To pretend that the two campaigns lied equally, which what some would call balanced reporting, when in fact the Bush campaign lied to a much greater degree than Kerry’s, would be in itself biased. He merely stated that it wasn’t reasonable to paint both sides equally culpable.
BobLibDem, that was great.
I don’t disagree with any of the criticisms of Fox as a blatantly biased organization and I at least respect, if disagee with, the concerns about them hosting a Democratic debate, but I think that using this joke as an excuse to pull out is transparently contrived. I think it hurts the credibility of the party to resort to the same kind of artifical indignation and selective listening that the Pubs have so often engaged in, and I don’t think it’s a great idea to give the appearance that they can be manipulated by their own fringe elements.
I also don’t see how they would really be damaged by letting Fox host their debate. Everyone already knows that Fox News is virtually a propaganda arm of the GOP and it would allow the country a chance to see how the Democratic candidates could perform with hostile questions (assuming that Fox would not make the attempt to apear unbiased). If the questioning or moderation became flagrantly unfair, I think it would only make FOX look bad, not the Dems.
I could understand the concerns more if Fox was going to host a debate between a Dem and a Republican, but with only dems, it seems to me that, at worst, we would see all the candidates being treated equally unfairly, which is kind of the same as treating them fairly. The Dems should not be afraid of a lion’s den. It’s a good way to earn respect and/or sympathy from initially hostile voters.
By the way, I did see the Daily Show last night, but that’s not what prompted me to write the OP. It just reminded me to to write an OP I had already decided to write anyway. Ironically, I was initially persuaded to take this position by an episode of Bill O’Reilly’s show in which i found myself grudgingly agreeing with his contention that harry Reid was being disingenuous and the the dems were letting themselves get pushed around by MoveOn and Kos.
I concur.
Actually, I think it’d be nice if the relationship between politics and political talk shows became less incestuous. It almost guarantees they’ll be spin-fests that offer no real insight.
I gotta say, Dio, that this pitting is impressive. I wouldn’t have expected it, which is a reflection on me, not on you. It means that I misjudged you. Yes, this pullout is beyond idiotic. It’s good to see rank and file Democrats trying to slap some sense into their leaders. Bloggers who would say that this in any way hurts the Republicans (or Fox, for that matter) have their heads so far up their asses that there is nothing left but legs and feet. The Democrats should be delighted to appear on Fox News and present a palatable message to their audience. Democrats can be patriotic. They can care about families. They’re not all ivory tower intellectuals removed from reality, and they need to communicate that fact to voters. This fuckup demonstrates the opposite.
Not to speak for Dio, but there seems to be some sort of perception on the part of many here that he is condemning the pull-out, and not just the lame justification for the pull-out. I agree with him on the point that justifying the pull out using the joke is lame. I think that they should have pulled out and said that it was because Fox is full of shit and they shouldn’t have agreed to do it in the first place.
The lame joke was just a hook to hang their hat on. However, I don’t think it’s a completely innocuous joke - I do think it was designed to further the Obama sounds like Osama bullshit that they’ve been working on for a while now.
I believe Diogenes has said that he respects but disagrees with the pull out in general. On that note, I respect but disagree with him.
As a result of this “fuckup,” they won’t be communicating that image to people who are predisposed to dislike them. I think the harm is minimal.
Wow that brings back memories of the last time I ever read the Daily Kos.
Good post, Diogenes. I like to believe that I support people who think manufactured outrage is the problem. I really hate when people I might otherwise agree with do it.
That’s a good point. You should focus on getting your message out to people who are already going to vote for your party. That’s where the real bang for your buck is.
Talking to people who voted for the other party is a waste, how is that supposed to get you more votes come election time?
I see a bit of a logic disconnect here. While I do not bother with Fox, I think many independent voters and open minded Republicans do. Their ratings are quite respectable and should not be ignore out of hand.
Jim
Yes Sir, pouring money into an outlet which will simply pour it all back out into your opponent’s back pocket while showing you in the worst possible light is a wise spending decision. That’s why Al Qaeda is traded freely on the NASDAQ…
Hillary went on Fox. She slew Chris Wallace. It takes balls like hers, but it can be done.
If the last debate on Fox in 2003 was that bad, then why would they ever agree to have debates there again?
Who knows? Although if your implication is that the 2003 debate wasn’t bad, one can always look at the record.
From SFGate.com. Also, here’s a transcript of the event. Here’s the first three questions in order:
Reading through the rest of the questions says to me that most of the questions were loaded, nasty bullshit. But the larger issue is that you have an organization with an MO of constantly perpetuating bullshit attacks on the Democrats.
I think it’s perfectly reasonable to freeze them out until they decide they want to be a reputable news organization. Fuck them, and anyone with half a brain will know that it cannot hurt your party, but may help it. Further evidence of the truth of this is borne out in the emergence of concern trolls counseling your party that doing so will cause it to lose support.
Me too. But as Dio was careful to point out, that’s not what they did. What they did was accept the invitation and then later withdrew just because of the Bush joke.
Exactly. I would have disagreed with a decision turn down them down at the outset but I would have understood it. Agreeing to do it and then backing out for such a trumped up reason makes them look like petty whiners and makes them look like MoveOn’s bitches.
I think the real question is why they’re not going. Are they trying to cost Fox money? Or are they afraid that by appearing on Fox they will give Fox a measure of control over their self-presentation?
If they’re just doing it to kick the dust of their enemies off their sandals, I think it’s politically simplistic if not naive.
I’m a Democrat, & I understand the impulse to repudiate Fox News & refuse them any recognition, but fear of entering a lion’s den is unworthy of statesmen. To be fair, maybe the real concern is whether Fox will distort their performance & positions in a way that makes those distorions more credible.
And frankly, given the examples Hentor gave, if they believe that, they’re pussies. They need to explain how their desire to stop funding the war is not a dissing of the troops. That’s something that should be explained to people who don’t understand it, and the right answer could actually change minds about votes. They ought to say plainly exactly what effect they believe pulling all troops out of Iraq right now would have on Iraq if indeed they made Sharpton’s statement. Those are not loaded questions. Nor are they unreasonable questions. They’re the kinds of questions I would hope PBS would ask as well. The candidates may wish to talk about their education plans and their bright visions for a prosperous America, but they can do that during their speeches after the debates.
Geesh, that’s an awful lot of naive there. It’s what they do. They’ve been doing it consistently. Do you actually believe that if the Gospel of the Dems is preached to the Foxfidels, they will See the Light and change their ways?
I spent far too much of my life believing that logic can win people over. The lesson has finally been pounded into my thick head that
From this study http://news.emory.edu/Releases/PoliticalBrain1138113163.html
And there we have it. Liberal, wake up and smell the cognitive dissonance. We have it from the brain experts at Emory U; logic is powerless in the face of partisan sentiments.