Opinion: Cop out?
DailyKos has the fax that was sent to FNC announcing that the Nevada State Democratic Party was dropping out of the August debate. The Fax blames it on Roger Ailes’ jokes from last night’s RTNDF Gala. Seems pretty thin to me to cancel a debate not because of something that occurred on FNC’s air, but because of something that was said at an Awards banquet…and by someone who wouldn’t even be directly participating in the debate itself. Add it all up and it looks to me like one giant cop out where the state party was looking for a way to get out and used this as the excuse.
March 9, 2007
Marty Ryan
Executive Producer
Fox News Political Programs
xxx-xxx-xxxx (fax)
400 N Capitol Street NW, Suite 550
Washington DC 20001DELIVERED VIA FAX AND EMAIL
Dear Marty,
A month ago, the Nevada Democratic Party entered into a good faith agreement with FOX News to co-sponsor a presidential debate in August. This was done because the Nevada Democratic Party is reaching out to new voters and we strongly believe that a Democrat will not win Nevada unless we find new ways to talk to new people.
To say the least, this was not a popular decision. But it is one that the Democratic Party stood by. However, comments made last night by FOX News President Roger Ailes in reference to one of our presidential candidates went too far. We cannot, as good Democrats, put our party in a position to defend such comments.
In light of his comments, we have concluded that it is not possible to hold a Presidential debate that will focus on our candidates and are therefore canceling our August debate. We take no pleasure in this, but it is the only course of action.
Sincerely,
Tom Collins
Chairman, Nevada State Democratic PartyHarry Reid
U.S. Senator (D-NV)
How can you lead this nation if you are afraid of facing Fox News. If terrorists said something you did not like, as good democrats will you cut and run too. American better take a close look at you before the November election.
Comment by julie — March 10, 2007 @ 2:09 am
Wow. Unbelievable.
Comment by erljr — March 10, 2007 @ 2:23 am
If this is the true reason — does it mean that Roger Ailes can say “I SORRY FOR THE JOKE” then everything will be fine and the debate will be rescheduled?
Comment by Aunt Mary — March 10, 2007 @ 2:35 am
Unbelievable is right, erljr.
I can’t believe that the Democrats would withdraw from this particular debate because of Fox.
Let’s assume, for the moment, that Fox is the media outlet of the Bush Administration that some people make it out to be. I say - so what? If they ask stupid or out-of-bounds questions, the candidates can certainly call them on it.
The ones who look bad in all of this, in my opinion, are the Democrats. If they truly believe that Fox is slanted and treats the Democrats poorly, then are they going to avoid every media outlet with that similiar perception? It only makes them look weak and fearful of answering tough questions.
Personally, I WANT tough questions posed to all candidates, and if Fox is the network that would do so with the Democrats, then so be it.
On topic, this is a major cop-out.
Comment by FishOil — March 10, 2007 @ 2:35 am
FishOil, I agree. This would be a time for Dems to expose Fox if they showed favorites with their questions. I have demonstrated that Fox is not my favorite network either.. but I can’t agree with this decision.
BTW, I didn’t think Ailes comment was particuarly nice… but it’s nothing you wouldn’t also hear Jay Leno say. It was clearly meant as humor and didn’t necessarily reflect negatively on Obama… it was a praise in a way.
Comment by Danny G — March 10, 2007 @ 2:53 am
i think it’s a lame reason too but how many freaking times does Fox have to make the Obama/Osama “mistake”. Will there be any Rudy/Newt/McCain divorce jokes? Look…Fox is the Republican Parties best friend and no one can deny it and let’s not forget about how Fox treated the Dem’s debates in ‘04?
Comment by Geoff — March 10, 2007 @ 3:15 am
Half of this country is “RED” and wants to know the Democrats answers to the type questions that FOX would likely ask and if they answer with all of America in mind they might win over some voters — Democrats want to claim they can do as good of a job on terrorism as the Republicans, but they can’t even stand up to a FOX mediator. How can the Democrats now think they can lead with MoveOn controlling them?
