BREAKING: CBC Chooses CNN Over Fox
BREAKING: CBC Chooses CNN Over Fox
UPDATE: The CBC Institute is planning two debates, and one of them may still be with Fox, so keep the pressure on.
++++
Last week, the American Prospect reported that the Congressional Black Caucus Institute was close to nearing a deal to host two Democratic presidential primary debates in concert with Fox News:
[T]he Congressional Black Caucus Political Education and Leadership Institute plans to announce two debates in concert with Fox News, according to a source familiar with the negotiations, which have apparently been going on for weeks. …
“Both CNN and Fox have presented the Institute with two great proposals and at some point in the coming days we will be making an announcement,” she said Candice Tolliver, a consultant working with the CBC Institute on the debates, adding that the Institute’s plans are not final.
Black online activists — led by ColorOfChange.org — partnered with Robert Greenwald’s Fox Attacks to call on the CBC Institute to reject Fox as a partner for their presidential debates. A letter from Color Of Change to activists:
“Fox News is not a ‘fair and balanced’ source of information or political debate, and it has repeatedly proven itself hostile to the interests of Black Americans… Fox on-air personalities and regular guests consistently marginalize Black leaders, culture, and institutions.”
The efforts appear to have paid off. A new release from CNN says it “will partner with the Congressional Black Caucus Political Education and Leadership Institute (CBC Institute) to host a presidential debate among Democratic candidates.”
UPDATE: Markos:
Uh oh. Cue in another Fox News hissy fit. Except that the Fox crowd has already unloaded their heaviest artillery on us. We’ve already been called Stalinist and Nazies. What’s left? They should’ve paced themselves.
Read the full statement:
CNN Joins Congressional Black Caucus for Democratic Debate in South Carolina
CNN will partner with the Congressional Black Caucus Political Education and Leadership Institute (CBC Institute) to host a presidential debate among Democratic candidates in South Carolina on Jan. 24, 2008.
Anchor Wolf Blitzer will moderate the Democratic debate. CNN correspondent Joe Johns and White House correspondent Suzanne Malveaux will serve as panelists to question candidates participating in the debate.
“CNN is pleased to join with the CBC Institute in spotlighting this important primary race,” said Jon Klein, president of CNN/U.S. “This debate provides a meaningful addition to our comprehensive coverage of the 2008 presidential election, particularly as it gives us an opportunity to explore more closely a range of issues that will impact the pivotal African-American vote.”
“Our goal with the debate is to provide a platform that will allow voters to hear the positions of candidates, from both political parties, on the critical issues facing our nation,” said CBC Institute Board Chairman and U.S. Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.) “Every voter deserves an opportunity to evaluate the candidates. Collaborating with CNN provides unprecedented viewership and allows us to take the 2008 presidential election to homes across America.”
“I am thrilled that the CBC Institute and CNN will host a debate in my home state of South Carolina,” said U.S. Rep. and House Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-S.C.) “It is my strong belief that this debate, leading to the first-in-the-South primaries, will be the definitive forum for America as we choose our next president.”
Information on exact times and other details of this debate as well as a CNN/CBC Institute-sponsored Republican presidential debate will be forthcoming.
The Presidential Debate Program is one of several initiatives sponsored by the Congressional Black Caucus Political Education and Leadership Institute, a nonprofit organization designed to train and educate African Americans and others on key issues of national policy. In this regard, the CBC Institute also commissions policy research, holds conferences and symposia, and conducts a political education and campaign training program. Founded in 2000, the CBC Institute is governed by a board of directors comprised of individuals from academia, business, labor, policy analysis, and elective office including members of the Congressional Black Caucus. Its activities are undertaken on a non-partisan basis.
CNN Worldwide, a division of Turner Broadcasting System, Inc., a Time Warner Company, is one of the world’s most respected and trusted sources for news and information. Its reach extends to nine cable and satellite television networks; one private place-based network; two radio networks; wireless devices around the world; four Web sites, including CNN.com, the first major news and information Web site; CNN Pipeline, CNN.com’s premium live video news service; CNN Newsource, the world’s most extensively syndicated news service; and partnerships for four television networks and two Web sites.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Funny…run to their leftist allies for protection against big bad Fox.
March 14th, 2007 at 12:31 pmCome on, Patrick1. Aren’t you going to tell us how this is great news for conservatives?
;)
March 14th, 2007 at 12:33 pmBoycott Fox!
March 14th, 2007 at 12:36 pmFunny, Fox Snooze hates it when they get the Al-Jazeera treatment!
-GSD
March 14th, 2007 at 12:37 pmEveryone should refuse to talk to FOX. They are a propaganda machine for the GOP plain and simple. Why give them any story or information, they make it up anyway.
March 14th, 2007 at 12:39 pmbut will Drudge declare it’s war again?It’s been a tough week for Faux,i love it.
March 14th, 2007 at 12:40 pmFox News is going down. It’ll be marginalized to Limbaugh-ian proportions. :)
March 14th, 2007 at 12:40 pmWe forget the true victim here.
Poor Alan Colmes. I bet he doesn’t even get a parking space anymore after this.
March 14th, 2007 at 12:40 pmAre you guys really that scared of Fox News? Is it now O.K. for Bush to stop calling on David Gregory at news conferences?
March 14th, 2007 at 12:40 pmThe CBC should be wary of CNN, as well. They’re only a half-step up from FOX, and that’s not saying much. CBC had better have good lawyers, at the ready.
March 14th, 2007 at 12:42 pm#9- Only if Chimpy isn’t afraid to tell the people some truth, for a change.
March 14th, 2007 at 12:43 pmMore of this and Rupert Murdoch will likely blow a gasket which would be great to see !
Fox is going down
March 14th, 2007 at 12:43 pmWhy is Fox Snooze afraid to declare that they are a proud Republican News outlet? Why are they afraid to state who and what they really are?
Republicans don’t watch Fox Snooze because they are nice to Democrats….they watch Fox because they like to see Coulter, Dildo O’Reilly and Scammity “smack down” Democrats. I always see Republicans cheering when that happens, but now Fox wants to claim they are fair and balanced?
Why is Fox hiding from their proud Republican roots?
-gsd
March 14th, 2007 at 12:44 pmFox should ditch their ‘Fair and Balanced’ slogan right now !! I mean, who are they kidding ?? It is doing them more damage than good.
