Democrats and Republicans very rarely come together to agree on anything. There's no new news there. But what's far less reported is the infighting that goes on within the parties on any given issue. From immigration to the War in Iraq, the positions taken by our presidential candidates on either side are all over the map. So it struck me as very strange that there is one issue that has completely galvanized the Democratic Party. That there is one Evil out there so great, so evil, such a threat to our country that they should not be negotiated with in any fashion or form. That threat to all humanity is Fox Broadcasting.
That's right, the people that brought you The Simpsons and American Idol are such a threat that all the Democrat Presidential contenders have agreed to boycott Fox. Now, normally I would just chalk this up to more partisan politics. But I couldn't help but laugh when I read this article. It seems that Fox CEO Roger Ailes made a comment about Barrack Obama that the Dems (who are always trying to find any hint of prejudice by any Republican so they can keep blacks faithfully on their side) took as offensive. Mr. Ailes claims it was a joke that took aim at Bush not Obama. The actual comment was; "And it is true that Barack Obama is on the move. I don't know if it's true that President Bush called (Pakistani President Pervez) Musharraf and said, 'Why can't we catch this guy?' " I don't get it, clearly it does seem a slap at Bush being unable to separate the two. So, seeing their chance to accentuate their point, the Dems one by one rushed out to the press announcing that they were pulling out of the Fox sponsored debates in Nevada. The important thing to remember here is; this is really about reminding blacks how prejudice Republicans are behind the scenes. Taking a shot at Fox and having an excuse for not appearing at a venue that might actually ask some tough questions is just icing on the cake.
The great irony is; these are the people (Dems) who are constantly wanting to deal with terrorist supporting regimes. They want us to meet with Iran. They want us to meet with North Korea. They want us to deal with the government of Sudan (which is systematically exterminating some of it's own people). I'm sure they would say we should sit down with Osama Bin Laden himself if the chance arose. In the Democratic world there is no problem so big that it can't be solved with negotiation and no dictator so evil that he can't be reasoned with. With one exception-Fox Broadcasting, the only evil empire that can't be dealt with.
The official reason the Democrats are giving for their boycott is that Fox is controlled by the right wing and has a right-wing bias. Then, just to prove that they won't stand for any bias, the Dems rescheduled their debates to the 365gay channel. Now there's a venue with absolutely no bias whatsoever. I swear, you couldn't even make stuff up this funny. You know, the Democrats would have a lot more credibility with me if they wouldn't continuously contradict their own positions. (Yes I know the Republicans do it too, it's the Dems turn on the fire.)
I guess I should just be happy that the Democrats have finally seen the light. They have finally admitted that there is evil out there that is just plain evil. And how much more evil can you get than the people who brought us Al Bundy.
Finally, If I had my way, these debates would be handled by only hostile moderators. I would put the Republicans on CNN with James Carville asking all the questions and the Democrats would have to deal with Shawn Hannity on Fox and all his snippy remarks. I would even have special moderators for specific candidates like Dick Morris for Hillary Clinton and Giulani's past wives for Rudy. At least then I wouldn't have to listen to soft ball questions predicated by compliments and maybe, just maybe, we would get a debate worth watching with real insight into our candidates. In the meantime, I predict our wonderful Dems will continue to demand that we deal with terrorists and dictators and will continue to refuse to deal with the real threat to America, Fox Broadcasting and Al Bundy. H.C.
15 comments:
"The official reason the Democrats are giving for their boycott is that Fox is controlled by the right wing and has a right-wing bias. Then, just to prove their point, the Dems rescheduled their debates to the 365gay channel."
I hate to admit it, but I feel a defense for Democrats coming on. Uh oh, here it comes:
Frankly, I think the decision to boycott Fox is a politically brilliant strategy. They, like most of the country know that the only true viewers of Fox News programming are die-hard "I won't stray from my party no matter what" conservatives and the few liberals who are looking for ammunition. The station, who has come to be most defined by obnoxious pundits like Hannity, O'Reilly, and Humme; will only allow a legitimate platform for their own folks while they leave the Dems powerless to mount a defense when it comes to challenging issues. So what's the point of going on Fox; other than loudly getting spoken over or getting your mike cut off? At the end of the day, using Fox as a platform for Democrats will only result in a decrease in ratings from the GOP faithful.
Hmmm Dre,
That's one way of looking at it. But what's the point of the Dems constantly only preaching to the choir? The Reps went on CNN and had Chris Matthews moderating. Doesn't that make the Dems look like they're afraid to go anywhere where they might get a tough question? Isn't this really about marginalizing Fox? As much as you might disagree with their politics, you wouldn't want fox shut down so nobody is out there to criticize the Dems when they misbehave. Remember, the Dems will most likely be in power after '08 (given the mess of the war and Rep corruption). Giving them unchecked power will certainly lead to abuse.