Comment by Aunt Mary — March 10, 2007 @ 3:22 am
MoveOn controlling them? Oh god. That’s so laughable.
Comment by Geoff — March 10, 2007 @ 3:47 am
Geoff - I spend two-thirds of my viewing time with CNN and MSNBC. The “Obama/Osama” mistake you speak of have occurred at those two networks 98% of the time; and they’ve only been made on FNC by Democrats. If you have something to back up your accusations, show us a link.
I have heard several of the “Rudy/Newt/McCain divorce jokes” you speak of, and so far they’ve all been funny.
And the ‘04 debates were all pretty F&B in my opinion. If you have a link you’d like people to look at, let’s see it.
Comment by erljr — March 10, 2007 @ 4:11 am
In regards to MoveOn “controlling” or “owning” the Democrats, I would think that that perception is something that the Democrats would want to divorce themselves of.
While I think the folks at MoveOn are well-intentioned, I also think they represent the fringe of the party and won’t win them a general election in 2008. We only need to look no further than Howard Dean’s demise due to his far left rhetoric (no, it wasn’t his “scream” that sank his campaign).
Comment by FishOil — March 10, 2007 @ 4:26 am
Dem’s break when their owns tell them what to do.
Comment by phil — March 10, 2007 @ 8:39 am
Owners opps!! The standard has been set.If you don’t agree with a network don’t hold debates on it.MSNBC andCNN should be boycotted to.
Comment by phil — March 10, 2007 @ 8:49 am
Looks like the Dem caught on tape saying the damn liberals need to be controlled is right. Moveon.org will end up screwing their party… I always listen to debates on Fox. All those so called Republicans that just might be thinking about changing party would listen to Fox before some left leaning news outlet. They are still conservatives, so it would possibly bring them votes with a centrist lean.
Comment by VMart — March 10, 2007 @ 9:08 am
“Tom Collins” drinks (hic)yet that’s no excuse.
Comment by Roger C. — March 10, 2007 @ 9:42 am
HERE WE GO AGAIN !!!! the far left LOONIES are dishing it out again but once again they can’t take it!!!! i just dont understand why they like to give it so good but they cant stand to take it!!! hippocrite’s?????? no! just idiotic radicals as normal…..ok Chavez lovers u had ur day…can’t wait to see what comes around on this!
Comment by criss — March 10, 2007 @ 10:10 am
I’ve seen Ailes’ comment in which he mentioned that there is “pressure as to how these debates should be conducted and what questions should be asked”. I have no doubt that is an issue for the parties and the networks when setting up debates. But I also wonder if this debate problem the Democrats have with FNC is less about the moderator and what debate questions will be asked and more about the Democrats being concerned about how the pre-debate and post-debate commentators at FNC will present the Democrats and their positions? And how the chyrons will be worded? These things too can affect an audience’s perception of the candidates and how the the debate went.
From reading around on the ‘net, I see that many Democrats have been upset for several weeks now at the way FNC shows have been portraying the Democratic candidates especially Obama. While the wording of the fax cites the Ailes’ comments as why they are pulling out, my take is that Ailes’ comments were more like the straw that broke the camel’s back so to speak. I think the fax was worded like this just to make sure that a large share of the blame for what happened was laid directly at Ailes’ feet since he is FNC’s chairman and many believe that he sets the tone there.
Comment by STP — March 10, 2007 @ 10:14 am
This is actually scary to me. Shutting out a news organization for political reasons. Think Russia without the killings.
Comment by Noelle — March 10, 2007 @ 10:16 am
Like Russia my ass. This is a free market and Fox purposely chooses to portray Democrats in a negative light to please people like you and Nevada Democrats chose not to play. Take your game elsewhere and so will we.
