Edwards BRILLIANT Move concerning the Fox Debates in Nevada

[ddeclue]

Thank you John Edwards for telling FauxNews to go to hell...

Democrats should not be legitimizing the RNC propaganda channel by appearing as guests on it. Let them try to explain to their viewers why there are only Republican hacks on it every day.

Doug D.
Orlando, FL

:)

[illinoisprogressive]

1. Doug, check my post below. giving you guys a heads up on a potentially

uncomfortable situation. Read it on Tapped and thought you guys should know

[ddeclue]

3. I disagree... Edwards did the right thing...let others follow his lead.

[benny05]

5. Linky?

Just looked on TAPPED, cannot find what you are pointing to, and it would help.

[AlCzervik]

6. totally disagree, Edwards is correct and the CBC is dead wrong.

[BuyingThyme]

31. This guy has some kick-ass moves.

[benny05]

2. I agree

Guess who else says NO to Fox? Carson City NV Dems!

Carson City Democratic Central Committee
RESOLUTION OPPOSING FOX PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE
March 7, 2007

WHEREAS, Fox News is not a neutral source of news – it’s a right-wing mouthpiece like Rush Limbaugh that smears Democrats and spreads blatantly false information; and

WHEREAS, Democrats granting Fox News the illusion of credibility would allow Fox to more easily “swiftboat” our 2008 candidates by pushing false Republican attacks into the mainstream media; and

WHEREAS, everyone supports reaching out to new people, but 1 day of Fox coverage is not worth legitimizing Fox’s misinformation the other 364 days a year; and

WHEREAS, plenty of better alternatives exist to Fox News – in Nevada, MSNBC plus its NBC affiliates, for example, get approximately double the viewers of Fox cable plus its local affiliates; and

WHEREAS, we believe that Democrats need to fight back against Fox News and the right-wing smear machine in the 2008 election cycle—not enable it.

BE IT RESOLVED, the Carson City Democratic Central Committee opposes the proposal to let Fox News host a Democratic presidential debate and strongly urges the Nevada Democratic Party to drop that proposal.


http://www.taylormarsh.com/archives_view.php?id=25250

[saltpoint]

4. con brio! I agree.

Edwards would prefer a real dialogue on health care, for instance, and he's suggesting that FOX News is not the venue to sanction it.

Con brio molto.

[Proud2BAmurkin]

7. It was a smart move. The participants look like saps now.

nt

[Czolgosz]

30. Not just smart, but true to his values, too.

[eleny]

8. he's breaking ground with this philosphical stand

it's so easy to refute any winger arguments launched against him. he's going to continue to get some press over his decision, too. smart. faux deserves this pie in the face.

[seashorelady]

24. Scheduling conflicts can be resolved. John Edwards is standing up.

[bigtree]

9. didn't he also cite scheduling conflicts?

I haven't heard any of the strident criticisms of FOX from Edwards that are coming from those who have praised his decision. Am I wrong?

[saltpoint]

10. Edwards' statement used the agile phrase to the effect that a FOX debate

would "not be the best use of Senator Edwards' time."

The protocol is observed, but the FOX fanny is whacked.

[glitch]

29. That is hilarious and perfect. I am going to use it in future situations.

"I am sorry, that would not be the best use of my time." :rofl:

[saltpoint]

32. Yep. Protocol observed but larger point driven home.

He hit it out of the park.

:dem: :dem: :dem:

[doc03]

11. I think all Democrats should

boycott Fox Noise. If all democrats would refuse to appear on any Fox program people would see how "unfair and unbalanced' they are. Of course LIEberman would still scab on us.

[Czolgosz]

12. Watch the field follow

[Erika]

13. Agreed 100%

Faux is another name for W propaganda.

[NDP]

14. If all of the other candidates attend, it was a terrible move by Edwards. Obama needs to say

that he won't attend, because that's the only way the Nevada Dems are going to even consider getting someone else to do it instead of Fox Noise. This is not about "not attending" a debate, it's about doing what you can to get someone else to do the debate. No need in acting like Fox Noise is a legitimate organization, by allowing them to do the debate.

Tell GOP strategist Roger Ailes to shove it.

Back out if Fox News is going to be doing it, Obama. We know that Hillary is too close to Rupert Murdoch to do the same.

[ddeclue]

15. Nope...it's not..it's the right thing to do...

If Edwards stays out it makes him look strong and them look scared. If he does it alone, he's the only one that looks strong and the rest look scared.

Doug D.

[saltpoint]

16. Yes -- and FOX is put on the defensive. That doesn't happen very often.

It needs to happen much more often.

Edwards has thrown the first pitch.

A very strategic move on his part -- in your word, "brilliant."

[Quixote1818]

17. Three cheers for Edwards! K & R for this one baby! nt

[saracat]

18. Edwards is showing spine. If the others don't join him they look unprincipled

and wimps. This is smart!

[grannylib]

19. I agree with boycotting Fox Fraudcasting altogether. Hubby will flip to

O'Lielley between Tweety's twitterings, while we are waiting for KO and the real news, and I have to walk out of the room. (Hubby just likes to make fun of BillO, but I can't even stand seeing/hearing that arrogant pusbag, and I can't afford a new TV, and if I stay in the room, I am gonna pitch something through the screen one of these days).

