YouTube
Friday, February 8, 2008

Third Party Watch
Sunday January 20, 2008

For some reason, Fox News continues to disregard the fact that Ron Paul is one of the GOP presidential candidates and he didn’t ignore Nevada like most of the presidential candidates.

I received the graphic above in my e-mail and don’t know to whom the credit is due. However, this screenshot was obviously taken of Fox News coverage of the Nevada results. For some reason, they failed to mention the #2 candidate, although they covered #1, #3 and #4.

Of course, most folks can easily figure out that Ron Paul was the candidate they “accidentally” forgot to cover.

Considering Paul’s exclusion from the New Hampshire debate, this incident, and a variety of snide remarks made by Fox commentators, it’s starting to look like Fox News has a political agenda. I wonder how this squares with campaign finance regulations, as corporations aren’t supposed to be making in-kind contributions to federal campaigns. I may disagree with the regulations, but it seems that John McCain shouldn’t be able to benefit like this from a regulation which bears his name.

UPDATE: It looks like Fox is continuing with the same general level of distortion regarding incoming South Carolina results. I’ve been watching the results come in at CNN and haven’t seen any point around the time this particular screen shot was taken when Giuliani was ahead of Paul.

Campaign chairman slams “outrageous” move

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet
Saturday, December 29, 2007

Texas Congressman Ron Paul has been banned from attending a presidential forum just two days before the New Hampshire Primary by Fox News.

The forum is due to be screened by Fox on January 6th 2008 but it won’t include the Republican fundraising frontrunner and a contender who is set to garner over 10% of the vote in New Hampshire.

This is another blatant ploy to sideline Ron Paul and pretend as if he isn’t going to play a crucial role in the campaign when even mainstream news media are now admitting that to be the case.

“Given Ron Paul’s support in New Hampshire and his recent historic fundraising success, it is outrageous that Dr. Paul would be excluded,” said Ron Paul 2008 campaign chairman Kent Snyder. “Dr. Paul has consistently polled higher in New Hampshire than some of the other candidates who have been invited.”

“Paul supporters should know that we are continuing to make inquiries with Fox News as to why they have apparently excluded Dr. Paul from this event,” he added.

The fact that Ron Paul broke all records by raising over $6 million dollars in one day this month matters little to the Neo-Con hierarchy at Fox News, who have thrown their weight behind Hillary Clinton’s warmongering platform.

The Texas Congressman’s fundraising haul gives him a real chance of picking up momentum quickly as the early primaries fly by, which is exactly what the establishment fear and are trying to derail.

Paul has been excluded from many major online polls in the last few months and was also initially blocked from attending a Republican presidential forum in Des Moines Iowa in June.

YouTube
Monday, October 22, 2007

Ron Paul talking with Hannity and Colmes after the GOP debate on Sunday night. Ron Paul won the Fox News debate poll with 34% of the vote, but of course Hannity tries to down play that fact once again.

Newshounds
Wednesday September 26, 2007

Just as predicted by The New Yorker’s George Packer, FOX News is assisting the Bush administration with a post-Labor Day PR campaign against Iran. The first half of Hannity & Colmes was devoted to it last night (9/25/07), complete with a preview of a FOX News special “Iran: The Ticking Bomb” to air on both Saturday and Sunday. And despite the fact that the public favors diplomacy as a solution, the network that claims “We like America” offered only hawkish guests hawking regime change. The only debate was over how to do it. With video.

In Part 1, John “I want war against Iran” Bolton was the sole analyst regarding Ahmadinejad’s speech to the United Nations. “Democratic strategist” Kirsten Powers, subbing for Alan Colmes, once again was more eager to brandish her conservative talking points (Columbia should not have allowed Ahmadinejad to speak, he’s a very dangerous man, etc.) than to offer any real debate or balance. The video is currently posted on the Hannity & Colmes website.

After Bolton, there was a preview of the upcoming special in which Hannity narrated a film about “what a strike against Iran would look like.” Surprisingly, even FOX News admitted that a strike against Iran’s nuclear facilities would not be the cakewalk Iraq was supposed to be. So in the following discussion, the debate was about the narrow question of bringing about regime change. Author Michael LeDeen, whom I caught lying about his views on the Iraq war just a few weeks ago, advocated military strikes on “terrorist training camps” in Iran and Syria, along with action (presumably covert) to foment unrest. FOX News military analyst Chuck Nash, whose affiliation with the regime-change-pushing Iran Policy Committee was undisclosed, advocated “empowering the Iranian opposition and causing an internal revolution.” He didn’t rule out military action; he just thought “regime change” was a better option.

Powers, a former inmate of the News Hounds dog house, repeatedly distanced herself from liberals, repeatedly agreed with the conservatives and Republicans on the show, and her only “advocacy” on behalf of Democrats was to question the practicality of strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities. Coincidentally, that stance was the same one both guests put forth. Hannity was on the edge of his seat, hoping for military action – with other people doing the fighting, of course.

Nash told Powers, “The (International Atomic Energy Agency) has admitted that about a year and a half ago they found traces of enriched uranium that they could not tag to known facilities. So we’re pretty much convinced that Iranians have facilities we do not know about.”

Maybe so. But that doesn’t mean the facilities are producing nuclear weapons. That point eluded Powers who either didn’t know or didn’t care that Mohamed ElBaradei, IAEA head, said a week ago, “I do not believe at this stage that we are facing a clear and present danger that requires we go beyond diplomacy.”

Diplomacy was never offered as an option by anyone on the “we report, you decide” network’s prime time debate show.