March 14th, 2007 at 12:46 pmYeah, we’re so “scared” of FOX news… that we’re standing up to it. Hmm.
Is that all you Bushies have in your troll arsenal this afternoon? A little reverse psychology?
Golly gosh. And here I was hoping that you’d at least equate standing up to FOX with hating God. Or hating unborn babies.
March 14th, 2007 at 12:47 pmJake, nobody answered your David Gregory question in the last thread, no need to ask it again.
March 14th, 2007 at 12:49 pmFinally Fox News getting the respect it deserves. None.
March 14th, 2007 at 12:49 pmThe problem is cable news is that to one degree or another it’s become a series of editoralizations about press releases and news blurbs generated elsewhere. No real (read: investigative) journalism. But it dresses up like the old TV News of old, sits on its sets, goes through its empty rituals, and so many are fooled. But there’s nothing to it.
Broadcast venues are still the best place to go to reach the majority of people, especially local audiences.
March 14th, 2007 at 12:49 pmEnough of us make sufficient noise that the clamor can’t help but be heard in high places. Fox is killing itself and we should keep up pressure on them, calling them out on their lies – while pressuring legitimate organizations that Fox does not have their interests at heart.
March 14th, 2007 at 12:53 pmAnchor Wolf Blitzer will moderate the Democratic debate. CNN correspondent Joe Johns and White House correspondent Suzanne Malveaux will serve as panelists to question candidates participating in the debate.
Not that hack! Get McCafferty to moderate!
And lest anyone thing CNN is some liberal mouthpiece; they are also the only news network to have a fellow from the conservative Heritage foundation on their reportorial staff.
March 14th, 2007 at 12:53 pmThe Glenn Beck Network isn’t any better than Fox. At least with Fox the majority of viewers know they’re getting propaganda. With CNN the Republican bias is hidden stealthier.
March 14th, 2007 at 12:54 pmkelso:
Just trying to see what the “new standard” is (that is if you guys could stop moving the goalposts once in a while). I will proceed forward, at least for now, assuming that it will be just fine with your side if Bush “stands up” against David Gregory and others he doesn’t want to take questions from. It will make my life easier.
March 14th, 2007 at 12:55 pmI will proceed forward, at least for now, assuming that it will be just fine with your side if Bush “stands up†against David Gregory and others he doesn’t want to take questions from. It will make my life easier.
Comment by Jake —
Why? Is your worldview so shaky it can’t handle an inconvienient fact?
March 14th, 2007 at 12:59 pmLike CNN is fair and balanced? So fox leans 1 way, and all the rest lean the other.
You would thing the Democratss would WANT to go on fox, thats where they are going to get the greatest exposure to people who may disagree with them, and allow them to sway their decisions. These people will not watch the other news channels because of the other channel’s bias. To reach these people, and attempt to sway their decision, and change their opinions, they need to be able to reach them, and going on fox would be the best way.
March 14th, 2007 at 1:00 pmBush never answers questions anyway, unless they come Jeff Gannon.
March 14th, 2007 at 1:01 pmAre you guys really that scared of Fox News? Is it now O.K. for Bush to stop calling on David Gregory at news conferences? Comment by Jake
Scared – only if you define it as “realistically concerned that FOX Noise will ask loaded questions, spin responses, and distort”
You do remember that Bush already has blacklisted reporters at news conferences? Hint: female, red dress, first name “Helen”.
March 14th, 2007 at 1:01 pmI will proceed forward, at least for now, assuming that it will be just fine with your side if Bush “stands up†against David Gregory and others he doesn’t want to take questions from. It will make my life easier.
He ignores Gregory’s questions now. He calls on him but do the American people get real answers? Just spin.
What is the big difference?
March 14th, 2007 at 1:02 pm0wned! Black PowaHh!!
March 14th, 2007 at 1:02 pmWhy is there no white caucus?
March 14th, 2007 at 1:03 pmLike CNN is fair and balanced? So fox leans 1 way, and all the rest lean the other.
No, they all demonstrably tilt to the right. Fox has leaned so far it’s fallen over. In addition, unlike CNN and MSNBC, which do have some desperate gasps of journalism left on life support, Fox – while putting on the pretense of being “news” – is nothing more than a pure opinion outlet. If they would say so, fine. But they lie, pretend to peddle news, pretend to be “balanced” in its presentation, and throw screaming tantrums when anyone points out the obvious: they are an overt propaganda outlet.
March 14th, 2007 at 1:04 pmFunny…run to their leftist allies for protection against big bad Fox. Comment by Patrick1
Let’s see, now. What is the only “news” organization that Cheney makes himself available to when he wants to “catapult the propoganda” or otherwise tell liberal Americans to “go f*** yourself”? Oh, I should be able to remember this…
March 14th, 2007 at 1:04 pmAn all out boycott of Fox should be next. Nobody should lend any legitimacy to this hack network until they clean up their act (which will never happen). Nobody looks to the national enquirer for news, why should anyone look to the Fox network? Exact same standards of journalism. Fox news is nothing more than a televised drudge report, in other words, complete and total garbage.
March 14th, 2007 at 1:05 pmLike CNN is fair and balanced? So fox leans 1 way, and all the rest lean the other.
NEWSFLASH: Fox is NOT conservative, it is Republican.
Would a conservative network give Bush a pass on illegal immigrants? Fox does.
CNN (Lou Dobbs) gives Bush a harder time on immigration than Fox.
Admit it.
March 14th, 2007 at 1:05 pmYou know what, as a white man, I’ll happily trade not having to live with the legacy of slavery and Jim Crow to forego having my own ethnic caucus.
It’s not like I lack for opportunities to display ethnic pride, what with all the jigs and reels I’ll pipe on Saturday.
March 14th, 2007 at 1:06 pmWhite caucus! haha!
March 14th, 2007 at 1:06 pmWhy is there no white caucus?
The US Senate is the white caucus. The Republican Party is the white caucus. :)
March 14th, 2007 at 1:06 pm#29 – Because the entire Senate is the White Caucus.
Well, it was until they started letting “darkies” get elected.
(I’m just using the pre-PC term that so many trolls seem to want to go back to using.)
March 14th, 2007 at 1:07 pmJake sez:
What a joke. Comparing FOX “News”, the right-wing propaganda outlet masquerading as a legitimate news organization, that Rupert Murdoch has openly admitted he uses to further his ultra-conservative agenda, to a single reporter that has a knack for asking Chimpy questions he’d rather not answer.
