When Fox News hosts its Republican candidates forum Sunday night, one of the leading candidates won't be invited.
The Fox debate is excluding Texas Congressman Ron Paul, even though he polls higher in New Hampshire, has raised significantly more money, and is campaigning more in New Hampshire than Fred Thompson -- who is invited.
The censorship of Paul has infuriated his loyal supporters, who note that he pulled 10 percent of the vote in Iowa, well ahead of Rudy Giuliani, who pulled just over 3 percent. Giuliani has also been invited to the Fox forum.
Paul is also setting records in GOP fundraising, raking in $20 million in the last quarter alone.
New Hampshire Republicans are apparently not happy with Fox's arbitrary decision to exclude Paul.
I'm not happy with it either, and I have no intention of voting for Ron Paul (although I agree with him on a lot more issues than some of the other candidates). But whether anyone agrees with him or not, the point is, he has as much right to be there as any other candidate. It's part of the process.
Who in the hell does Fox News think they are, anyway? CNN of the right? No, really; I didn't like CNN's sleazy tactics (attempting to pass off activists as randomly selected ordinary voters) and I don't like this.
Apparently, Fox just doesn't like Paul -- and the feeling seems mutual:
...."Fight Fox," a new Web site organized by Paul backers, tells readers: "We need to send a message to Fox's Rupert Murdoch & his fellow Neocon buddies that he is not Musharraf and the US is not Pakistan, yet! Fox News cannot just stifle public opinion. debate and impact a primary election by excluding Ron Paul just because they don't like his message of freedom and liberty."
Paul seems to share that view. According to a report in the Boston Globe, he called Fox News a "propagandist" for the Iraq war.
Despite the hoopla, Fox is sticking to its guns: no Ron Paul.
"We look forward to presenting a substantive forum which will serve as the first program of its kind this election season," David Rhodes, vice president of Fox News, said in a statement.
The irony is that Fox's move will probably help Ron Paul more than it will hurt him. His supporters certainly aren't going to bolt because of this. They'll just scream bloody murder, and they'll be quite right in doing so.
I can't think of a better way to generate a backlash in Paul's favor, and a noisy one at that.
You'd almost think Fox was deliberately creating rancor.
MORE: I watched the debate and I didn't find Fox's statement (that the debate only included the "viable" candidates) persuasive as a reason for excluding Ron Paul. The debate clearly favored Romney.
posted by Eric on 01.06.08 at 04:58 PM
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://classicalvalues.com/cgi-bin/pings.cgi/6010
Comments
Eric, the GOP hierarchy detests Ron Paul, almost as much as Mike Huckabee. FOX Noise is desperately trying to figure out a way to bounce Huckabee from the debates as well.
I'd love it if Mike Bloomberg and Ron Paul ran together on a third party ticket. I wouldn't voter for them of course, but the sensible wing of the Republican party would, IMO.
YogiBarrister · January 6, 2008 05:15 PM
There's no one I disagree with more than Alan Keyes, but I even supported his right to be in the debates.
Allowing Ron Paul into these "debates" is on the same level as allowing Lyndon LaRouche would have been, back in the days when he was running as a Democrat.
Both have exactly zero probability of getting "their" parties' nominations. Neither has anything to contribute to the dialogue. They are basically amusing (or not-so-amusing)distractions from the task at hand, which is to hear what actual candidates who have a non-zero probability of getting the nod have to say.
David Hecht · January 6, 2008 06:07 PM
David, Ron Paul is running neck and neck with Giuliani in New Hampshire, and he is mopping the floor with Fred Thompson. He is also the only candidate that has been honest about the disastrous consequences of the Bush administration. The GOP is driving away the sensible wing of their party. A Bloomberg/Paul ticket would likely garner as many votes as the Republican candidate come this fall.
YogiBarrister · January 6, 2008 06:23 PM
Calling Dr. Moe, Dr. Larry, Dr. Paul.
dre · January 6, 2008 07:17 PM
Excuse me. What in the hell does the Republican party have against its libertarian wing?
You know the - leave us alone - wing?
The lower spending wing?
The "government must stop running the economy" wing?
Might I say the Reagan wing? You know -
"government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem."
BTW would some one please tell me why the US went to war without a declaration of war against the jihadis in 1803 and 1815?
That is the one place I think Dr. Paul has forgotten his history.
I wouldn't say that Dr. Paul is mopping the floor with Fred.
Dr. P. will do better in NH (probably). He may do better in Michigan. Then comes South Carolina where Mr. Fred is currently mopping the floor with Dr. P.
In any case I think keeping Dr. P. out of the FOX debates is so totally screwed. Americans need to be exposed to Dr. P's ideas. The good, the bad, and the ugly.
I think Fred represents a lot of those ideas without the "Nazi support" baggage Dr. P has attracted. Given the relative war chests Fred has done an amazing job so far.
M. Simon, the NH polls today show Paul at 10%, Thompson at 1%, another has Paul at 8.1% and Thompson at 2.7%. Thompson has done absolutely nothing in his career that indicates he would be a good president. We simply can't afford to elect another lazy man to office. There is way too much hard work ahead of us for that.
YogiBarrister · January 6, 2008 10:14 PM
“When Fox News hosts its Republican candidates forum Sunday night, one of the leading candidates won't be invited.”
I am not sure how Ron Paul can be considered a leading candidate. H9is poll numbers are only slightly above Duncan Hunter’s and way out of the first and second tier. As one post note, he has no chance of winning the nomination, none what so ever. People know Ron Paul and his positions and his positions are not catching on with the party voters. That much is clear. As we see with Hillary and Romney, money is not everything.
rpkinmd · January 7, 2008 06:48 AM
Simon, Congress issued letters of Marque and reprisal as allowed for in Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution, on the dates you referenced. This Congress could do the same today as Ron Paul recommended back in 2001.
Jardinero1 · January 7, 2008 11:35 AM
Good, drive Ron Paul away, who by the way gets more money from the troops than any of the other Republican candidates. Let us hope that Michael Bloomberg and Ron Paul run as a third party, thus sparing America even the remotest possibility that any of the "top tier" Republican candidates become president.
The Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler
Don?t bang your head!
Eric, the GOP hierarchy detests Ron Paul, almost as much as Mike Huckabee. FOX Noise is desperately trying to figure out a way to bounce Huckabee from the debates as well.
I'd love it if Mike Bloomberg and Ron Paul ran together on a third party ticket. I wouldn't voter for them of course, but the sensible wing of the Republican party would, IMO.