Thread: Fox News host, Tucker Carlson, advocates mob rule government

I’m not sure if Tucker Carlson actually supports “democracy” in its classical sense ___ which is comparable to mob rule government ___ or he simply hasn’t taken the time to learn the fundamental differences between our constitutionally limited “Republican Form of Government” and that of a democracy in which a majority of what the people want they should get, i.e., mob rule government!

Let us listen to Tucker Carlson’s VERY OWN WORDS and you decide what he wants.

“I want a democracy where the majority of voters get to decide what their country does.”

This is the classic definition of a “democracy” as distinguished from our constitutionally limited “Republican Form of Government” in which our elected representatives, restrained by a written Constitution, set public policy.



What disturbs me about Tucker's comment is, if 51 percent of the people in America want to grant amnesty to illegal entrants, they should get what they want and we should ignore our Constitution and the rule of law.


Perhaps Tucker Carlson, and other hosts on Fox News Channel, who constantly refer to our system of government as a “democracy”, will expound upon their referencing our system as a “democracy” instead of the constitutionally limited “Republican Form of Government’ which our constitution guarantees under Article 4, Section 4.

JWK

John Adams was absolutely correct when he pointed out that "democracy will envy all, contend with all, endeavor to pull down all; and when by chance it happens to get the upper hand for a short time, it will be revengeful, bloody, and cruel...".

Originally Posted by johnwk

I’m not sure if Tucker Carlson actually supports “democracy” in its classical sense

You mean in the sense you, one person, wants it to be!

Originally Posted by johnwk

This is the classic definition of a “democracy” as distinguished from our constitutionally limited “Republican Form of Government” in which our elected representatives, restrained by a written Constitution, set public policy.

So you pick one set of words, out of the context in which they were spoken, and build a Strawman from them. Tucker Carlson's comments continued that he wanted a majority to determine how this country should be governed rather than some minority activist group making that determination. And you label democracy by the majority as "mob rule".

Originally Posted by johnwk

What disturbs me about Tucker's comment is, if 51 percent of the people in America want to grant amnesty to illegal entrants, they should get what they want and we should ignore our Constitution and the rule of law.

You pretend to be educated on the Constitution, but you ignore that the Constitution is the will of the majority. The Framers created a "representative government" because it was impractical to have everybody negotiating each law. So they created the appointment of representatives. The "representatives" were supposed to convey the wishes of each representative's constituency. They were not elected to be local dictators.

The problem I have cited before is the creation of parties, which several Founders warned against, which have taken over. The allegiance of the representatives is to their parties, not their constituency. So we have a mob of 535 dictating laws to the 330 million. And you find that preferable to even a simple majority being in control of our laws?

And you, supposedly knowledgeable about our Constitution, should know that to change the Constitution takes far more than 51 percent of the voting public. Our leaders can ignore the Constitution, as can any individual, but a "mob" of 51% cannot change it.

Originally Posted by johnwk

Perhaps Tucker Carlson, and other hosts on Fox News Channel, who constantly refer to our system of government as a “democracy”, will expound upon their referencing our system as a “democracy” instead of the constitutionally limited “Republican Form of Government’ which our constitution guarantees under Article 4, Section 4.

Maybe it would be easier for you to educate yourself to understand common language. When Tucker Carlson, and other hosts on Fox News Channel use the word "democracy", they are using it as a comparison to "dictatorship" or, as Tucker Carlson specifically stated in that segment, an "oligarchy". You obviously missed that part of his statement, either because it didn't register with you, or you deliberately wanted to misconstrue what he advocates. Either way, that is your failing!

Originally Posted by jtdc

johnwk:

I’m not sure if Tucker Carlson actually supports “democracy” in its classical sense

You mean in the sense you, one person, wants it to be!

Webster’s Dictionary 1828 - Online Edition explains the differences between a “Republic” and a “Democracy” as follows:


DEMOCRACY, noun [Gr. People, and to possess, to govern.] ”Government by the people; a form of government, in which the supreme power is lodged in the hands of the people collectively, or in which the people exercise the powers of legislation. Such was the government of Athens.”