Comment by elmonica — March 10, 2007 @ 10:31 am
STP, if they can’t take the heat, it’s time for them to get out of the kitchen. They will face scrutiny from FNC whether they debate there or not. Now they will face scorn and abuse, a good bit of it from fellow Dems, for this lapse in judgment. Here was their chance to respond to tough questions in their own words and prove their mettle. They blew it.
Comment by Goldfish — March 10, 2007 @ 10:36 am
Of course, they will face scrutiny from FNC whether they debate or not. Duh.
And the Democrats not being able to take the heat is not what my post was about. I’m questioning the real reasons why they pulled out of the FNC run debate as opposed to what the fax says.
Comment by STP — March 10, 2007 @ 10:53 am
I’m sure what the fax says is a crock. Just another lame excuse.
Comment by Goldfish — March 10, 2007 @ 10:55 am
I couldn’t believe they even agreed to hold the debate on FNC in the first place - might as well have the RNC in charge of the staging and presentation of your platform.
Yeah, the reason for dropping is kind of specious - they should have just said ‘we belated realized - doh - that we chose an inappropriate forum for our debate’.
Comment by Arthur — March 10, 2007 @ 11:47 am
The head of a ‘news’ organization joked in public, on the record, about the democrats…and you don’t think that’s reason enough to come to the conclusion that the dems wouldnt get fair treatment? Where were the jokes about repubs? Viewers see day after day after day the unbalanced coverage on fnc. fnc makes its stance very very very clear, it doesnt in no way want a democrat in the white house.
Comment by Me — March 10, 2007 @ 12:07 pm
The last go-round, all the dems did in their debates was bash Bush. I couldn’t believe it - each one tried their hardest to out bash the President. They said NOTHING about what they would do, just how they hated Bush, etc., etc.! Maybe that’s the problem - they may be afraid that Fox won’t let them go on and on as they did last time, and may actually ask them questions and hold them accountable for direct answers.
Comment by Missy — March 10, 2007 @ 1:14 pm
I thought the Obama/Osama joke was poking fun at Bush, not at Obama.
Comment by Philip — March 10, 2007 @ 1:16 pm
From reading around on the ‘net, I see that many Democrats have been upset for several weeks now
STP: A little education:
A large chunk of the stuff you read on the net, including here, are not from Americans.
Stupidly, Edwards and the Dems capulated to people that can’t vote!
Comment by Ira — March 10, 2007 @ 1:59 pm
A large chunk of the stuff you read on the net, including here, are not from Americans.
Of course. Because all true-blue Amuricans lurve Fox News. And if you don’t, you’re obviously not an American. You’re an Enemy of the State. Just ask Sean Hannity.
Comment by Arthur — March 10, 2007 @ 2:55 pm
If the head of CNN or MSNBC had compared a GOP candidate to a terrorist you guys would be demanding his resignation and organizing a boycott. But the FOX president, a GOP operative, calling a Dem candidate terrorist is just fine and dandy.
Such hypocrites.
Comment by MikeD — March 10, 2007 @ 2:59 pm
“if they can’t take the heat, it’s time for them to get out of the kitchen.”
Why don’t the GOP candidates hold their debate at Air America with Michael Moore as a “fair and balanced” moderator?
Comment by MikeD — March 10, 2007 @ 3:04 pm
Why don’t the GOP candidates hold their debate at Air America with Michael Moore as a “fair and balanced” moderator?
Excellent idea. If Michael Moore isn’t available, maybe Alec Baldwin? Or Arianna Huffington?
Comment by Arthur — March 10, 2007 @ 3:09 pm
#18 Elmonica — This is not a “GAME” — if you take your ball and go home as you put it — you need to stay there and shoot hoops in our own driveway.
#22 Arthur — Going on your theory all Republicans should then “NOT” agree to hold debates on MSNBC as MSNBE is so left wing — i.e. Florida Governor’s Debate 10-2006, Chris Matthews moderator, what a joke — Chris brought his agenda and truly did a disservice to the Florida voters as the issues that was make a difference to them were not discussed.(St.Petersburg Times Tampabay.com - 10-31-06)
#23 Me — NBC, MSNBC, ABC, CBS and CNN in “NO WAY” want a Republican in the White House. They are doing their best to make this “WHOLE DEBATE” against Bush. That way the few conservatives that are in the media will not have any topics for bad press against the democrat candidates.
