Lindsay Graham or Tucker Carlson? It’s okay to not like either
By Easton Martin | March 31, 2026
The modern conservative political landscape is beginning to demand a total commitment to one of two warring factions. This forced binary is suggesting that a person must either adopt the narrative of blaming Jews for everything or “Israel first” without reservation.
Such a dynamic ignores the reality that there is a significant space in the middle for those who see the gap between the two distinctions. It is entirely possible to criticize the actions of both the Tucker Carlson types and the Lindsey Graham types. We can reject the extremist rhetoric of the former while also recognizing the opportunistic behavior of the latter.
Senator Lindsey Graham has frequently made a fool of himself through his public maneuvers. He consistently attempts to weasel his way into the ear of the President to advance his own specific agenda. This kind of behavior reveals a politician who is more concerned with proximity to power than with consistent principle. His reputation for shifting his stances to match President Trump is well documented. His actions are a transparent attempt to maintain relevance through personal flattery and constant access.
At the same time, we should address the claims made by Tucker Carlson regarding the nature of faith and politics. Carlson has recently argued that Christian Zionism represents the single biggest threat to Christianity in the United States today. He has even gone so far as to label the movement a form of heresy. One can certainly disagree with the tenets of Christian Zionism without accepting such an extreme and historically inaccurate label. The term heresy has a very specific and meaningful definition within the history of the church.
Historically, the label of heresy was reserved for doctrines that directly contradicted the foundational creeds of the Christian faith. These theological disputes typically concerned the nature of the Trinity or the divinity of Jesus Christ. Examples like Arianism or Gnosticism involved a fundamental rejection of the core identity of the faith as established in the early ecumenical councils. Christian Zionism is largely an eschatological framework or a political viewpoint regarding the modern state of Israel. It does not alter the underlying dogmas of the Christian creed in the way that true historical heresies did. Calling it a heresy is a rhetorical exaggeration that ignores centuries of established theological tradition.
The goal of these observations is to point out that we are allowed to call out both sides for their foolish statements. No one should feel forced to paint themselves into the narrow corners of the current cultural war. So many voices want you to believe that you must choose between being a “shifty Zionist rat” or “the boy who cried Jew”. These people want you to buy into their rigid and divisive narratives to serve their own ends. A middle space exists where a person can remain critical of all players without being captured by a single faction. Should one have an opinion on these current issues? Absolutely. But pay no mind to those who demand you think a certain way, and those whose entire worldview is a conspiracy theory.
