Fox News Crowns Giuliani as GOP King

AIM.org ^ | April 30, 2007 | By Cliff Kincaid

[Kevin J waldroup]

The popularity of presidential candidates in opinion polls at this stage of the campaign is almost completely a function of name-recognition or how much media coverage they have already received or purchased from the liberal media. Yet that is one of the unfair criteria that Fox News will use to select the Republican presidential candidates for a May 15 debate in South Carolina. The arrangement could prevent a true conservative from emerging as a "serious candidate" in the GOP. It may also be designed to help frontrunner Rudy Giuliani, labeled a fake conservative by Terence P. Jeffrey of Human Events, get a virtual lock on the Republican presidential nomination.

[The_Victor]

After Hillary’s pro WoT stance in the democRAT debate, I can’t find a thimble-full of difference between her and Rudy.

[finnman69]

"Four candidates--Hunter, Tancredo, Paul, and Brownback--are at one percent in the latest NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll."

All you need to know.

[Sola Veritas]

Rudy the Rumpranger is a front runner IF:

(1) You like killing babies
(2) You want to disarm the law abiding and hate the 2nd Ammendment
(3) You’re a homophile
(4) You’re easily mislead by his “strong defense” rhetoric

[madison10]

They can just throw his crown in the trash...’cause it ain’t gonna happen.

[veronica]

I am 100% behind limiting debates to candidates who have proven they have a chance to win. The others have not earned the right to participate.

[HoustonTech]

"One might think that the early Republican presidential debates would be designed to let Republican voters see and hear all of the registered and declared candidates. A May 3 debate, sponsored by MSNBC, the Reagan Library and Politico.com, will include 10 Republicans: Sam Brownback, Jim Gilmore, Rudy Giuliani, Mike Huckabee, Duncan Hunter, John McCain, Ron Paul, Mitt Romney, Tom Tancredo and Tommy Thompson.

"But the Fox News-sponsored debate on May 15 could exclude several of these candidates, on the grounds that because they don't register high enough in the polls they are not 'serious' candidates. Such a process is blatantly unfair, this early in the campaign, to those who have not benefited from favorable media attention and big business support. Some of the candidates are clearly counting on the debates to raise their standing in the polls and win Republican voters. But Fox News wants to deny them that opportunity to reach voters."

In fact the ten on ten debate favors Giuliani more than a more limited debate, because the larger debate dilutes the message of the conservatives. No one would really get the time to discuss ideas, and this favors the guy with bad ideas.

I won't be much interested in the debates until a good number of the unlikely nominees drop out.

[Dead Corpse]

"...crowns Guiliani as King..."

Over my dead corpse....

[EDINVA]

One difference would be SCOTUS. He likes Scalia/Roberts/Alito/Thomas; she likes Ginsburg. If elected, each would appoint justices similar to those s/he admires. Take your pick.

[Dead Corpse]

Yeah... nothing like pushing your candidate ahead by preempting the masses from seeing the alternatives.

I say let who ever wants to participate in the debates, let them. Even if it means having 20 GOPers on stage, a point scoring system, and elimination rounds.

[claudiustg]

He’s not even a “fake conservative”.

[SE Mom]

This is completely WRONG.

To exclude some of the lesser knowns this EARLY in the process is ridiculous. Though I laughed through most of the Dem debate last week- at least they had all their guys up there.

Will they just have McCain, Romney and Guiliani up there? Nonsense. Hunter is terrific and has important things to say. The others are at least deserving of being seen and heard by the public.

This is a total crock.

Email Brit:

Special@foxnews.com

[veronica]

Some of the lesser candidates have been running for a while yet they are stuck in the basement. They have been eliminated by virtue of the fact that they have not succeeded in defining themselves as serious players. That’s life.

[napscoordinator]

Where is the barf alert????

[apocalypto]

Why would anyone consider Giuliani a conservative? He is not the person I would want to be in charge of national security. While mayor, didn’t he support mainly Democrats for judges, and some far out types at that?

[Dead Corpse]

Er... no. That's media bias. One you seem to approve of. The debates are one way to counteract this effect.

What other forms of political censorship do you approve of?

[freespirited]

The following does not sound like Hillary to me. Rudy also fought use of tax dollars for obscene art and supports the right of teachers to put up the Ten Commandments in the classroom. I doubt Hillary would be with him on either issue.

Despite widespread misinformation about how “liberal” Giuliani is, this group’s 180-degree reversal shows what can happen when conservatives actually scrutinize Giuliani’s entire performance. Giuliani chopped overall crime 57 percent, slashed homicide 65 percent, graduated 649,895 New Yorkers (58.4 percent of relief recipients) from welfare to work, curbed or abolished 23 taxes, sliced the tax burden by $8 billion or 18.9 percent of personal income, halted racial and gender quotas in contracting, delivered 25,637 children from foster care to adoption, privatized some 23,000 apartments from bureaucratic control to individual and family ownership, and financed charter schools while fighting for vouchers.

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YzE2MTQ5ZWM0ODI5NGJjOGNlOTc4MDkyYzk4MWZmZDg=

[The_Victor]

He likes Scalia/Roberts/Alito/Thomas

I'm not convinced that this is the case. I fully expect a President Giuliani to nominate more Kennedy/O'Conner/Souter/Breyer "moderates." That's just my perception, though.

[veronica]

There has to be a cut-off point. Just as when you and I apply for a job and we have to demonstrate we have all the “right stuff” for the position, a potential President has to show he can attract a minimum number of people to his POV. Some people run for POTUS to gain recognition, to become kingmakers, to fill their coffers or for pure vanity. These pretenders should not be rewarded with face time on TV. They dilute the messages being sent by the real contenders.

[zerosix]

Interesting, Rudy has NEVER said what he thinks about Clarence Thomas. I have heard him tout the names of Robert, etc. yet specifically omit the name of Clarence Thomas.

What is one to make of that -- come on you Rudy cheerleaders, what does your guy have against Thomas?