Jake, if this is the extent of your critical thinking skills, how exactly do you find your way home at night???
March 14th, 2007 at 1:09 pm#24 Douglas G: How many Fox viewers do you think are that open-minded that they would change their opinions based on what any Democrat had to say? How often do you watch Fox? The only (semi) moderate on the network is Alan Colmes, and that’s even stretching it a bit. They do nothing but destroy Democrats and the “Democrat” Party (as they love to say). No one that watches Fox has the slightest inclination to change their opinions on anything – they watch to validate their beliefs and world-view. Sean Hannity, Bill O’Reilly, Ann Coulter, Greta van Susteren, Brit Hume … the list can go on and on. Did you hear Roger Ailes “jokes” the other day? This is not a “fair and balanced” network – it is a mouthpiece for the Administration and any Democrat that agrees to debate on Fox is opening him- or herself up to ridicule, distortions, disinformation and plain old meanness.
March 14th, 2007 at 1:13 pm#38 – Jake is a liar. He “claimed” that Pres. Clinton fired attorneys six years into his term, and expected everyone to accept it as fact, just becasue he said it.
Notice how Jake made ZERO posts in the article that showed this did NOT happen?
Jake is a consumate liar. This makes Jake a perfect person for the bush Administration.
March 14th, 2007 at 1:14 pmWhy is there no white caucus?
Comment by rabidbunny
Well, rancidbunny, here are a few of the 1000+ Congressional Caucuses:
9/11 Commission Caucus
Addiction, Treatment and Recovery Caucus
Bipartisan Disabilities Caucus
Blue Dog Coalition
Appalachian Caucus
Coalition on Autism Research and Education
Congressional Azerbaijan Caucus
Ya think whitey’s on any of them?
There’s a whole bunch more. You can look it up if you want.
March 14th, 2007 at 1:15 pmTo reach these people, and attempt to sway their decision, and change their opinions, they need to be able to reach them, and going on fox would be the best way.
Comment by Douglas G.
The best way to be smeared by innuendo? Fox would be fashioning the questions; do you really think they wouldn’t slant questions to evoke embarrassing replies? If Fox had run the debate, they probably would have later cut and pasted the clips to achieve maximum political damage against the candidates – remember, they were claiming exclusive rights to rebroadcasting the footage.
March 14th, 2007 at 1:16 pmWhy do the trolls hang out here? Is it like picking at a scab? Are they gluttons for punishment? Masochists? I admit that I travel to a wingnut site now and then but I don’t comment, just chuckle and shake my head in amazement at the idiocy.
I have to say tho, as the incoherency of our pet trolls keeps increasing, the less I need to visit their favorite sites.
March 14th, 2007 at 1:17 pmYou can’t rationalize and reason with zombies.
-GSD
March 14th, 2007 at 1:19 pmHey jake:
You’re absolutely right. But to improve on the idea – Bush should stop taking questions from anyone, or should only take questions from Fox.
That would be cool.
BTW: You want a new standard? Try honesty (maybe a little integrity wouldn’t hurt). How’s this for a new standard: Stop being cheerleaders for a group of criminals who have driven us to the point of bankruptcy.
Also, stop whining about “moving the goalposts”. Do you realize what an immature fool that statement makes you look like? “Mommy! They keep moving the goalposts and won’t let me win!” Just STFU with that crap.
You pathetic crybaby.
March 14th, 2007 at 1:19 pmI wonder what the CBC is afraid of?
March 14th, 2007 at 1:20 pmOh wait, I just figured it out, tough questions! Cowards!
March 14th, 2007 at 1:20 pmbarfly:
Why would it make my like easier to have the President not even call on the likes of David Gregory? Because I would not have to defend against as many “loaded questions, spin responses, and distortions†from said media. Sound familiar? My “worldview” is no less shaky than Edwards who can’t handle debating on the Fox channel.
Kelso:
Bush doesn’t “answer questions” from bottoms. Good luck with that boycott of Fox News though — I assume you will be fine with President Bush boycotting every media outlet but them?
PLC:
Taking a question from Helen at the last press conference is your definition of “blacklisting”?! I’m talking about not even letting David and Helen into the building.
Dead Horse:
The “difference” is that the President at least is man enough to take the questions — Edwards won’t even do that — no one was stopping Edwards from “ignoring” the debate moderators by spinning and not giving the American people “real answers” as well.
TripMaster Monkey:
Would you be surprised if I told you I carpool home?
March 14th, 2007 at 1:23 pmCowards!
Comment by michael — March 14, 2007 @ 1:20 pm
Ironic Clip of the Day!
March 14th, 2007 at 1:23 pmWhat network does Darth Cheney demand be playing on his TV when he’s making a visit somewhere? The VORA, yes, the Voice of Republican America, Fox Snooze.
What network has their “so-called” reporters swooning over Bush while talking about how the reporter’s whife is working hard for Bush’s re-election?
What network was claiming that the Democratic victory was “not the end of the world”?
Yep, Fox.
A Republican propaganda outfit for the Republican Party.
-GSD
March 14th, 2007 at 1:24 pmpowkat sez:
I used to post at reigh-wingnut sites, but it’s really amazing how fast you can get banned for point out that the Emperor has no clothes. ^_^
That’s the difference between right-wing blogs and left-wing ones. the left-wing ones aren’t afraid of the occasional right-wing opposition, because the facts are firmly on our side. The right-wing sites, on the other hand, must do all they can to keep the facts firmly out, since in the presence of them, their arguments broil like vampires in sunlight.
March 14th, 2007 at 1:26 pmI just hope Fox News can find enough celebrity scandals to make up for their lost political coverage.
March 14th, 2007 at 1:26 pmDemocrat Soldier:
I posted the link for the full Report in that thread. If that was too difficult for you, here are just the U.S. Attorneys who did not serve full 4 year terms during Clinton’s term:
Vicki Lynn Miles-LaGrange (1994); Claude Harris Jr. (1994); Edmund A. Sargus, Jr. (1996); Joseph Preston Strom, Jr. (1996); Kendall Brindley Coffey (1996); Larry Herbert Colleton (1994); James Lamar Wiggins (1996); and Kent Barron Alexander (1997).
P.S. smafdy — I am new here, but the way I read the “Terms of Use” agreement does not permit me to respond to your personal attacks in kind.
