Obama, Clinton to skip Fox-backed debate
Rushlimbo
Posts: 832
Obama, Clinton to skip Fox-backed debate
By JIM KUHNHENN, Associated Press Writer
Barack Obama (news, bio, voting record) and Hillary Clinton will not participate in a Democratic debate co-hosted by Fox News Channel this fall, campaign aides indicated Monday.
The decision by the two Democratic presidential candidates follows an announcement last week by John Edwards, another White House contender, that he would forgo the Fox event.
The Sept. 23 debate, set for Detroit, is co-sponsored by the cable news network and by the Congressional Black Caucus Political Education and Leadership Institute.
Without Obama, Clinton and Edwards, however, Fox and the CBC institute would be missing three of the marquee contenders for the Democratic presidential nomination.
Obama and Clinton aides said they intended to participate in six debates sanctioned by the Democratic National Committee. The DNC's list did not include the Fox News-CBC Institute debate, a concession to liberal and black activists who say Fox has slighted blacks and is biased in favor of conservatives.
A spokesman for Obama, who is a member of the Congressional Black Caucus, made it clear that Obama intended to participate in a debate co-sponsored by the CBC Institute and CNN.
"CNN seemed like a more appropriate host," Obama spokesman Bill Burton said.
The Clinton campaign announced its intentions Monday after Obama had let it be known he would not be attending the Fox debate.
"Were going to participate in the DNC-sanctioned debates only," Clinton spokesman Phil Singer said. He added that Clinton already had commitments to participate in an upcoming debate in South Carolina and one hosted by Tavis Smiley, the PBS late-night talk show host.
Democrats have been under pressure from liberal activists to avoid Fox-hosted debates. Last month, the Nevada Democratic Party canceled a debate that Fox was to co-sponsor in August.
The institute, a nonprofit group whose directors include members of the Congressional Black Caucus, and Fox News announced an agreement nearly two weeks ago to air Republican and Democratic presidential debates. But activists, including civil rights leader Jesse Jackson, immediately criticized the alliance and many called on Democrats to pull out.
But Candice Tolliver, a spokeswoman for the CBC Institute, said Monday: "The debates are still scheduled as announced,"
Calls by the Associated Press to Fox were not immediately returned.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070409/ap_on_el_pr/presidential_debate
By JIM KUHNHENN, Associated Press Writer
Barack Obama (news, bio, voting record) and Hillary Clinton will not participate in a Democratic debate co-hosted by Fox News Channel this fall, campaign aides indicated Monday.
The decision by the two Democratic presidential candidates follows an announcement last week by John Edwards, another White House contender, that he would forgo the Fox event.
The Sept. 23 debate, set for Detroit, is co-sponsored by the cable news network and by the Congressional Black Caucus Political Education and Leadership Institute.
Without Obama, Clinton and Edwards, however, Fox and the CBC institute would be missing three of the marquee contenders for the Democratic presidential nomination.
Obama and Clinton aides said they intended to participate in six debates sanctioned by the Democratic National Committee. The DNC's list did not include the Fox News-CBC Institute debate, a concession to liberal and black activists who say Fox has slighted blacks and is biased in favor of conservatives.
A spokesman for Obama, who is a member of the Congressional Black Caucus, made it clear that Obama intended to participate in a debate co-sponsored by the CBC Institute and CNN.
"CNN seemed like a more appropriate host," Obama spokesman Bill Burton said.
The Clinton campaign announced its intentions Monday after Obama had let it be known he would not be attending the Fox debate.
"Were going to participate in the DNC-sanctioned debates only," Clinton spokesman Phil Singer said. He added that Clinton already had commitments to participate in an upcoming debate in South Carolina and one hosted by Tavis Smiley, the PBS late-night talk show host.
Democrats have been under pressure from liberal activists to avoid Fox-hosted debates. Last month, the Nevada Democratic Party canceled a debate that Fox was to co-sponsor in August.
The institute, a nonprofit group whose directors include members of the Congressional Black Caucus, and Fox News announced an agreement nearly two weeks ago to air Republican and Democratic presidential debates. But activists, including civil rights leader Jesse Jackson, immediately criticized the alliance and many called on Democrats to pull out.
But Candice Tolliver, a spokeswoman for the CBC Institute, said Monday: "The debates are still scheduled as announced,"
Calls by the Associated Press to Fox were not immediately returned.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070409/ap_on_el_pr/presidential_debate
War is Peace
Freedom is Slavery
Ignorance is Strength
Freedom is Slavery
Ignorance is Strength
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
totally agree with Maher (might be a first)....this makes them look pathetic...it shows that neither one can debate when the "home field" (CNN, MSNBC) is taken away from them...im taking my ball and going home..hahaha
Because they really are not an alternate. I think you touched on what I see as one of the problems with our politicians these days. the fact that they do not reach across the aisle to try to bring people from other parties. They simply focus on their base and continue to support this political rift in this country.
Clinton and Obama have the decency and self-respect to not sign up for this.
It makes them look weak. The 3 top dem candidates seem to go about the Bush method and only talk to reporters and appear on shows they want to. Sorry, but Ill pass and vote for someone with some balls, which none of these 3 obviously have. WHen Bill Clinton had his fox interview he made Chris Wallace look foolish and in front of a very large, probably mostly conservative audience. None of these three seem to have the confidence in their abilities to do the same. Not exactly a characteristic I look for in a presidential candidate.
