Fox News host Tucker Carlson has some ‘splaining to do about how he allowed a review of CNN’s newly refurbished Crossfire – which Carlson formerly co-hosted - to devolve into a vulgar, sexist rant about co-host Stephanie Cutter. (H/T Aria)
From the review:
A loathsome creature like Stephanie Cutter, the roots jutting out from her blonde dye job as black as the recesses of her soul, can push her way onto national television to sit next to a former Speaker of the House and two sitting U.S. senators. A charmless, dead-eyed, tacky sociopath with no sense of ethics, an empty shell spewing her flat-throated bile without the slightest trace of self-awareness, can beat all of us to the front of the Darwinian line.
A figure of hatred and dishonesty, a person devoid of any pleasantness or redeeming human value, a treadmill-stomping, Starbucks-chugging monument to modern self-absorption, someone incapable of appreciating good art, fine food, or the love or kidness of her fellow man, can shove and kick and lie her way ahead of the rest of us in this misbegotten society. This unmitigated monster can appear before us, talentless, grating, fraudulently tanned, thrusting in our faces the career trophies she earned simply because we didn’t care enough to stop her from getting them.
Trust me, the rest of it is just as hideous.
It’s perfectly fair for someone to hate or pan Stephanie Cutter but how about citing some professional reasons? Because this screed is not just mean-spirited and misogynistic, it’s adolescent and amateurish.
And yet, Editor-in-Chief Carlson still has it on his site’s front page 24 hours after it was originally posted.
But, most importantly, you are clearly missing the point of Ellen’s post, N Luaces (yeah, reading comprehension is a good thing – perhaps you should give it a try). The author of the screed that Tucker allowed to be posted on his website didn’t just stop at saying that Cutter was rude, abrasive or unprofessional. He went well beyond giving a professional critique of Cutter’s performance on the show – he turned it into a personal attack that included completely unnecessary, sexist remarks.
You and Tucker’s analyst can certainly dislike the way Cutter handled herself (as Ellen clearly noted in her above remarks). And, obviously, the analyst who wrote that review hates Cutter on many levels. However, if you think Tucker hit the nail on the head by allowing a review with such a misogynistic tone to be posted on his website, well, all I can say is that I agee with you on one thing – that females can do much better than that…they need to call out bullsh!t sexism and demand more professionalism from the so-called analysts.
With all my love,
If you want to see some fur fly, send Tucky’s review to @newtgingrich. Let’s see what the Newt has to say about little old Tucky.
Tucky cherry picks and selects his victims. He will not go after certain individuals because they will fight back.
NOTE TO TUCKY
Still sore about Roger, eh Tucky? You’re a chip of the old block. Daddy Dick is proud.
I thought Ms Cutter was working for CNN, not FoxNoise.
I wonder how the bleached-blonde
Tucker shows an undue amount of venom towards shows that hold his former slot in the first place, for no other discernable reason than bitterness about leaving both CNN and MSNBC at dead last in the ratings. Note that I said “discernable,” it may be deeper than that, but he ain’t showing it if it is. But he gets worse when a woman or a minority host holds it.
So this could be as simple as that there’s a woman sitting in his chair. And don’t tell me he doesn’t still think it’s his chair- He still acts like his not being renewed was some kind of major slight against him, as opposed to, you know- being dead last and still dropping.
BTW, if ratings are any indication, he’s not being well-received on Fox & Friends weekend, either. Apparently, his most memorable moment is falling asleep on the air.