March 14th, 2007 at 1:27 pmJakE:
I’ll say it again: Bush on Fox only. That is waaaay cool! What a great idea. i would love it if that would happen! In fact, I think the Republic Party should boycott all media except for Fox and Limbaugh.
Let the good times roll!
March 14th, 2007 at 1:27 pmOh wait, I just figured it out, tough questions! Cowards!
Comment by michael — March 14, 2007 @ 1:20 pm
So, you are willing to go and defend your views on “Democracy Now” with Amy Goodman?
March 14th, 2007 at 1:28 pmJake sez:
Would you be surprised if I told you that your transportation arrangements are of zero interest to me, and completely off-topic for this thread?
March 14th, 2007 at 1:28 pmWhy would it make my like easier to have the President not even call on the likes of David Gregory? Because I would not have to defend against as many “loaded questions, spin responses, and distortions†from said media. Jake
What’s this have to stuff? Are you admitting that you are part of a spin machine? Paid troll? And if you could provide even one example, your assertion might seem reasonable. But we both know you won’t – or if you do, it will be one that is so weak that it collapes of it’s own illogic. How do you feel about Les Kinsolving? Do you think he asks “loaded questions” of the president?
March 14th, 2007 at 1:30 pm“You know what, as a white man, I’ll happily trade not having to live with the legacy of slavery and Jim Crow to forego having my own ethnic caucus.”
It’s about 300 years too late to make that trade.
March 14th, 2007 at 1:30 pmJake:
Okay, here’s my republic party moment: I apologize for my prior remarks (wink, wink, nod, nod).
March 14th, 2007 at 1:31 pmjake
Not sure what you mean by ‘bottoms’. Bush already boycotts the other networks, it’s only fox and Rush Limbaugh, and lest I forget, Jeff Gannon.
It’s disgusting and it says alot about this administration.
March 14th, 2007 at 1:32 pm“What network was claiming that the Democratic victory was “not the end of the worldâ€?
Yep, Fox.
A Republican propaganda outfit for the Republican Party.
-GSD
Comment by GSD — March 14, 2007 @ 1:24 pm”
So what! Why are the dems afraid of Fox? We’re talking about a debate. If the Dems have answers to tough questions what does it matter what forum they present their answers in? But I can guarantee that CNN will lob underhand softballs to these people!
March 14th, 2007 at 1:32 pmJake, calm down. Let Bush blacklist whoever he wants. We’ll all agree to let the cards fall where they will. The UK seems okay with dual news outlets, one for progressives the other for conservatives, so why flap around like the sky is falling?
One thing you’re going to have to get used to, though: the era of FOX-styled swapping editorials for news is over.
Hey, don’t be bitter. It was a good run while it lasted, but you 30-percenters are going to have to come to terms with Bush’s profound failures outside of FOX’s illusion of fair and balanced.
March 14th, 2007 at 1:33 pm“So, you are willing to go and defend your views on “Democracy Now†with Amy Goodman?
Comment by gogreen — March 14, 2007 @ 1:28 pm”
ANY TIME!
March 14th, 2007 at 1:33 pm““You know what, as a white man, I’ll happily trade not having to live with the legacy of slavery and Jim Crow to forego having my own ethnic caucus.â€
It’s about 300 years too late to make that trade.
Comment by cynical ex-hippie — March 14, 2007 @ 1:30 pm”
They need to GET OVER IT!
March 14th, 2007 at 1:35 pm#
Democrat Soldier:
I posted the link for the full Report in that thread. If that was too difficult for you, here are just the U.S. Attorneys who did not serve full 4 year terms during Clinton’s term:
Vicki Lynn Miles-LaGrange (1994); Claude Harris Jr. (1994); Edmund A. Sargus, Jr. (1996); Joseph Preston Strom, Jr. (1996); Kendall Brindley Coffey (1996); Larry Herbert Colleton (1994); James Lamar Wiggins (1996); and Kent Barron Alexander (1997).
P.S. smafdy — I am new here, but the way I read the “Terms of Use†agreement does not permit me to respond to your personal attacks in kind.
Comment by Jake — March 14, 2007 @ 1:27 pm
How many of these were FIRED? The “not served a full term” is a meaningless dodge. They could have been promoted, quit or died for that matter.
-GSD
March 14th, 2007 at 1:35 pmAlways enjoyable to see the W lackeys & FOXtards in full, fact-free blather mode
Poor FOX news, can’t find a Dem group willing to go along with being hit with cheapshots galore anymore
Too Bad, So Sad
March 14th, 2007 at 1:35 pmJake:
Seen the stock market lately? Pretty soon, you won’t have to carpool home. You won’t have a job. You won’t have a home. Courtesy of the Republic Party.
March 14th, 2007 at 1:36 pm“These people will not watch the other news channels because of the other channel’s bias. To reach these people, and attempt to sway their decision, and change their opinions, they need to be able to reach them, and going on fox would be the best way.”
You really think that there is any possibility that the people who watch Faux can be educated? I doubt it. There is a reason why some people watch nothing but Faux Noise. It’s because they lack the ability to think for them selves and have no critical thinking skills. They need a “daddy” to tell them what to believe and how to act. They go to Church on Sunday so their “daddy” God can tell them how to act and what to believe and they watch Faux Noise so that “daddy” Faux can tell them how to act and what to believe.
The only way to fight the terminally ignorant is to ignore them and marginalize them. That’s what the Democratic party needs to do with Faux, ignore them.
March 14th, 2007 at 1:36 pmOh wait, I just figured it out, tough questions! Cowards!
Comment by michael — March 14, 2007 @ 1:20 pm
You figure something out? BAHAHA, now *that* is a good joke!
March 14th, 2007 at 1:36 pmANY TIME!
Comment by michael — March 14, 2007 @ 1:33 pm
Do it this second, liar.
March 14th, 2007 at 1:37 pmWell, rancidbunny, here are a few of the 1000+ Congressional Caucuses:
9/11 Commission Caucus
Addiction, Treatment and Recovery Caucus
Bipartisan Disabilities Caucus
Blue Dog Coalition
Appalachian Caucus
Coalition on Autism Research and Education
Congressional Azerbaijan Caucus
Ya think whitey’s on any of them?
There’s a whole bunch more. You can look it up if you want.
You don’t think there is anything inherently racist about having a caucus in the United States senate based soley on race? The fact that white senators on on the ones you listed really is irrelevent, because nobody is excluded solely on race.