REPUB’LIC, noun [Latin respublica; res and publica; public affairs.]
”A commonwealth; a state in which the exercise of the sovereign power is lodged in representatives elected by the people. In modern usage, it differs from a democracy or democratic state, in which the people exercise the powers of sovereignty in person. Yet the democracies of Greece are often called republics.”


Our Fifth Column democrat socialist leaders have done a great job during the past 60 -70 years in convincing the people that we are a “democracy”, which is a vile form of government and friendly to socialist thinking allowing rights associated with property ownership to be overruled by majority vote.

Tucker Carlson should know better. Are we to forget that words matter?


JWK


The liberty to succeed or fail at one’s own hand is a socialist’s nightmare and not the American Dream

Originally Posted by jtdc

You pretend to be educated on the Constitution, but you ignore that the Constitution is the will of the majority.

Under our “Republican Form of Government” the people do not vote on legislation as is done in a democracy. Under our “Republican Form of Government” which is guaranteed by Article 4, Section 4, elected representatives are entrusted with “all legislative powers”, limited by a written constitution as distinguished from a democracy in which the people exercise legislative power using their vote, and why democracy is often referred to mob rule government.

JWK

Originally Posted by johnwk

Webster’s Dictionary 1828 - Online Edition explains the differences between a “Republic” and a “Democracy” as follows:


DEMOCRACY, noun [Gr. People, and to possess, to govern.] ”Government by the people; a form of government, in which the supreme power is lodged in the hands of the people collectively, or in which the people exercise the powers of legislation. Such was the government of Athens.”



REPUB’LIC, noun [Latin respublica; res and publica; public affairs.]
”A commonwealth; a state in which the exercise of the sovereign power is lodged in representatives elected by the people. In modern usage, it differs from a democracy or democratic state, in which the people exercise the powers of sovereignty in person. Yet the democracies of Greece are often called republics.”

John, you continue to demonstrate your ignorance! From your quote: "sovereign power is lodged in representatives elected by the people. In modern usage, it differs from a democracy or democratic state, in which the people exercise the powers of sovereignty in person." DO YOU SEE THOSE LAST SIX WORDS? "the powers of sovereignty in person"! That means the people still have the power, but they delegate the use of it to representatives.

Originally Posted by johnwk

Our Fifth Column democrat socialist leaders have done a great job during the past 60 -70 years in convincing the people that we are a “democracy”, which is a vile form of government and friendly to socialist thinking allowing rights associated with property ownership to be overruled by majority vote.

Amazing how you can feign fear of democracy, calling it "vile", yet you claim fear of a "fifth column" which is an "oligarchy", and at the same time advocate an oligarchy over a democracy!

Originally Posted by johnwk

Tucker Carlson should know better.

You have demonstrated an animosity to Tucker Carlson along with most others on Fox News. Yet you never criticize CNN, MSNBC, and the rest of the media.

Originally Posted by johnwk

Under our “Republican Form of Government” the people do not vote on legislation as is done in a democracy.

There are basically five major forms of government: Study.com:
monarchy, democracy, oligarchy, authoritarianism, and totalitarianism.
You condemn democracy! WHICH OF THESE OTHER FORMS DO YOU WANT US TO BE: monarchy, oligarchy, authoritarianism, or totalitarianism?

To quote you: "words matter"! And you are applying your own definitions to the words of others to allege that they are saying what they are not saying, so you can condemn them!

Originally Posted by johnwk

and why democracy is often referred to mob rule government.

So that is your "out"? If someone defines it as "mob rule", that justifies you claiming that is the definition of "democracy"? It isn't!

Originally Posted by jtdc

John, you continue to demonstrate your ignorance! From your quote: "sovereign power is lodged in representatives elected by the people. In modern usage, it differs from a democracy or democratic state, in which the people exercise the powers of sovereignty in person." DO YOU SEE THOSE LAST SIX WORDS? "the powers of sovereignty in person"! That means the people still have the power, but they delegate the use of it to representatives.

The truth is, you have once again displayed your lack of reading comprehension skills.

As confirmed by the quote you refer to, in a democracy, as distinguished from a “Republic”, the people exercise the powers of sovereignty in person. The people of the united States do not vote on the adoption of legislation. We are not a democracy.

