Amen. I miss Michael Kinsley, as much a milquetoast I thought he was, Tucker’s whining was much worse. NB: Affirmative action, which aided white women the most also helped bring about the two-earner household; although I gotta say that I don’t exactly blame society for shying away from the task of offering equal civilities in the face of fear smears, I have enough experience to know the difference between the smear, the fear and the general reality… also, those three elements are far from as intense as when I was growing up — but the fear of the unkempt and nomad retaliation is something which seems to breed out towards overdocility among settled populations, so I doubt it’s a matter of disrespect as much as it is one of losing SETTLED PRIVILEGE; after all, we all know who the bad peeps is and the good ones are, and which neighborhoods they belong locked into both massa and slave, aiight?

  11. well now, about these lack of positive comments about the ernest job mr. Carlson reliably performed on newscasts, lets take a moment to reflect on the positive. After all, we all want to be fair and balanced.

    where to begin? The gentleman, may I refer to Mr. Carlson as a gentleman without inciting your wrath? – the gentleman can’t be faulted for being a wall flower, whereas so many other people can. Think about it: if 1% of all the people who actually feel anger, disgust, violent urges, or just plain nausea when watching the gentleman would have ever, and I mean ever, as in, if only just once in their noisy but unheard lives, had ever just once gotten the moxy to speak with one voice and clearly, in the current vouge style of Barrack-articulateness, just put the passion of their point into a sharp, short, non-run-on sentance, and said instead in a concise way, what they really felt, ever, just once, instead of grousing, complaining individually, but would have all together let their vomit become words, then, they would have the right to criticize the gentleman.

    however, because all these grousers and whiners are all just an anonymous mess of voiceless consumers, they – you! – haven’t got the personal honor to say word one against a man who was willing to speak up before you all.

    organize, produce, get it out! otherwise, shut the f up.


  12. Ang

    Thank you for expressing my feelings so eloquently. I despise Tucker Carlson. I feel the same way about Pat Buchanan. I don’t know why msnbc chooses to feature them as guest on almost every political show on their station. Both are obvious bigots.

  13. janice L jones

    tucker carlson why why why would you keep getting his view on any thing that any black person has to say ? he has tunnel vision when it come to understanding african american life. tucker off your self established superior pedestal it’s no longer secure. you are so narrow in your thinking I do hope you have no children. It’s your mind set passed on to the next generation keeps Jim Crow alive. why don’t you listen before you speak. this country will never come together as long as there are one sided views like yours and you are allowed air time. Perhaps you should take some time to actually read the bible and study it and what it says about lier’s or those that cause others to sin as you do with your views.

Comments are closed.