March 14th, 2007 at 1:38 pm“We’re talking about a debate. If the Dems have answers to tough questions what does it matter what forum they present their answers in? But I can guarantee that CNN will lob underhand softballs to these people!”
Is that anything like the “tough” questions that Tim Russert or any Faux toady asks Bush or Cheney when they interview them?
The Dems are entirely able to answer tough questions. The problem is the kind of tough questions Faux will ask the candidates. Things like “Have you stopped beating your wife (and that’s a yes or no question)”
March 14th, 2007 at 1:39 pm“Not sure what you mean by ‘bottoms’. Bush already boycotts the other networks, it’s only fox and Rush Limbaugh, and lest I forget, Jeff Gannon.
It’s disgusting and it says alot about this administration.
Comment by kelso — March 14, 2007 @ 1:32 pm”
Bush is already President! He can pick and choose whose network he appears on. By avoiding a particular network the Dems are showing weakness and the fear of answering tough questions. We will play this up and remind people how void you people are of fresh ideas and how they sidestep tough questions!
March 14th, 2007 at 1:39 pmSo what! Why are the dems afraid of Fox? We’re talking about a debate. If the Dems have answers to tough questions what does it matter what forum they present their answers in? But I can guarantee that CNN will lob underhand softballs to these people! Comment by michael — March 14, 2007 @ 1:32 pm
Fox is a *propaganda* outlet, not a news organization. It does not deserve to be legitimized, any more than you deserve to be – st*pid old coward.
How many years did you hide under that desk again (5?) while other *real-mean* died for your cowardice? Just for you to disrespect them when they run for office? St*pid old puke! Cowardly c*nt!
March 14th, 2007 at 1:39 pm61 Michael – you obviously don’t understand Psychology – the whole presentation can and would be easily manipulated to how the questions are framed, what order the questions follow, and how the editing goes with the answers.
Bottom line – FOX is not a legitimate news source. Debate isn’t even in their vocabulary (and neither is “winning” evidently).
March 14th, 2007 at 1:40 pmThey need to GET OVER IT!
Comment by michael — March 14, 2007 @ 1:35 pm
You need to get a clue, you st*pid old fcuk!
March 14th, 2007 at 1:40 pmOh wait, I just figured it out, tough questions! Cowards!
Comment by michael
Right, Master Baiter.
Debate challenge (pending 3 1/2 weeks):
Topic: Michael is a complete and utter moron.
Your task: Argue in favor of that postion.
Get started, chickenshit.
March 14th, 2007 at 1:41 pmBush is already President! He can pick and choose whose network he appears on. Comment by michael — March 14, 2007 @ 1:39 pm
Ah, more *imperial* bush nonsense. You’re a st*pid little puke.
By avoiding a particular network the Dems are showing weakness and the fear of answering tough questions. Comment by michael — March 14, 2007 @ 1:39 pm
Yet, in your twisted world, old *codpiece* is permitted the same behavior, and isn’t showing a *fear*. You’re a dum bass old puke.
We will play this up and remind people how void you people are of fresh ideas and how they sidestep tough questions! Comment by michael — March 14, 2007 @ 1:39 pm
You mean like a bush press conference?
Idiot.
March 14th, 2007 at 1:42 pm“Things like “Have you stopped beating your wife (and that’s a yes or no question)â€
Comment by Kate Henry — March 14, 2007 @ 1:39 pm”
Stop being stupid. What questions are they afraid to answer?
March 14th, 2007 at 1:43 pmLOL what questions! hahahahaa
I think, especially this week, it’s the Republicants, namely the White House who ought to be answering some tough questions, yet you don’t seem to give a damn they aren’t.
March 14th, 2007 at 1:43 pmmichael = coward = vietnam avoider = useless puke trying to make up for his self loathing.
March 14th, 2007 at 1:43 pmWell, TripMaster Monkey, frankly I thought it was off-topic as well, but yes, I would be a bit surprised since YOU were the one who asked: “… how exactly do you find your way home at night???”
March 14th, 2007 at 1:44 pmShow us a fresh idea that promotes the good af all Americans proposed by the new republican party, please.
March 14th, 2007 at 1:44 pm“…By avoiding a particular network the Dems are showing weakness and the fear of answering tough questions. We will play this up and remind people how void you people are of fresh ideas and how they sidestep tough questions!”
Please play it up. By all means, call our bluff. Please expose our “weakness” in standing up and calling a spade a spade. (But you gotta wonder why this hasn’t worked so far… hmmm?)
The fact is you Bushies can dish it out, but you can’t take it.
March 14th, 2007 at 1:46 pmC’mon Michael – why isn’t Cheney, Mr. 12% himself answering any of these questions? Why isn’t Karl Rove, Mr. Honesty, not answering any tough questions? Cowards…yeah…you know the ones who go for 5 deferments to get out of Nam …or how about protecting the great State of Alabama from the Vietcong?!
March 14th, 2007 at 1:46 pmYou don’t think there is anything inherently racist about having a caucus in the United States senate based soley on race? The fact that white senators on on the ones you listed really is irrelevent, because nobody is excluded solely on race.
Comment by rabidbunny
Frankly, I don’t give a shit. If they want to have a White Caucus, go ahead. If you have a problem with it, go picket their meetings.
March 14th, 2007 at 1:47 pm“61 Michael – you obviously don’t understand Psychology – the whole presentation can and would be easily manipulated to how the questions are framed, what order the questions follow, and how the editing goes with the answers.
Bottom line – FOX is not a legitimate news source. Debate isn’t even in their vocabulary (and neither is “winning†evidently).
Comment by Bush Eater — March 14, 2007 @ 1:40 pm”
BS! A question is a question. It doesn’t matter in what order it is asked they either have an answer that satisfies the American people or they don’t. For example, the only question I would ask every one of them is: how will you conduct the war on terrorism?
March 14th, 2007 at 1:50 pmI think that the 28%ers are just now figuring out that they are a shrinking minority.
March 14th, 2007 at 1:50 pmThey’re not afraid of questions. They’re wary of the slanderous commentary that will inevitably come after.
And in any event, this is less about fearing Fox than about punishing it for past behavior. Act like an overtly partisan propaganda outlet for the other guy, and you’re frozen out.
Free speech means the message gets out, not who gets to deliver it.