This will be a extremely important election, our country needs the “VERY BEST” be it a Democrat or a Republican — with the Democrat party allowing MoveOn to stifel the debate we will not as people be well served.
#26 Ira - Great point!
Comment by Aunt Mary — March 10, 2007 @ 3:33 pm
I thought the Ailes joke was aimed at President Bush, not Obama. Spud points this out in a blog entry today.
MikeD, since Michael Moore doesn’t work for a network, I doubt he’d a moderator, However, if a network wanted to bring in Michael Moore as a moderator, the GOP would be up for the fight. They’ve gone head to head with Moore in news programs - no moderation, just debate. Dems need to get the same fighting spirit. I’m still waiting for them to get it in gear.
Comment by Goldfish — March 10, 2007 @ 5:41 pm
And Mike, Keith Olbermann has called the President, Vice President and Secretary of State a lot of bad things during his special comments. And he got away with it.
Comment by Goldfish — March 10, 2007 @ 5:45 pm
Goldfish,
Olberman is more than balanced by Scarborough and Carlson who call Democrats every name in the book. That makes it 2 to 1 in favor of conservatives at MSNBC.
Comment by MikeD — March 10, 2007 @ 6:12 pm
MikeD - I’m glad Olbermann is balanced. We don’t want him falling down.
Please go post on blogs in your own language. Or learn English.
Comment by erljr — March 10, 2007 @ 7:35 pm
Ira,
Obviously it’s a safe bet that some of what is on the ‘net with regards to American politics is not from Americans. It is called the WORLD WIDE web, after all, and the route America chooses to take with its politics affects other countries. I’m interested in what other countries decide to do with their political choices. Aren’t you?
Now, having said that, what’s your real point? That the opinions I read at the major Democratic websites regarding how they view FNC’s treatment of Democratic candidates are not those of the typical Democrat who frequents said sites? That it’s just a bunch non-Americans posting a bunch of anti-FNC stuff in hopes of what? Controlling the point of view of ‘net reading Democrats?
Should some non-American voices be posting on the Democratic websites, it does not automatically make the overall Democratic conclusions I glean from said websites invalid or a lie. Are we to disregard or find suspect every opinion or news item we read on the ‘net made about American politics because it might, perhaps, perchance, possibly be from someone who is not an American? You said they “capulated to people that can’t vote” (I’m assuming you meant capitulated). Isn’t more than likely that most of the people who were wanting the Democrats out of the FNC debate were Americans who COULD vote?
Comment by STP — March 11, 2007 @ 12:26 am
Where do you live STP?
Comment by erljr — March 11, 2007 @ 1:43 am
From one of Ira’s posts in the past it is obvious he thinks only Americans should be commenting here about cable news networks . Mind you that person didn’t have the same opinion about FNC as he did so that may be the reason for that particular post?
Comment by myview — March 11, 2007 @ 10:25 am
STP: Again, my basic opinion on this story is given the large amount of non-Americans that participate on the far-left websites, sign the petitions, etc., John Edwards and the Democrats made a huge miscalculation. The name of the game is to win elections, not win a philosophical argument or get even for some perceived wrong. IMO what they did will cost them votes from both moderates and even some conservatives who are disenchanted with the Republican frontrunners.
From one of Ira’s posts in the past it is obvious he thinks only Americans should be commenting here about cable news networks.
myview: The Fox News Channel that is broadcast in the US is what is also shown in many foreign countries. I believe that MSNBC is only shown in North America and CNN International, not the domestic CNN is what is beamed around the world. So the FNC bashers that are all over this website are reading from a different sheet of music than Americans when it comes to commenting on American cable news.