Edwards was right, and I hope Senator Obama will back out as well. I HOPE Senator Clinton will, but I have my doubts.

[Emit]

20. Message from Tom Collins, Chairman of Nevada Democratic Party

March 7, 2007

Dear Nevada Democrats:

As you know, the Nevada State Democratic Party has agreed to host a debate with FOX News that has caused some concern among some of our activist allies. Because FOX has such an editorial bias against Democrats, some of our allies believe that we should have chosen another media partner. Senator Reid shares some of these concerns and has asked us to take another look at the parameters of this debate in order to ensure that all Democrats are comfortable as we move forward.

Our objective in hosting the August debate with FOX has not been to endorse the FOX News Channel. Our objective with this debate is the same as our objective in hosting an early Nevada Caucus in general -- to have as many opportunities for Nevada voters and voters throughout the West to hear directly from the candidates for president as possible. That is why our first forum was hosted with ABC News as the broadcaster, our November debate will be hosted by CNN and the final debate in January 2008 will be hosted with another outlet.

In planning the debate, the Nevada Democratic Party has been aware of the intricacies of dealing with FOX and so we secured assurances from them that the details of the debate were mutually agreed upon such as format, panelists, set design, and the assurance of an uninterrupted broadcast without commentary. FOX has also agreed to carry the debate live on KVVU, the affiliate in Las Vegas where most Nevada voters live. Other affiliates may follow. We believe that these details will assure that voters have the opportunity to focus on the candidates and the issues and not the panelists or commentators for an uninterrupted 90 minutes.

Since reaching that agreement with FOX we were heartened to hear from so many people who supported our decision to reach out to voters wherever they may be, including those watching FOX News. The state parties of Arizona, Montana, Colorado and New Mexico joined in support of our decision along with DNC Chairman Howard Dean, many members of the Nevada media and the leaders of the Nevada AFL-CIO, Culinary Union and Professional Firefighters Association. While one of our state party’s Executive Board members has been vocally opposed to the debate, several party leaders have expressed support, including:

* Chris Wicker, Washoe County Chair: http://dullardmush.blogspot.com/2007/02/washoe-dem-chair-responds-to-FOX-debate.html

* Tom Gallagher, 2004 candidate for Congress from NV-03 http://www.nvtoday.com/index.php?option=com_content=view=251=

However we decided to take a step back and make our best effort to address the concerns that have been raised including:

* Many Democrats will want to watch or listen to the debate without supporting the FOX News Channel.

* There was a desire to include a panelist from a more progressive outlet, such as Air America, to ensure balance at the questioners table.

* There was also a desire to bolster a progressive media outlet, such as Air America or Politics TV that could use the opportunity to grow its constituency.

In answer to these concerns, we have secured an agreement to invite KJFK radio, the local Air America affiliate, to air the event live and C-Span will be able to carry the debate twice in its entirety after the conclusion of FOX’s broadcast. Additionally, the Nevada Democratic Party has an agreement to invite a local progressive voice onto the debate panel.

We will also offer PolitcsTV.com the ability to carry the live FOX News web cast feed on its site for one-time viewing. If PoliticsTV agrees, this will give national viewers who do not wish to watch FOX the ability to watch the debate live while bolstering a progressive leaning organization.

With these additions, we feel that we have addressed the concerns of our activists and our own objectives:

* To keep the debate focused on the candidates and allow unfiltered access for our viewers.

* To keep the debate focused on the issues important to Nevada voters.

* To ensure that the most people possible have access to the debate and the candidates.

With these changes, we believe we have made a good-faith effort to address the concerns laid out to us and look forward to working with the candidates and our local supporters to ensuring the best debate possible.

Sincerely,

Tom Collins
Chairman,
Nevada Democratic Party

[loudsue]

21. Tom Collins has had one too many...

And he needs to get a clue about leadership in the Dem Party. Faux News isn't part of the clue.

:kick::kick::kick:

[Emit]

22. I have mixed feelings about this issue.

I live here in NV -- up north. Our problem is reaching voters in the cow counties -- the rural areas. It's no secret you have to court them in order to win an election in Nevada.

Otoh, I think it sucks, too, because I know what the outcome following the debates will be -- with Faux commentators, etc., etc.

Frankly, for our viewers in NV, I hate to say this, but, I do not think it will matter much. Oh, it matters to a few of us who are more clued in -- but most of us are already activists in the party anyway -- and will vote Dem all the way.

One debate out of several might not negatively impact the outcome of votes here.

[Czolgosz]

28. amen!

[Catfight]

23. Pull back the curtain folks...we have a winner! Fox exposed! nt

[Zandor]

25. Did he expressly say it was because it was Faux?

I just heard the campaign comment he had time constraints or something. Or did he say he wouldn't do it becaus it was Faux?

[newyawker99]

26. Hi Zandor!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[Zandor]

27. Thank you!

Good to be here.