Fox News Doesn’t Want You To Vote For Ron Paul

“The last chance for voters to see the candidates, all together.” — That’s how John Gibson is advertising the Fox News GOP debate tonight, and it’s a red-faced lie.  These are not “the candidates, all together,” these are the pro-war candidates that Fox News has decided New Hampshirites should vote for: McCain, Thompson, Romney, Huckabee, and Giuliani. But no Ron Paul, even though Paul massively out-polls Fred Thompson — in fact, in the latest RealClearPolitics poll average, Paul gets almost four times more support than Thompson, 8 percent for Paul to a pitiful 2.4 percent for Thompson. So why does Thompson make the cut if Paul doesn’t?

“It’s the one event voters need to make up their minds,” Gibson says.  “We Report, You Decide”? Rupert Murdoch and John Gibson have already decided for you. Kudos to the New Hampshire Republican Party for withdrawing its sponsorship from this phony event.


3 thoughts on “Fox News Doesn’t Want You To Vote For Ron Paul

  1. Scott Lahti January 7, 2008 / 3:01 am

    Sully and many another are all over this one from like scorn. But the battle has already been won, and the Limbaugh/FNC &c. right knows it and can scarcely hide its desperation and confusion, as caught on camera this past week to sidesplitting effect. FNC’s flagships are down about 20% from their year-on-year peaks. Romney outspent Huckabee in Iowa by sidereal margins – to naught. Limbaugh’s reduced to berating his own wayward base over the Huckaboom in Iowa and in polls elsewhere. The temptation to see Fox & Fairweather Friends as a Soviet Bloc, implacable and monolithic is understandable, but 2008 is “our” 1989, whoever is nominated and elected, given the *faits accomplis* so far and in the offing: The “Something in the Air” (Thunderclap Newman), the Fire this Time (Baldwin), are palpably “More than a Feeling” (Boston) – they’re showing up the established power brokers in the GOP for the cardhouse-dwellers they’ve been all along – one huffanpuff, and There Blows tha ‘Hood.
    And the prospect of an Obama opponent come November – assuming Dem primary voters grasp their party’s self-interest just a “tipping point” away – will deprive the psychotic Hillary-haters of their sole remaining ammo dump. Meanwhile, those attempting the racial or madrassa cards against Obama will be shown up as Yosemite Sams’ Club members, blackening their own faces instanter as Americans’ renascent decency grabs hold of their gun barrels and bends them back in their own faces.

    That’s my Tory, and I’m ticking to it.

  2. Scott Lahti January 7, 2008 / 4:09 am

    You want a good chuckle in a “plus ça change” vein, see the 1968 open letter in The New York Review of Books, “The People’s Choice”, protesting the stiffing of Gene McCarthy and RFK by the LBJ machine:

    To the Editors:

    We, citizens of the United States, representing as the primaries so clearly show, a popular majority of Democrats, opposed to the policies of the present Administration, call upon our fellow citizens, to join with us in active support against the cynical disregard of the electorate’s expressed wishes by the political bosses who are attempting to utilize the delegates to perpetuate themselves and their bosses. As a consequence we are faced, in November, with the alarming possibility of a choice between presidential candidates which is no choice, but a conspiracy in which the delegates have been played as so many pawns.

    It is evident that a candidate need no longer be concerned with the will of the people, as expressed in the primaries. Why are primaries held at all if it is irrelevant how people vote and delegates are at the disposal of the bosses?

    Eugene McCarthy is and Robert Kennedy was wholeheartedly opposed to the Administration and its machine. Their television debate just before Kennedy’s assassination showed them to be in substantial agreement on all major issues. Their concern has been a new national and world order. Who authorized the delegates committed to Kennedy to shift to his opponent, Mr. Humphrey? The President has offered Mr. Humphrey a ride on the Democratic Party machine, but Mr. Johnson is still driving.

    If Mr. Humphrey were the man he pretends to be he would listen to the voice of the people, withdraw from the race and work for the man for whom the people have clearly stated their preference, Eugene McCarthy….

    The control of the delegates by the bosses makes a mockery of democracy, and constitutes a betrayal of the people. The split in the nation is large enough to justify granting the people a genuine choice between the two opposite camps, between the old and outworn establishment determined to continue in the old ways, and the new and healthier forces which seek to remedy the errors of the past and fulfill the promise of the future.

    We demand an open Convention and a meaningful choice.

    Erich Fromm

    Erich Kahler

    Dwight Macdonald

    Herbert Marcuse

    Ashley Montagu

    Lewis Mumford

    George Ward

    James Watson

  3. Daniel McCarthy January 7, 2008 / 6:36 am

    Thanks, Scott. I remember seeing that letter once before when I was combing the NYROB archives for Dwight Macdonald stuff. Plus ça change indeed…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s