I really don’t care who comments on ICN but I can smell the foreigners a mile away!
Mind you that person didn’t have the same opinion about FNC as he did so that may be the reason for that particular post?
myview: If this is directed to me, I don’t understand your question.
Comment by Ira — March 11, 2007 @ 12:39 pm
Ira: It really wasn’t a question as much as wondering if you are more tolerant of those foreigners you can smell when they happen to agree with you.
You’re wrong about CNN.CNN US is what airs in Canada,not CNNI.
Oh and in case your smelling test fails.I’m an American currently living in Canada.:)
Comment by myview — March 11, 2007 @ 12:57 pm
myview: Can you still vote in US elections?
Similar to MSNBC, the domestic CNN does not air outside of North America. Last year I was on a cruise and watched plenty of CNN International. It is much different than the CNN in the US.
I am “tolerant” and love the discussions here except when people make outlandish statements or blatantly lie and unfortunately I see a good quantity of those posts around here.
Comment by Ira — March 11, 2007 @ 1:30 pm
The last thing “THE USA” needs is foreign influence in what is going to be a “VERY” important election for “US CITIZENS”. I am sure we will get a great deal and much of it is on sites like MoveOn and it helps fuel the far left wing hysteria. I do not like outside influence from our own government in many aspects of my life, however, the United States of American is the longest standing democracy in the world and I am proud to call it home.
Comment by Aunt Mary — March 11, 2007 @ 2:20 pm
Aunt Mary: I also don’t think ANY country should try to influence some other country’s elections.However if citizens of other countries want to comment or have an opinion about US politics I have no problem with that.I have no idea if what Ira says about signing petitions etc is true or how he would even know.If it does happen , no I don’t agree with that.
Ira: I really don’t know if MSNBC is shown outside of North America so for now will take your word for it. Yes CNNI is the channel most non US citizens receive but you must remember there are programs on CNNI from CNNUS. All the cable networks having transcripts and or video clips, program blogs etc are available for everyone. So I imagine some of these people who you think are foreigners may be getting their opinions about the cable networks from the internet.
As far as the voting question.Surely you must know the answer to that.
Comment by myview — March 11, 2007 @ 3:05 pm
Ira,
Sorry but I think your basic opinion and your original notion that my conclusion (of many Democrats were already upset at FNC prior to Ailes’ remarks) is suspect just because some non-Americans may participate on liberal websites are questionable.
Curious about what you were saying with regards to large amounts of online non-Americans influencing Democrats, last evening and today I regularly checked the location stats for 5 major liberal websites (below) that I used to reach my conclusion (that many Democrats were already upset at FNC) which you disputed.
The number of non-Americans who go to the said liberal websites are actually a small number. Americans make up the hugely overwhelming majority of people at the liberal websites. For instance, my most recent check of the location stats at AmericaBlog was 94% American, Daily Kos 95%, MyDD 94%, Atrios 93%, and Democrats.com 93%. While these numbers do flucuate some, (with a high 98% Americans and a low of 88% Americans) the overall percentages I saw refute your claim that large amounts of non-Americans are participating at liberal websites and thus influencing Democratic opinion.
John Edwards and the Nevada Democrats may have made a miscalculation but it wasn’t be because of the “large amount of non-Americans” that participate on left-wing websites as you claim. Nor do I buy your assertion that they caved into those who can’t vote. As I said in my prior post, I think it’s more than likely that most of the people who were wanting the Democrats out of the FNC debate were Americans who COULD vote…not non-Americans. I base this and my original conclusion upon opinion/analysis/commentary pieces I have heard and read on TV, radio, web and newspapers from both liberals and conservatives who have discussed that Democrats (over the past few years and currently) think FNC has a bias against them. And now I have the website stats showing it’s mostly Americans frequenting liberal sites that feel this way about FNC to further back that up.
Btw, just how many non-Americans signed that petition for the Democrats to pull-out of the FNC debate anyway? I assume you know since you said it’s a large amount.