"Doesn't that make the Dems look like they're afraid to go anywhere where they might get a tough question? Isn't this really about marginalizing Fox?"
Honestly, I don't think this has anything to do with marginalizing Fox or the Dems being fearful of facing tough questions. I thin YouTubers will prove that pretty soon. Rather, I think that -- given Fox's clear conservative bias makes it almost pointless to attempt to have a platform. Contrary to belief, I don't think that most viewers of political news stations (liberal and conservative alike; though conservative news is far more prevalent) actually know how to discern editorials from journalism. So why put yourself out there at the mercy of Fox editorialists who will do everything possible to make you look silly? Even in the off chance that you're able to mount a solid position, most of the audience won't listen to you just by virtue of your political affiliation.
Essentially, the question comes down to: "Why bother?"
hey H.C., just wanted you to know i'm reading along (not that it makes a difference, i'm sure); just don't have anything to offer on this one. it's a good post though.
Hi Heiress,
I'm glad your still here and of course it makes a difference, I need a women's prespective on some of these issues. So don't be shy if you want to tell me when I've stepped over the edge.
Uh...hello?! I made a point here, Hippie.
Sonny (from Grease): "When a guy picks a chick over his buddies, something's gotta be wrong..."
No offense, Sylvia.
Hey Dre,
Sorry, it's been really busy around here and I wanted to show you something I read yesterday and I had to find it first. I saw this in the Detoit News and since you brought up the youtube thing, check this out- http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2007707230349 I especially liked this part; "Though CNN doesn't mention it much, the cable news network will select the questions posed to the candidates in what on-air host John Roberts calls a "highly secretive process." I guess they'll only answer questions that they like. HMMMMM. I hear the Reps are going to do the same bit. I guess what I'm really saying is; how are we going to get to the bottom of who these people really are when they'll only take questions that they've already polled their responses to?
I'm not endorsing CNN by saying so, but I thought the questions -- pre-selected or not -- were pretty good ones. Interestingly though, none of the questions spoke to immigration and terrorism; subjects where the report card for Democrats has been pretty poor.
But all said, I'm not that impressed with the Youtube format. The same thing could've been accomplished with a live studio audience (though you likely wouldn't have the chance to sample from people all across the nation). This whole thing was a creative; yet pointless display. Frankly, I'm not supportive of this youtube format as I once thought I would be.
"But all said, I'm not that impressed with the Youtube format. The same thing could've been accomplished with a live studio audience (though you likely wouldn't have the chance to sample from people all across the nation). This whole thing was a creative; yet pointless display. Frankly, I'm not supportive of this youtube format as I once thought I would be."
/agree.
WONDERFUL idea, horrible execution. Unfortunate too, as I'd be willing to bet that just about everybody, regardless of partisanship, would prefer that the candidates be asked 'unscripted' questions. And asked by the voters themselves? Genius.
A bit off topic but since Fox was mentioned I may as well point out that I've been wondering how they (Fox) portray the recently announced female president on the upcoming season of "24". Hmmm...
-n
"A bit off topic but since Fox was mentioned I may as well point out that I've been wondering how they (Fox) portray the recently announced female president on the upcoming season of "24". Hmmm..."
I actually like 24, though the plot is starting to get superfluous and cheesy. But you raise an interesting point. I heard about the female president angle as well. You've gotta wonder about their expectations; even when the writers claimed that the move (coupled with having a black president who, by the way, was almost assassinated) was not politically charged. Right...
These democrats are pussies. How can we expect them to deal with Kim Jong Ill if they they can't even deal with Rupert Murdoch. I can't say there is anybody right now that I would vote for on the Democratic or Repube ticket. I hate to say it but I wish Arnold could run. He's moderate enough for me...plus he was in "Predator" so was Jesse Ventura and he could be his vice president.
Hey Nic,
I agree, I was very disappointed/nauseated at watching that farce of a debate. Having a "highly secretive process." sounds too much to me like the Dems ix-naying any questions that made them feel uncomfortable and I think the results proved it. What a bunch of soft-ball bullshit. I predict the Republican debate in the same forum will be equally full of shit. I answer questions I don't like.....why can't they??? Just one more reason people should take a look at the H.C./ Louis Ticket. OOPS I meant Louis/H.C. Ticket.
Hey Tabor,
Why is it I get goosebumps when you slam both parties? LOVE that stuff.
none taken andre.
Post a Comment