March 14th, 2007 at 1:50 pmWhat’s next Olbermann and Err America?
March 14th, 2007 at 1:51 pm“michael = coward = vietnam avoider = useless puke trying to make up for his self loathing.
Comment by ValiantVenusGrewFromUranus — March 14, 2007 @ 1:43 pm”
Venus, you are showing your age again!
March 14th, 2007 at 1:52 pmFaux News is going to ask tough questions? You mean like the tough questions anyone on Faux asked Bush, Cheney and the rest of the GOP crew?
March 14th, 2007 at 1:53 pmBush Eater,
Michael is a simpleton, a debate dodger, and a Master Baiter.
There’s no help for him.
March 14th, 2007 at 1:55 pmVenus, you are showing your age again!
Comment by michael
Oh man, VVGFU, you must be smarting from that one.
March 14th, 2007 at 1:57 pm#87-michael,
Since the bush/cheney “war on terror” has actually proven to have increased terrorist activity and become a powerfully successful recruitment tool for terrorist organizations, thereby being a net beneficial for terrorists, why is it that you support terrorism and, obviously then, hate the United States of America?
March 14th, 2007 at 1:58 pm“BS! A question is a question. It doesn’t matter in what order it is asked they either have an answer that satisfies the American people or they don’t. For example, the only question I would ask every one of them is: how will you conduct the war on terrorism?”
You further prove your lack of understanding of basic Psychologial concepts. Check out a book on Social Psychology – check out any of the plethora of studies…hell, attend a college exam… the order of the question, it’s framing, and the manipulative nature of editing are very power concepts in both Psychology and Marketing.
But I guess you’re obviously ignorant enough to “not” realize that Faux does this exact manipulation of their audience (among a great number of other tactics).
I guess that supports why Conservatives love to minimize education – easier to get you fools to swallow anything, falling for every trick in the book. In short, you’re an effing moron. Swallow that Fox nut – swallow it Michael.
March 14th, 2007 at 1:58 pm#39, the problem with your arguement is also that the reverse is true. How many people who watch the OTHER networks need to be swayed?? In fact, I can say this, having the deabte on cnn will harm democrats more than help them, because it is going to their republican opponents in a position to reach far more people whom they can sway to their position, than the democrats will. Since these other channels tend to be more liberal, and have more liberal viewers, you have just give the republican opponents a far larger audience then they would have gotten from fox, and thus a larger opportunity to sway votes.
March 14th, 2007 at 1:59 pmSo what! Why are the dems afraid of Fox? We’re talking about a debate. If the Dems have answers to tough questions what does it matter what forum they present their answers in?
Oh, like it didn’t matter the last time a Democratic Party debate was hosted solely by Fox, when they asked the candidates to elaborate on disagreements they have with bushco inc policies, and then after the debate they ran and re-ran clips from that moment with the caption “Democrat Debate Is Bush Hate-Fest.”
Nope, no ’spin’ there…. Typically “Fair & Balanced”
March 14th, 2007 at 2:01 pmHere are some tough questions for Cheney there Michael:
Why do you eat Bush droppings?
How is your fascist religion different than the terrorists’?
Do you solve any problems in life without the use of military force?
How did your daughter react when you told her you hated her lifestyle and how did she feel when you told her she was going to burn in Hell?
Just how drunk were you when you shot your friend in the face?
How does it feel to “buy” the vote of the religious right, in effect, turning them into what they hate the most.
Yeah Michael, there’s no such thing as an unfair question
March 14th, 2007 at 2:02 pmThe only thing more pathetic than O’Reilly’s off-key caterwauling over his network’s rightly getting blasted are those trolls who spend all their waking moments encouraging themselves that somehow, the Dems will pay for their perfidy in telling FOX news to stuff it
But if lil’ troopers like Michael can function better by telling themselves these flights of fancy, then who’s really hurt?
Sorry assclowns, no voters are losing sleep over FOX news suddenly paying for all its cheap shots and outright smears of Dems over the years
Too Bad, So Sad
March 14th, 2007 at 2:02 pmLet’s see, Fox news will “miss” hosting the Congressional Black Caucus Presidential debates…..big deal! Like there is any doubt which way 92% of blacks will vote…..
It will be one big pander-fest…instead of explanations as to why the 40 year War on Poverty has been such an abject failure. I wonder if the candidates will bring up the commesurate rise in the black prison population with the rate of black illegitimacy. I don’t think so. How about black politicians asking the Presidential candidates for truth in labelling laws – maybe so many gangstas and white wannabes would be able to buy clothes that actually fit.
And I can hardly wait for the Congressional Black Caucus to ask Presidential candidates about their musical appreciation for Rap and Hip-Hop.
But the real coup d’gras will come when the CBC complains about the lack of money for AIDS in Africa or the committment for troops in Darfur.
March 14th, 2007 at 2:03 pmCrazy Fox Captions I’ve noticed just in the few passing minutes at work:
“Will France Attack Us?”
“Dems weak on terror?”
“Ann Coulter Fights Back…”
March 14th, 2007 at 2:04 pmPreach to the choir, that will get results.
What? You can’t coherently debate your opinions except to those who agree?
Cowardess, something we won’t vote for in 2008
March 14th, 2007 at 2:05 pmNOT SO FAST! CBC STILL PLANNING 2 FOX DEBATES!
The CBC press releases cleary states that CBC is “in discussios” with Fox.
March 14th, 2007 at 2:05 pm
The real point here is that there needs to be a complete firewall between primary and general election debates (which are news), and opinion outlets like Fox.
I don’t want the Republicans taking Air America’s offer any more than I want Democrats debating on Fox. Air America and Fox will comment on the debates afterward to their hearts’ content.
Fox has a proven record of bad faith in debates – by cutting away early to have their character assassins – aka commentators – attack one party to the debate to further another.
March 14th, 2007 at 2:06 pmPlease play it up. By all means, call our bluff. Please expose our “weakness†in standing up and calling a spade a spade. (But you gotta wonder why this hasn’t worked so far… hmmm?)
The fact is you Bushies can dish it out, but you can’t take it.
Comment by hypatia’s father
Why do those on the right care if Democrats debate/don’t debate on Fox? Ya’ll sound whiny about it. Whatsup?
March 14th, 2007 at 2:09 pmWow. Glen Beck and Tom DeLay instead of Bill O’Reilly and Sean Hannity. I’m stoked.