JWK

Originally Posted by jtdc

You have demonstrated an animosity to Tucker Carlson along with most others on Fox News. Yet you never criticize CNN, MSNBC, and the rest of the media.

Another lie! While I question Carlson's words, I have not demonstrated an animosity towards him.

Additionally, and with regard to your assertion I never criticize CNN or MSNBC, see, The new face of the Democrat Party, an open border socialist, Ocasio-Cortez :

I see Rep. Joe Crowley, a ten term democrat member of Congress, has lost to an unknown, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who is an open border socialist extremist, who wants to close down ICE and abolish immigration and customs enforcement laws, guarantee everyone a federal job, provide Medicare to everyone, and give everyone a free college education. She should be a big hit at our Fifth Column media outlets such as MSNBC, CNN, etc.



Also see:

Our Fifth Column’s move to shut down ICE [Immigration and Customs Enforcement]

When was the last time someone at MSNBC reported on the destructive nature to our public schools which are overrun with the children of illegal entrants? When was the last time Rachel Maddow reported on the bankruptcy of countless emergency rooms because of illegal entrants demanding care, or reported on MS-13 gang members who murder and rape the children of American citizens, extort local business owner’s and turn our neighborhoods into war zones? In fact, Rachel Maddow prefers to attack President Trump for daring to report on the criminal activity of this band of animals.

JWK

Without a Fifth Column Media, Yellow Journalism, Hollywood, and a corrupted FBI, Loretta Lynch, Hillary Clinton and Barack Hussein Obama, would be making license tags in a federal penitentiary

Originally Posted by johnwk

As confirmed by the quote you refer to, in a democracy, as distinguished from a “Republic”, the people exercise the powers of sovereignty in person.

Desperate stupidity!

Wikipedia - Republic
A republic (Latin: res publica) is a form of government in which the country is considered a "public matter", not the private concern or property of the rulers. The primary positions of power within a republic are not inherited. It is a form of government under which the head of state is not a monarch.

As of 2017, 159 of the world's 206 sovereign states use the word "republic" as part of their official names – not all of these are republics in the sense of having elected governments, nor is the word "republic" used in the names of all nations with elected governments.

[Emphasis added]
Or as Google Search presents:

Google - republic
re·pub·lic
rəˈpəblik/
noun
noun: republic; plural noun: republics

a state in which supreme power is held by the people and their elected representatives, and which has an elected or nominated president rather than a monarch.
archaic
a group with a certain equality between its members.

[Emphasis added]
You seem to conflate "republic" with "representative". They do not mean the same thing.

Originally Posted by johnwk

The people of the united States do not vote on the adoption of legislation. We are not a democracy.

SAY WHAT?
Again, words from a Google search:

Google - democracy
de·moc·ra·cy
dəˈmäkrəsē/
noun
noun: democracy

a system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives.
"capitalism and democracy are ascendant in the third world"
synonyms: representative government, elective government; More
self-government, government by the people;
republic, commonwealth
"freedom of speech is essential to democracy"
antonyms: dictatorship
a state governed by a democracy.
plural noun: democracies
"a multiparty democracy"
control of an organization or group by the majority of its members.
"the intended extension of industrial democracy"
the practice or principles of social equality.
"demands for greater democracy"

Origin
late 16th century: from French démocratie, via late Latin from Greek dēmokratia, from dēmos ‘the people’ + -kratia ‘power, rule.’
Translate democracy to
Use over time for: democracy

[Emphasis added]

AND YOU ACCUSE ME OF LACK OF COMPREHENSION!

Originally Posted by johnwk

Additionally, and with regard to your assertion I never criticize CNN or MSNBC, see, The new face of the Democrat Party, an open border socialist, Ocasio-Cortez :

Uh, that's about Ocasio-cortez, not the cablecasters. This thread is specifically about Tucker Carlson!

Originally Posted by johnwk

Also see:

Our Fifth Column’s move to shut down ICE [Immigration and Customs Enforcement]

Again, not a specific complaint, but a general complaint that they didn't hammer on this.

No sale!