I agree with you. It definetly reflects negatively on them. It just goes to show you that they are not that different than Bush.
I don't think Fox News would try to tear down any of the Democratic candidates in any unfair way. Likely they would ask honest and legitimate questions, at least by presidential debate standards. I don't see their not appearing as a sign of fear. Hosting the debates would be a boon for the network; and I see this refusal as the candidates simply not wanting to assist in making Fox, notable for their slant and, to be frank, inaccurate reporting, appear as a reputable news source. Would the Republicans (or the Democrats for that matter) appear in a debate on Comedy Central?
john stewart emceeing a republican primary debate would be awesome.
in the end, maybe them not appearing on fox is kinda bratty, but it will probably hurt fox more than the candidates. though it does reveal the invidious cheerleading of public policy these days. they don't even try to reach middle america or win on their points, they try to rally the base by preaching to the choir. granted, i have trouble believing a foxnews debate would be fair on them... i can only imagine the kind of shit they would quiz them on and im guessing very little of it would have anything to do with their policy stances and more would be demanding that they defend their commie hippie voting record. or maybe they don't want to go on fox cos they dont want their mics cut off like that army vet.
Most likely I wouldnt vote for any of these three, but with the election a year and a half away I could have easily been persuaded too if any of the three impressed me. Although their stance on issues is the most important thing, I do think this makes them look weak. And after we have been through 8 years of Bush dodging the press and not even reading newspapers because he doesnt like criticism, I am not really up on voting someone for the same type of mindset. The best way to discredit Fox is to do what Bill Clinton did and go on and make them look foolish. The only thing this does is make them look scared of Fox. And with the makeup of Fox viewers, I hardly think the dems looking scared of them is going to discredit the station a bit. In fact, I think many will look at this as a Fox news victory. Fox news isnt going away, and will be there through the next presidency. Might as well make it cleare now that you arent scared of them, and you can hold your own when on the channel.
Edwards=no
Obama=maybe, ask me closer to the election
I honestly believe that some Democratic candidates would pander to Comedy Central and the softball questions (and ass kissing) from Stewart or Colbert.
Or, to put it another way, ripping on the people in power doesn't automatically translate into unwavering support for the opposition. You eat what you're fed, and I don't fault Stewart or Colbert for dining heavily on the all you can eat buffet that the Bush administration provided.
Thats ridiculous. Fox is the most watched news channel on TV. I understand how we all look at Fox and I understand all the negative points of Fox, and agree with most of them. But, to say the most watched news channel has no credibility is ridiculous. Maybe they shouldnt have credibility, but they do, because a lot of conservative viewers find them credible. And really, thats all that matters.
as opposed to???????????????
I think it's the most watched because of programs like the O'Reilly Factor and Sean Hannity's show. It has little to do with their reporting.
Oh Im sure that is the case. But my point was, that Fox should not be dismissed just because of how we look at them. A very significant portion of the country does find them credible. By simply dismissing them, these candidates are more or less letting Fox's credibility issues go unchallenged.
A true leader should be able to engage their opponents supports. Listen to them and attempt to embrace their beliefs and meet them half way. We no longer have that type of leadership in this country. Wether democrat or Republican they only cater to their base and constantly alienate the otherside. This is probably the main reason why I can't support a Republican or a Democrat, with the exception of Ron Paul. They really don't care about the country as a whole only about their party and it's supporters.
Of course I wouldnt like, but an entertainment show and a channel that does have a lot of influence on how people in our country view the news is a completely invalid comparison. We can all shit on Fox as much as we want. And I agree, they deserve to be shit on. But because we decide to criticise them, doesnt mean that a significant portion of the country dont look to Fox to help them form an opinion. If you simply want to dismiss Fox because you dont find them credible, then you more or less let their lack of credibility go unchallenged, and the many viewers are going to be influenced by a biased news source whose opponents wont bother to challenge them.
No it isnt. Do you find Fox credible? I dont. Does your opinion of Fox change if the dems do this debate or not? Mine doesnt. Do you think it changes the opinions of Fox loyalists because the Dems wont go on? I seriously doubt it. This does nothing to challenge Fox's credibility. It just makes the dems look scared IMO.
I don't think it lets their credibility go unchallenged. I think Clinton, Edwards, and Obama are missing a huge opportunity to reach out to voters who would normaly not support them. I'm going to assume that most republicans watch Fox News simply because the news is presented in a slant that is favorable to them. This could be a golden opportunity to reach out to those Republicans who are dissappointed with the current republican party and it's leadership. Instead though they choose to do the samething they blame this administration of doing and that is surrounding themselves with supporters so that they do not have to face any criticism.
Well that is actually the biggest issue I think. Fox's credibility IMO isnt going to change no matter if they do it or not. But it does give these candidates a chance to reach a very large audience that probably isnt paying much attention to them at this point. And I think they are missing out on their opportunity to try and reel in some disgruntled conservatives, or especially moderates.
I believe that the more Fox News's bias becomes evident (and let's face it, many people still don't consider them to be "conservative"), the more viewers it will lose. It's a tabloid station that I believe got many of it's viewers - the ones that pushed it past other stations in ratings - simply because they waved the most flags and had the flashiest red, white, and blue graphics whooshing past the screen following 9-11. That will eventually wear off (and, if I'm not mistaken, it's already starting to). Like I said, this is the challenge.