CBC-Fox News Debate: Going...Going...
By: Chris Guy
Published On: 4/10/2007 12:41:34 AM
First John Edwards, then Barack Obama (a MEMBER of the CBC), and now Hillary Clinton have backed out of the Congressional Black Caucus' planned debate with Fox News. Officially it hasn't been called off, but the writing is on the wall.
Four years ago the Congressional Black Caucus co-sponsored a debate with Fox News. The banner on the stage read: Democrat Candidate Presidential Debate After the debate, Fox News came up with an article on their website: Democratic Candidates Offer Grim View of America
Hannity, O'Reilly, and the Hitler Youth over at places like the Free Republic and Red State can whine all they want, but Fox News viewers voted for Bush to the tune of 88% last election, that's more than self-described conservatives did. So when people say that Faux News is biased in favor of a conservative idealogy...that's just wrong. They're to the right of the conservative idealogy.
Comments
A step in the right direction (TheGreenMiles - 4/10/2007 1:50:37 AM)
Why would the CBC organize a debate with Fox in the first place? It's not a news channel, it's a conservative talk channel. Every time a Democrat goes on it, it just lends credibility to a channel that deserves none.
Simple, ... (Detcord - 4/10/2007 7:33:49 AM)
...numbers of viewers which dwarf the competitors.
Define competitors (TheGreenMiles - 4/10/2007 9:40:01 AM)
Who are Fox's competitors? You can't compare them to CNN and MSNBC, because those are news channels. Fox is conservative talk.
The media industry defines this, not me... (Detcord - 4/10/2007 3:35:32 PM)
...so your beef is with them. The numbers are what they are.
Media Bistro
http://www.mediabist...
Source: Nielsen Media Research
Jounalism.Org
http://www.stateofth...
Regardless, it's nice to see the infamous Holloywood Ten blacklisting theology emerge again...can't wait to see how this unfolds and is justified.
Agreed. Faux News is All Propaganda, (Lowell - 4/10/2007 8:09:04 AM)
All the Time. Don't give it any legitimacy, it deserves none.
Politicians vs. Statesman (J.Scott - 4/10/2007 10:34:44 AM)
It does not look as if either Party has any real Statesman anymore....simply a bunch of politcians pandering to their bases. A true Statesman like those of Wilson, Kennedy, Roosevelt took their fight to the "American" people not merely those whom have already declared their support. Its not about articulating positions anymore, but simply getting people to the polls..ie your people. The one guy who has it on the rest in the Democrat camp is Obama, who effectively can argue his point and make you think even if you disagree in principle with his issue. Thats statesmanesque. And for true conservatives the only real option is Brownback from Kansas. Statesman debate....Politicians pander. www.alteroffreedom.blogspot.com
*rolling eyes* (TheGreenMiles - 4/10/2007 11:46:04 AM)
Yes, Abe Lincoln would definitely have been a regular on The O'Reilly Factor.
I think you should read your history on Wilson (lauralib - 4/10/2007 1:50:53 PM)
He may have been a "statesman" but he was also a terrible racist. He pretty much singlehandedly eliminated integration in Federal government jobs. While I appreciate your point above, I wouldn't pick him as my role model for "statesman".