March 14th, 2007 at 2:09 pm“Preach to the choir, that will get results. What? You can’t coherently debate your opinions except to those who agree? Cowardess, something we won’t vote for in 2008″
Dude. The debate was going to be between Democrats. Do you even understand that? Agreement was not an issue. But, hey, leave it to a Bushie like you to stick your foot in your mouth by admitting that FOX itself would function as an adversary in a debate, as a opposed to a fair and balanced mediator.
March 14th, 2007 at 2:12 pmHow do you stop a bully like FOX News? Punch them right in the face. Way to go Dems!!
March 14th, 2007 at 2:14 pmsimplicio:
So, can our side bomb the New York Times building now?
March 14th, 2007 at 2:16 pm#110 – See, your side has always been against freedom of speech.
I see you never gave a link to Pres. Clinton firing attorneys six years into his term. I guess it’s asking too much for you to back up your statements with facts.
March 14th, 2007 at 2:21 pm….and the Michael troll disappears on cue. YES!!
March 14th, 2007 at 2:21 pmBTW Michael, you will never escape my debate challenge — I’m your personal troll. :D
Sure, Jake. You can make an exemplary contrast between Bushies like you and progressives.
Progressives stand up to bullies by refusing to play their games and insisting that boundaries be respected. On the other hand, you Bushies reveal your true selves when you fantasize about blowing up newspapers. (Cheer up, Jake. There may be a little jihadist lurking in your heart even now!)
Hmmm….
Thanks for making our jobs in pointing out these differences all the easier.
March 14th, 2007 at 2:23 pmHey, Douglas G:
Good! Give the Republics a bigger audience. Let them put both feet into their lying pieholes in front of as many people as possible. Tear back the curtains on the corruption, the hipocrasy, and the festering boul on America’s rear end that is the Republic party.
Just don’t give Fox the power.
Republic Party = Loosers
March 14th, 2007 at 2:23 pm#110-Jake,
Not funny, appropriate, or even in context of the message that you were responding to. Do you enjoy such a weak position that your only retort in a debate is a sensational and asinine call to violence?
Pathetic and cowardly. Why do you hate Americans? Why would you call for the murder of Americans? Why are you supporting and even engaging in terrorism?
March 14th, 2007 at 2:24 pmJake:
I refer to a METAPHORICAL “punch in the nose.” That’s what FAUX News is dealing with right now. A series of metaphorical right hooks to the chin. And look at how worked up O’reilly and Hannity are getting over it. A bully can dish it out but can’t take it when someone stands up to them. Daily Kos, moveon, thinkprogress . . . you’re getting a taste of people-powered politics upside the head. Keep bringing it dems!!
March 14th, 2007 at 2:25 pmSo, can our side bomb the New York Times building now?
Comment by Jake — March 14, 2007
Terrorists bomb buildings, is that your intent?
March 14th, 2007 at 2:29 pmHey simplicio:
I’m stickin’ w’ knock them the F**K OUT!
Republic Party = sissies (actually, I’d have called them pussies, but that would violate forum rules).
March 14th, 2007 at 2:31 pmAsked if his News Corp. managed to shape the agenda on the war in Iraq, Murdoch said: “No, I don’t think so. We tried.” Asked by Rose for further comment, he said: “We basically supported the Bush policy in the Middle East…but we have been very critical of his execution.”
Slowly now, so Bush cultists and others who are brain-adled by FOX propaganda can understand: Rupert Murdoch doesn’t even deny that he has tried to push a political agenda with his “News Corporation.” By openly pushing the agenda of one of our political parties, his organization is not really a “news” organization. It is more of a propaganda arm of the repub party.
March 14th, 2007 at 2:37 pmJake: Typical hysterical, sociopathic, conservative.
The response to a metaphorical “punch in the mouth?” Why, a mass-murder by bombing a large office building of course! Good, Jake. Good. No calm down and have some cookies and milk, young man.
March 14th, 2007 at 2:45 pmValium Venus: “And I can hardly wait for the Congressional Black Caucus to ask Presidential candidates about their musical appreciation for Rap and Hip-Hop.”
As did white folks at the beginning of the 20th century, VV just LOVES to laugh at that Minstral Show. It makes her feel so damn superior.
March 14th, 2007 at 2:47 pmwait… I thought Jake said he was a registered Independent. What side
March 14th, 2007 at 3:06 pmis that, Jake?
Just browsing intermittently today, when I come across this gem:
So, can our side bomb the New York Times building now?
Comment by JaketheSnake — March 14, 2007 @ 2:16 pm
Yeah, I’m sure the familes of the Oklahoma City bombing victims really appreciate that humour. Especially the parents of the deceased children.
March 14th, 2007 at 3:11 pmYou’re a helluva comedian, there Jake!
and stealing from your own Ann “check out my Adam’s apple” Coulter!
Priceless!
and don’t think for one minute I’m falling for your “I’m a registered independent” crapola. I thought an Independent didn’t pick sides? Or is destructive violence and mass murder the M.O.A. of non-comformists?
DOLT!!!
DRxJ sez:
Much like Coulter, Jake is getting increasingly desperate, as he watches his patchwork of specious arguments fall apart.
March 14th, 2007 at 3:20 pmJake aka Tim McVie
Terrorists are among us, & they look just like YOU!
March 14th, 2007 at 3:21 pmLet’s see, Fox news will “miss†hosting the Congressional Black Caucus Presidential debates…..big deal! Like there is any doubt which way 92% of blacks will vote….. Comment by valiant venus — March 14, 2007 @ 2:03 pm
Yet, Fox cries like a little baby, and so do you! Why are you CONs such whiny little children anyway?
It will be one big pander-fest…instead of explanations as to why the 40 year War on Poverty has been such an abject failure. Comment by valiant venus — March 14, 2007 @ 2:03 pm
A CON lecturing others about pandering and producing abject failure! Now that’s funny! By abject failure, you mean like the *privatization* of Walter Reed? Or were you referring to the free-market Health Disaster? I could go on, but it would fill the thread.
I wonder if the candidates will bring up the commesurate rise in the black prison population with the rate of black illegitimacy. Comment by valiant venus — March 14, 2007 @ 2:03 pm
Yeah, because we all know none of that is related to the decline in blue collar jobs, and the underfunding of schools in poor neighborhoods by the GOP (Lets make money from Crack to fund latin american wars) leadership.
