Why I am not writing a blog about Tucker Carlson

By Matthew Hayward

As I sit down to write this blog post, I find myself in a peculiar situation. I've spent a considerable amount of time gathering information and following the headlines about the sudden departure of Tucker Carlson from Fox News. However, despite the immense coverage and intense interest in the story, I have decided not to write a blog about Tucker Carlson. Instead, I want to share my thoughts on why I am choosing not to focus on this particular topic and offer some personal reflections on the broader issue of trust in mainstream media.

First and foremost, the story about Tucker Carlson's departure from Fox News is already being covered extensively by numerous media outlets. The details of his ouster, the defamation lawsuit settlement, and the impact on Fox Corporation's market value are all over the news. As a blogger, I aim to provide a unique perspective and offer insights that aren't readily available elsewhere. In this case, I cannot add anything new or valuable to the conversation that hasn't already been said by countless journalists and commentators.

Secondly, while the story of Tucker Carlson's exit from Fox News is undoubtedly significant and has the potential to reshape the media landscape, other pressing issues deserve our attention. In a world where we are constantly bombarded with breaking news and shocking headlines, it's important to step back and reflect on what truly matters. I want my blog to be a platform for discussing meaningful topics that inspire change, promote understanding, and encourage critical thinking. Dedicating an entire blog post to Tucker Carlson's departure would not contribute to these goals.

Additionally, it's important to address the issue of trust in mainstream media and the pundits we follow. It's all too easy to become enamored with charismatic personalities like Tucker Carlson, Glen Beck, and others who have come before them. However, it's crucial to approach all mainstream media and pundits with a healthy dose of skepticism and to take their opinions with a grain of salt. There is no single great truth seeker out there. I might suggest a few names that come to mind; journalists like Ben Swann and Brandi Kruse have demonstrated a commitment to unbiased reporting and critical analysis.

Speaking of journalistic integrity and critical analysis, how many people remember judge interpolitano's last episode on Fox before he was suddenly fired?

Lastly, as a blogger, it's crucial to maintain a sense of authenticity and stay true to my values. While I recognize the importance of discussing current events and staying informed, I also want to ensure that my content aligns with my own interests and passions. Writing about Tucker Carlson's exit from Fox News simply does not resonate with me on a personal level, and I believe my readers will appreciate my honesty and dedication to producing genuine content.

With these thoughts in mind, I will continue to focus on creating content that is meaningful, thought-provoking, and aligned with my values. As a blogger, my priority is to offer my readers a unique perspective on the issues that matter most, and I believe this decision reflects that commitment.

Could Today Be the Cheapest Price for Bitcoin Ever Again? Here’s Why

By: Matthew Hayward Current price Nov 10, 2024 76.72K 80.43K Is Now the Time to Buy Bitcoin? Bitcoin has come a long way since its early days as a niche digital asset. Today, as we enter another phase in its established four-year cycle , Bitcoin may be at a historic high, but it could soon become the new baseline price. This cycle, which has repeatedly shown Bitcoin’s resilience and long-term growth potential, suggests that the current price might be the lowest we’ll see again. While recent political shifts, including Donald Trump’s landslide election victory, have added new momentum and support for Bitcoin, the timing within the cycle itself makes this an ideal moment to consider buying. A Political Shift: From Anti-Crypto to Pro-Crypto For years, Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies have faced an uphill battle against a U.S. government determined to restrict and control their growth. This opposition was largely led by Gary Gensler, who waged an outright war against crypto from hi...

When Government Demands Papers We Refuse

By Matthew Hayward 9/19/2025 The Supreme Court just paused a lower court order that had limited federal immigration stops in Los Angeles. That stay lets federal agents resume roving patrols and interior operations that critics say rely on appearance, language, job, or neighborhood to pick people for questioning. This matters because it normalizes a posture of suspicion. Checkpoints miles inland and roving patrols turn movement inside the country into a condition to be earned rather than a freedom to be enjoyed. The government already claims expanded authority inside the 100-mile border zone. That claim, plus an open green light for stops based on appearance, is a recipe for arbitrary enforcement. Philosophy of resistance John Locke told us that the consent of the governed is the foundation of legitimate power. When rulers invade life, liberty, or property, or when they become arbitrary disposers of people’s lives and fortunes, the social compact is dissolve...

The National Guard Was Never Meant to Be a Federal Tool

By Matthew Hayward 7/13/2025 Let me say this clearly: the National Guard was created to defend the states, not to enforce the will of the federal government. It was meant to serve as a local militia—an armed extension of the people under the control of the state. The highest authority a Guard member was ever supposed to answer to is their elected governor, not a bureaucrat in Washington, not a federal agency, and certainly not a sitting president weaponizing military force on domestic soil. Yes, I know the laws have changed. I know the Montgomery Amendment, the National Defense Act, and the Supreme Court's decision in Perpich v. DoD rewrote the rules. But legal doesn’t mean constitutional. Gradualism doesn’t legitimize usurpation. You don’t get to trample foundational principles and call it progress. What’s happening now—federalizing state forces to deploy them in cities without gubernatorial consent—is blasphemous. It's an insult to the very spirit of the Constitution. The ...

Search This Blog