Posted on 12/23/2019 4:50:01 AM PST by gattaca
Fox News host Tucker Carlson attacked the Heritage Foundation on his program on Friday night, claiming that the organization and other groups "colluded with big tech to shield left-wing monopolies from any oversight."
Carlson, who used to work at the conservative think tank, said "Heritage no longer represents the interests of conservatives, at least on the question of tech."
According to The Hill, the Fox News host also criticized a policy paper by the organization, which he claimed "defends the special privileges that Congress has given to left-wing Silicon Valley monopolies."
Heritage responds The Heritage Foundation wasted no time in responding to Carlson. Its vice president of communications, Rob Bluey, responded with a lengthy statement that blasted the television host for engaging in "ad hominem attacks."
Unfortunately, Carlson did not contact us in advance of his segment or provide Heritage with an opportunity to respond to his accusations. Rather than engage in a substantive policy debate, he chose instead to make ad hominem attacks and question our integrity. We are disappointed this came from someone whom we admire and respect.
The Heritage Foundation will not let these attacks go unanswered and we welcome the opportunity to have a substantive debate on public policy. Bluey also addressed Carlson's claims regarding Heritage's tech policy paper.
Carlson's claims began with an attack on a recent Heritage report about Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. He claimed the report's author repeated lines verbatim from a trade association. This is false. In fact, the 13-page Heritage report contained 22 footnotes, all of which were properly quoted and attributed to sources. The report went through a thorough and lengthy process of vetting and review by Heritage scholars to ensure accuracy and agreement among all Heritage analysts involved in technology and social media policy.
The conclusions of Heritage's report were based on the principles that guide all of our policy recommendations—principles Carlson seems curiously less interested in defending. Instead, he made an unfounded assertion against Heritage and outrageous smear of one of our scholars. It is disappointing that Carlson would deceive his viewers with such patently false information. Moreover, Bluey noted that "Carlson failed to acknowledge Heritage experts' consistent criticism of technology companies, including Google's decision to withdraw from the Department of Defense's Project Maven and its work with communist China on a censored search engine."
"We won't be intimidated or bullied as we continue to represent the interests of conservatives and all Americans," his statement concluded.
Intimidated or bullied? Sounds kind of drama queenish to me. Like something you'd hear from a Leftist.
as we continue to represent the interests of conservatives and all Americans," his statement concluded.
Wait, what? Not all Americans have the same interests. If they did, there'd be no need for your think tank. Tucker may have a point.
Hang in there, Tucker. The people stand with you not the GOPe/Silicon Valley.
Love Tucker Carlson.
My observation is that Everyone has a price. Donations mean something. Ever heard of ‘Quid Pro Quo’?
"Free Dictionary" definition of (political) conservative:
1. The inclination, especially in politics, to maintain the existing or traditional order.
2. A political philosophy or attitude that emphasizes respect for traditional institutions and opposes the attempt to achieve social change though legislation or publicly funded programs.
3. Caution or moderation, as in behavior or outlook.
Questions that we need to ask ourselves.
1. Can we be both a conservative and globalist?
2. Can you we both a conservative and libertarian?'
3. Can we be both a conservative and laissez-faire capitalist?
Possibly, we need to hyphenate our classification of "conservative".
Conservative-globalist
Conservative-libertarian
Conservative-laissez-faire-capitalist
Conservative-nationalist.
Unashamed paleoconservative here checking in.
Has everyone forgotten that the Author of NAFTA, which was intended to be the Last Step towards Global Marxism with the Ruling Class firmly in charge, while they Destroy the Middle Class of every country that has one, Was the Heritage Foundation.
FWIW, I’ll take Heritage’s board over Fox Corp’s any day of the week.
Note to Tucker: Glass houses, dude.
Note to mewzilla: that is a false choice.
Nobody is forcing Heritage to take piles of cash from the progressive fascists at Big Tech. Nothing good will come of that. Guaranteed.
I trust Tucker.
I didn’t see anywhere that Heritage denied that they colluded with or in any other way support big tech. All I saw is that they were attacking Carlson.
Tucker Carlson has done a wonderful job of exposing RINOs and every time that he does so some Bush-worshiping, “compassionate conservative” crypto-leftist, nanny state pukes begin to whine.
I have followed the Heritage Inst for years. Pro globalist and never met an American job they did not want to offshore except their own.
On occasion they come up with some conservative pro American worker position but not often.
Don’t let the heritage foundation get your name or email address. They are worse and more relentless than any telemarketer in their attempts to contact you.
Looks like Carlson may be relying too heavily on his staff without oversight - he doesn’t seem they type to just toss stuff out like this.
________________
Carlson once worked at Heritage, so he ought to know a thing or two of whence he speaks. Big tech’s tentacles and influence are everywhere and to suggest otherwise is foolish. I expect POTUS to begin a major campaign to reign them in. Big tech has is the government’s out of control creation.
Tucker is 100% based and red-pilled. He knows exactly what is going on with Conservative Inc. and its Israeli push.
That is why he wasn’t at the sodomite SAS festival a few days back.
Heritage is GOPe globalist. Tucker is correct
If ad hominem means to attack one’s opponent rather than the subject discussed, I would suggest that Heritage has it all wrong. Carlson attacked not only Heritage actions but those by the Koch Brothers and it was done in the most specific terms. In fact, the Heritage response was filled with generalizations and was a very weak response. Which makes me wonder....
Tucker getting flak. He must be right over the target.
In fact, the Heritage response was filled with generalizations and was a very weak response. Which makes me wonder....
Agree. Tucker is getting flak because he is over the target. I have little doubt half the beltway types working at Heritage didn’t even vote for POTUS.
“I’m with you. Surprised to see people here jumping all over Tucker who continues to fight against globalism and the “conservative” think tanks that support it.”
Tucker is well meaning and is supportive of Conservative values and Trump. Unfortunately he is a bit of a lightweight - something like a college sophmore trying to be a professor.
Globalists hijacked the Republican Party after WWII. Before WWII the Republican party and trade protectionism were synonymous.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.