I just came across this comment about Grover Norquist that Carlson made in 1997, and thought it was interesting.
Of course there are still apologists on the Right who pose as journalists. You point to Grover Norquist as one of them. You're right, Norquist is a mean-spirited, humorless, dishonest little creep. But in my experience, there aren't many Grovers in positions of prominence on the Right, and virtually none in conservative journalism. Which is why I wrote a piece about him in the first place, because he's an embarrassing anomaly, the leering, drunken uncle everyone else wishes would stay home. Norquist is repulsive, granted, but there aren't nearly enough of him to start a purge trial. Yet you write as if the Norquists of the world controlled the right-wing press from above, and as if only a courageous few conservative journalists--yourself, needless to say, prominently included--dared contradict them. Do you really believe this?
I had no idea that Norquist even pretended to be a journalist, but I like what Carlson said about him. I wonder if Tucker still thinks that "Grovers" are rare?
http://www.slate.com/id/3654/entry/23930