I don’t think so. Comment by valiant venus — March 14, 2007 @ 2:03 pm
You don’t think at all – that’s the problem Anorexia C*nt.
How about black politicians asking the Presidential candidates for truth in labelling laws – maybe so many gangstas and white wannabes would be able to buy clothes that actually fit. Comment by valiant venus — March 14, 2007 @ 2:03 pm
That’s ironic, for someone that has to shop in the teenage boys department for clothes that *fit*.
And I can hardly wait for the Congressional Black Caucus to ask Presidential candidates about their musical appreciation for Rap and Hip-Hop. Comment by valiant venus — March 14, 2007 @ 2:03 pm
What a bigoted, stereotypical, racist remark. It’s just what I would expect from the Minstrel stereotyping racism of a bigot like you.
But the real coup d’gras will come when the CBC complains about the lack of money for AIDS in Africa or the committment for troops in Darfur. Comment by valiant venus — March 14, 2007 @ 2:03 pm
Yeah, because Black Americans can’t have sympathy with the continent of Africa, or the high number of African American troops serving in the military?
You’re a fcuking idiot – you st*pid racist c*nt.
March 14th, 2007 at 3:25 pm“The hard-line right-wingers who listen primarily to FOX are too closed minded to listen to what Democrats are saying”
And just what is that?
March 14th, 2007 at 3:40 pm“Glenn Beck is, with one abberation, confined to the minor leagues HNN.
Comment by CaptainVideo — March 14, 2007 @ 3:30 pm”
And your reason is?
March 14th, 2007 at 3:41 pm“This decision is another victory in the battle to deligitimize the Republican Party’s propaganda organ”
No it’s not, they are avoiding tough questions!
March 14th, 2007 at 3:43 pmBut the real coup d’gras will come when the CBC complains about the lack of money for AIDS in Africa or the committment for troops in Darfur.
Comment by anorexic valiant slot luving venus — March 14, 2007 @ 2:03 pm
Here, my friends, is your compassionate conservatism at it’s finest!!!
Children…Toddlers…. are being slaughtered in front of their mothers, and stick queen here has the audacity to smirk at the idea of much needed funding for the victims of Darfur.
By the way, you prejudice little twit….it’s not just the CBC that is complaining, it’s people like me that are fed up with the Bush Lie of Iraqi Freedom from Evil Dictator, while millions are ‘bayonetted” in Africa, or worse ( I dare you to read about the women there who had guns strategically placed in their vaginas, so that upon firing, it can do the upmost damage without killing)
I’m now going to steal from your nemesis, VVCFU.
Your a fcuking moron, dum bass
and dammit, eat a friggin’ cheeseburger.
March 14th, 2007 at 3:43 pm“Yet, Fox cries like a little baby, and so do you! Why are you CONs such whiny little children anyway?”
We’re not whining, we’re laughing that the Dems have made such fools of themselves. Voters are going to be asking, why are they so afraid?
March 14th, 2007 at 3:45 pm“Much like Coulter, Jake is getting increasingly desperate, as he watches his patchwork of specious arguments fall apart.
Comment by TripMaster Monkey — March 14, 2007 @ 3:20 pm”
And just how is Coulter getting desperate?
March 14th, 2007 at 3:49 pmOnly the dum basses like you, mike. The rest may already know
March 14th, 2007 at 3:52 pmthe answer, or maybe take a closer look into what exactly it is
that makes people abhor the impotence known as Fox news.
“putting right-wing morons like Glenn Beck on, and targeting their programming at the American maintream of moderate and liberal viewers instead.
Comment by CaptainVideo — March 14, 2007 @ 3:47 pm”
Why do you consider Beck a moron? Because he makes sense?
March 14th, 2007 at 3:55 pm“Only the dum basses like you, mike. The rest may already know
the answer, or maybe take a closer look into what exactly it is
that makes people abhor the impotence known as Fox news.
Comment by alp3 — March 14, 2007 @ 3:52 pm”
Does that mean you can’t answer the question?
March 14th, 2007 at 3:56 pm“That proves my point. Q.E.D.
Comment by CaptainVideo — March 14, 2007 @ 3:50 pm”
Can’t answer the question?
March 14th, 2007 at 3:57 pmmichael sez:
I didn’t say she was ‘getting desperate’. I said she was ‘getting increasingly desperate’. Coulter has always had that air of foamy-mouthed incoherency about her…but lately, it’s worsened considerably.
March 14th, 2007 at 4:00 pmand by the way, my little anorexic teller of tall tales, just to broaden your vocabulary, and thus help you become wiser, it’s not coup d’gras, it’s coup de grace
March 14th, 2007 at 4:08 pmHope that helps.
If you’d like, I can also help you on reading labels for proper nutrition.
Which question, mike? this is fun… i like your style.
We’ll each just keep asking each other ridiculous questions.
well, at least until your shift ends, that is…
?
March 14th, 2007 at 4:08 pmNo it’s not, they are avoiding tough questions!
Comment by michael — March 14, 2007 @ 3:43 pm
No it’s not, YOU are are avoiding tough questions – because you’re a coward and a deserter!
March 15th, 2007 at 12:17 amWhy do you consider Beck a moron? Because he makes sense?
Comment by michael — March 14, 2007 @ 3:55 pm
What is the Jeapordy answer for “how do you know michael is a dum bass”.
March 15th, 2007 at 12:18 amAnd just how is Coulter getting desperate?
Comment by michael — March 14, 2007 @ 3:49 pm
And just why are you so st*pid you have to answer that question?
It must be awful for a pansy like you to have to hide behind the *skirt* of a woman that’s more manly than you’ll ever be! Coward!
March 15th, 2007 at 12:20 amAnd just what is that?
That proves my point. Q.E.D.
Comment by CaptainVideo — March 14, 2007 @ 3:50 pm
Your point that you’re a little c*nt masquerading as a *man*? No wonder you’re a fan of Coulter’s Psycho-sexual confusion! It must have been awful for you to live for so long as a pansy! No wonder you’re so desperate to act like a tough-guy!
March 15th, 2007 at 12:21 amCongrats, leftards! With Fox out of the picture, you get to speak to a smaller audience. Brilliant.
March 15th, 2007 at 12:24 pmHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! CNN: the Censorship News Network.
http://www.drudgereport.com/flash2.htm
March 15th, 2007 at 1:30 pm