Judge Napolitano and Fox News
Posted by freedomforall 8 years, 1 month ago to Government
Excerpt:
On the 17th of this month, Judge Andrew Napolitano was dropped as an official commentator for Fox News. His show, Freedom Watch, had ended in 2012 after a run of three years. It wasn’t renewed, which in my opinion was because Rupert Murdoch and the head honchos of Fox News felt very uncomfortable with his staunch “libertarian conservative” views on today’s politics.
Judge Napolitano, from the beginning in 2009, was a thorn in the overall ideological make-up of Fox. This is because Fox does not stand for freedom and strictly limited government. They merely stand for a “conservative mega-state” instead of a “liberal mega-state.”
What’s worse, Fox endorses the neo-conservatives’ drive for world hegemony.
On the 17th of this month, Judge Andrew Napolitano was dropped as an official commentator for Fox News. His show, Freedom Watch, had ended in 2012 after a run of three years. It wasn’t renewed, which in my opinion was because Rupert Murdoch and the head honchos of Fox News felt very uncomfortable with his staunch “libertarian conservative” views on today’s politics.
Judge Napolitano, from the beginning in 2009, was a thorn in the overall ideological make-up of Fox. This is because Fox does not stand for freedom and strictly limited government. They merely stand for a “conservative mega-state” instead of a “liberal mega-state.”
What’s worse, Fox endorses the neo-conservatives’ drive for world hegemony.
on FOX. Good news for us!
The recent flap over his presence on FOX is because he publicly said that a journalist told him that Obama spying on the Trump campaign was done through the British GCHQ intelligence agency, which works closely with NSA. The British and FOX denied it in a big uproar -- but they all denied a lot of what GCHQ and NSA were proved to be doing.
I will say I get the best news from Fox over all the other MSM outlets but the Fox is in fact guarding the hen house.
We take it as a fact that major powers of the world won't engage in full-scale war. Through most of history, the thinking was major powers were bound eventually to end up in full-scale war. As WWII begins to fall out of living memory, we are complacent that no form of a "nuclear holocaust" could ever happen.
I'm optimistic that trade obviates the spoils of war. But we are not completely safe from large-scale war.
The article talks about globalism. I think globalism is a fact of life that started around the time of cheap air travel and the Internet. Imperialism, though, is a choice.
That's one site I'd support.