I think this Joseph Farah column lends evidence to a possible globalist agenda at Fox News:
As almost everyone who reads this column regularly know, I do not support Ron Paul's bid for the presidency.
My strong preference is for another admittedly long-shot candidate, Rep. Duncan Hunter.
I have even offered up my share of unflattering commentary directed toward Ron Paul.
But, from my perspective as a newsman of 30 years, one thing is certain – Ron Paul has more than earned the right to participate in the Jan. 6 presidential debate sponsored by Fox News Channel.
Yet, he is being barred, censored, silenced, eliminated, squelched, muted, suppressed, stifled.
It's outrageous. It's unconscionable. It's unfair. It's unbalanced.
…
It seems clear Fox News Channel is eliminating Ron Paul's voice from the debate for reasons other than polls or financial viability – neither of which am I certain would be good reasons at this stage of the campaign.
So what are those reasons?
Fox claims it is making the decision based on national polls, not local polls.
What's wrong with this logic?
That's not the way our nation makes decisions about which candidates are selected to head their parties' tickets.
It's somewhat ironic that Fox would use national criteria to determine who would get to participate in the debate before the New Hampshire primary.
In New Hampshire, Paul is outpolling at least one of the candidates invited to debate.
But, again, polls don't mean squat. Why are any candidates being eliminated before the first primary of the election year campaign?
This is a very bad decision for a cable news channel whose slogan is "fair and balanced."