Erljr, why don’t you ask Ira if I’m an American or not? After all, he claims to have the ability to sniff out if someone is a foreigner. LOL!
Comment by STP — March 12, 2007 @ 12:14 am
I did my ESP thing I do with Ira and found that you are an American living somewhere in the west or midwest. Did it work?
I was actually surprised with your stats. There are lots more non-Americans than I ever expected.
It’s pretty easy to spot the non-Americans here. They write in broken English and/or they go way off point and/or they don’t respond when I ask them something and/or they write one sentence paragraphs and/or they write 1-2 sentence liberal talking points we’ve all heard a million times before. Oh yes, they’re also ALL liberals. I guess there are not many conservative non-American commenters here, but there are some conservative jerks, who are, unfortunately, Americans, and fit into some of the groups I mentioned above.
You, STP, don’t fit into any of those groups, so I guess you and Ira will have to agree to disagree. Or not.
Comment by erljr — March 12, 2007 @ 2:29 am
LOL, Erljr, you’re partially right with your ESP. I don’t live in the west or midwest but I am an American and I grew up in the midwest. Since, I have lived in the south and east.
I was surprised by the stats too. I was actually expecting a lot more non-Americans according to what Ira was saying. I don’t consider an average of 7% to be a large amount. Now, keep in mind, neither Ira or I know what % of those non-American are actually making posts designed to influence Amercians against conservatives (or FNC in this case). Or, maybe Ira does and he’ll tell us? Isn’t it likely that many non-Americans just go there to read like I typically do and don’t bother posting?
When I checked the stats on those liberal sites, I also checked the stats on some of the major conservative sites I read. They actually had a higher percentage overall of non-Americans visiting. My last check on conservative sites like Little Green Footballs had 83% Americans, HotAir 74%, RedState 89%, Right Wing News 87%, Captain’s Quarters 87%, and Riehl View 88% (a high of 95% Americans and a low of 81% Americans). If the non-Americans are liberals (like the ones you say come here), oddly enough, I typically see less opposing (liberal) opinions posted at the conservative sites than I would expect considering they get a higher percentage of non-Americans. I don’t know, maybe the conservative sites delete more posts of opposing opinion?
Anyway, what it comes down to is that I’m not buying the point that non-Americans who come to liberal websites are the ones who got the Democrats to believe that FNC has a bias against them and pull out of the debate. I think America’s Democrats are quite capable of coming to that conclusion on their own.
Comment by STP — March 12, 2007 @ 12:00 pm
erljr: Besides the reasons you gave, I notice when certain items are mentioned here, and I won’t give away any secrets by being more specific, the non-Americans don’t have a clue.
STP: Nobody can ever know how many non-Americans contribute to the far-left blogs and websites. But whatever their number, they have allowed these sites an exaggerated influence in the Democratic Party.
Comment by Ira — March 12, 2007 @ 12:21 pm
You’re not trying to move the goalposts on me, are you, Ira? First you say a “large amount of non-Americans that participate on the far-left websites, sign the petitions, etc.” and now it’s just “but whatever their number”? What happened to “large amount”? ;-) Because you did not address the questions I asked you or provide proof, I assume that means that you don’t have the evidence to back up your statements. That’s fine, I enjoy reading your opinion anyway. It’s just that opinions with corroborating facts carry a lot more weight with me (especially in this case).
The number of non-Americans aside, I think that during the pre-primary process, left-wing blogs and their related organizations could indeed carry an exaggerated influence (just like the right-wing blogs and their related organizations could too). On that we probably both agree. But I wonder if that influence won’t fade quite a bit when the actual post-primary election mode swings into action because the moderates from both parties and the independents (both of whom will probably be providing the deciding votes for the presidency) won’t be paying attention to them. The moderates and independents I know are far too logical and independent thinking to buy into what the extremes of either party will be trying to sell them.
Comment by STP — March 12, 2007 @ 4:00 pm