Posted on 06/24/2010 2:05:15 PM PDT by patriotgal1787
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kz-nVW3Zitk&feature=player_embedded]
Tonight on The ANDREA SHEA KING Show at 9p ET we'll be talking about it. It? Yep. Take a look... William Gheen of ALIPAC will join us at the top of the hour. Don't be late.
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/askshow/2010/06/25/the-andrea-shea-king-show
Fox News Owner Rupert Murdoch Pushes for Amnesty for Illegal Aliens by William Gheen President of Americans for Legal Immigration PAC ALIPAC www.alipac.us
June 24, 2010
A big question has been answered for those of us wondering why very few of the leaders of organizations fighting against illegal immigration are on Fox News anymore.
The last time I was on FOX was on Sunday morning at 8am. Before that, a little over a year ago I criticized John McCain's support for Amnesty and pointed out that the man countering my statements in support of immigration enforcement, Francisco Hernandez, was the brother of the open borders amnesty zealot Juan Hernandez who was serving as McCain's Hispanic Outreach Coordinator on McCain's Presidential campaign. I was only invited back once after that and the weekend staff that invited me probably got grilled out for having me on.
Nope, you will rarely if ever see me, Roy Beck of NumbersUSA, Dan Stein of FAIR, or any of the significant immigration enforcement and border security groups on Fox anymore.
You do see Carl Rove, Mike Huckabee, and US Senators Lindsey Graham and John McCain on Fox all the time and each of them supports Comprehensive Immigration Reform Amnesty for illegal immigrants that would turn illegal aliens into voters and thus destroy any peaceful political hope for future border or immigration enforcement in America.
So why have the Amnesty sellouts been given free reign at FOX NEWS with almost no significant representation for the organization leaders and elected officials that represent the 80% of Americans who want immigration and border enforcement instead of Amnesty?
It appears we have our answer as the Associated Press is reporting today (June 24, 2010) in their article titled 'NYC mayor, major CEOs lobby for immigration reform' that FOX NEWS and News Corp owner Rupert Murdoch has appeared with the billionaire liberal mayor of New York, Michael Bloomberg, to ask lawmakers in Washington to pass Amnesty.
Article NYC mayor, major CEOs (Fox News) lobby for immigration reform Amnesty
What does the Aussie care about the American Way anyhow?
I remember Murdoch saying he supported Hillary for president.
So while he has positioned Fox as a slightly less left alternative to CNN, and he couldn’t possibly be as far left as the Obamanoids, he is not as conservative as his audience.
So I guess its amazing that he lets Beck get away with what he gets away with, but its not surprising if he imposes certain blind spots. Like, soft-pedaling on immigration, or a solid disinterest in Obama’s non-existent personal history.
Fox News is to the Right of CNN but they are still leftist run. In 2004, the Newscorp executives openly endorsed John Kerry for president.
Almost all the elites are pro-amnesty, it puts tons of money in their pockets. Just watch one episode of Shep Smith if you think Fox News is conservative.
Enough with the conspiracy crap and be grateful Murdock believed FOX was a good business move.
To me this is indicative of the biggest problem we have in this country—people who take positions based on their own self-interest, rather than considering what’s best for our society as a whole (which often does run counter to one’s individual self-interests).
I find I often have to set aside my self-interests when I vote, mostly because I work for the government. So voting for bonds that are on the ballot (I live in California) would be in my best interest because it would mean money for my department. But I have never voted for a bond measure and I never plan to.
This year’s November ballot will have an initiative that would lead to greatly increased, permanent funding for the Department in which I work. It would probably mean a big promotion for me because my Department will be able to justify hiring more people and therefore will promote those of us in management to higher paying classifications. But on principle I’m strongly opposed to the measure and will vote against it. No, that’s not the best thing for me personally, but I do think it’s what’s best for my state.
So there you go—Murdoch only thinks of his self-interests, not of what’s best for our country. Not surprising, but definitely disappointing.
Absolutely NO surprise here. After he dumped his long-suffering wife and wed a woman from China, his opinions have either shifted toward the “one world” or as Bush senior referred to it after the fall of the Berlin wall in ‘89, as “One World Government.”
He is smart enough to realize that if he caters to 40% of the market while everyone else is fight over 20% of the market he can win the ratings war even if his channel presents crap like the Great, Great, Great American Panel, Smart Blonde/Dumb Blonde, the “body language lady,” etc.
If he thought he could make more money running the Gay Pron Channel,” he'd be on the phone with Perez Hilton.
His name is Rupert Murdoch, not Murdock. He is not a Republican, he supported Hillary Clinton for Senate and President. His current wife is a Chinese Communist. It is true that he has given Roger Ailes a free hand at FNC.
Probably.
Murdock is a Republican and a businessman.
He made a smart move positioning Fox to the right of the others. It means he gets half the audience right off the bat while the others divide their half a dozen ways.
He has never claimed to be a conservative
Maybe, but he's got to be more conservative than the guys running MSNBC and the rest. Still, as I say, he did claim to be a Hillary supporter. That may have been for business reasons, to offset the claims that Fox is blindly conservative, but it may have been sincere too.
but he gave Roger Ailes complete carte blanche to run FOX News the way he wanted
Thank God for that. I am appreciative of that.
and he exerts NO influence at the network. Ailes wouldn't stand for it.
I find that hard to believe. "No" influence would be hard to prove.
Enough with the conspiracy crap
All I said was, I notice there are certain subjects that seem to be soft-pedaled...
and be grateful Murdock believed FOX was a good business move.
And I am. But back to your original point, no, I don't know anything more than what I piece together reading what I see in the press. Its an impression. I appreciate Fox because I can remember the decades when there was no Fox.
Off topic but does anyone know why JANE SKINNER is leaving FOX NEWS?
I was hoping for the internet to bring just such a thing to us now that streaming is going to be the dominant mode.
Fox was a breath of fresh air. It showed just how distorted the news was from the MSM broadcasters.
But even they aren't anywhere near what could be.
It's disgusting to see a guy like Murdoch talking about "our" immigration policy, as if his citizenship was anything but a facade. He needs the ticket so he can operate in the big market, nothing more. Nothing "American" about the guy.
A real alternative will be an instant hit.
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.