Roger Ailes on Megyn Kelly Report: ‘All of Our Stars Will be Back’

Fox News chairman and CEO Roger Ailes is being interviewed by Neil Cavuto at this hour in California at a 21st Century Fox investors conference.

The first question Cavuto asked was about the rumor, first reported on Drudge Report, that Megyn Kelly will me moving into the 9pmET timeslot this Fall. “Generally, I don’t confirm or deny any rumors, and that is a rumor at the moment,” said Ailes, adding “all of our stars will be back.”

As for Hannity, who currently hosts the 9pm hour, Ailes said, “Hannity is a brand that many of our viewers love and want to see, and, as you know, is one of the nicest guys in the building.”

Ailes did say he’s been having conversations with Shepard Smith about “a new way to deliver news.” This could mean a lot of things, including that Smith’s 7pm timeslot is up for grabs.

It’s easy for Megyn to be against the extreme things that Gosnell did. Many pro-choicers are, just to show that they love babies too. In addition, Megyn defends the Family Leave Act, which conservatives condemn as government red tape on business. She also says that children raised by homosexual couples and couples with working moms do just as well as couples with stay-at-home moms. Conservatives strongly disagree. See this link for more.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YZ5wNp67YcM.

Well, she’s just defending her own decision to be a working-away-from-home mom, isn’t she? Does she have a house husband, or a nanny? You see a lot of that with young mothers. They are still learning how the world works.

At least she’s half way there. Not far enough, but half way is better than no way. People evolve over time. I had a couple of friends who used to vociferously defend the pro-choice way until I stood up to them and defended pro-life. They shut up quick, and now both of them claim to be pro-life. Only God knows what is in their hearts.

I own a small business. The Family Leave Act does not affect me at all. I don’t have to pay them when they are on leave — just promise to offer them a job when they come back, if one is available. Sort of like soldiers going to war (and we have those too). My experience has been that most of them never come back. We adapt and make room for them if they do. The same for those who have cancer, hysteractomies, broken legs, etc.

The Family Leave Act is not the hill to die on for conservatism and small business.

Thanks for your response. To your first point — Megyn should be home with the three kids — babies want mom most, not just for breast-feeding but mom is who they call for when hurt or lonely. Megyn should have figured this out by now, but obviously considers her feminism most important.

Your small business seems to handle family leave quite well. Congratulations to you! But the Family Leave law is a malignant welfare state burden on larger business, one of the many red tape rules that reduce employment and prosperity. It is a Western European, cradle-to-grave socialist type law. Megyn surely knows this, but once again, her feminism is most important.

I just couldn’t resist seeing what you were up to Norse and imagine my shock to see you having a row with one of my best pals here

Over immigration...

Color me shocked I tell you

And danggit Norseman

Youre a 98er

Is nothing sacred anymore

Geez this is depressing

Interesting factoid about the 2.5 million granted amnesty before who were also given a greased path to citizenship along with that amnesty. (Again, legalization of residency, amnesty, and citizenship are three separate issues.)

60% of that 2.5 million never applied for U.S. citizenship, preferring to retain their citizenship in their country of origin, although they did remain here, and all of their children born here are now citizens.

One suggestion I’d have under a legalization bill would be to specify that any child born to a legal alien resident would not be granted automatic citizenship, but would take the citizenship of their mother. I don’t know if that requires a constitutional change though.

I think the GOP has an opportunity to turn things around here if handled properly. That’s because the Left is so determined to go for full citizenship that they won’t compromise. (I know, “compromise” is the nemesis here.)

That fact, and I think it will be proven a fact, makes it possible for the GOP to advocate a combination of solid border security along with legalization of residency with no path to citizenship for those who entered illegally unless they go to the back of a very long line. They might also be able to work in the change to citizen status of the children that I mentioned above, at least of those born after the law was passed.

This would probably find broad support among the illegal population who is here to work, although their “leaders” would rail against it from day one of course. But it would put the Dems in a position of denying legalization (which those here working want) because they couldn’t get citizenship (which after two decades, 60% of those who could get citizenship have decided they don’t want.)

I think, properly explained, and understood, this would put the GOP on the offensive on this issue. The end result would be that we know who’s here and why they’re here and would have the ability to set reasonable standards for entering the country legally, and for staying here a number of years.

As I’ve also said, Paul Ryan’s approach of taking up each of these issues separately is the best way to go, since it’s the only way to clearly separate the separate issues of border security, legalized residency, amnesty, and citizenship.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.