Please use the following links to Urge Clinton and Obama to drop out of the Fox News Debate

[jzodda]

You can go here

http://www.hillaryclinton.com/help/contact/Default.aspx

and

http://my.barackobama.com/page/s/contact2

Urge them to follow John Edwards and drop the Fox News Supported Debate. I wrote them the following:

"I am writing this to strongly advocate that you follow John Edward's decision and NOT particpate in the September 23 debate in Detroit hosted by Fox News. If you drop out then this debate loses all of its importance and sends a message to Fox News. They are not fair, not balanced and should NOT be supported by our side. They will just use their pundits to attack you and the other candidates before and after the debate regardless of what is said. What's more important is that we should try to convey the message that Fox News is a network that supports Republicans and is the PR firm of their party."


If enough of you do the same maybe we can get them to all drop out. The more attention we bring to the "fair and balanced" coverage of our side by Fox News the better.

[illinoisprogressive]

1. personally, I think the democrats should go and face them down

Stand up to the school yard bullies and talk back. That is the only way to stop bullies. you don't stop them by staying away. ducking. You take care of bullies by standing up to them.
if they go they can be in their face.

[jzodda]

2. Thats a mistake because they won't be trying to act like a bully

They will try to be polite and ask pre-screened questions. The candidates won't take on the sponsor directly, as they will be there to answer questions and then leave. All this does is make Fox News seem and look credible which they aren't. The idea is to TAKE AWAY all their credibility and the only way to do that is to not participate in their events. If you do you then are saying they are a real news organization. Thats exactly what we should not be trying to portray. If they participate its a victory for Fox News no matter how you look at it.

[liberalnurse]

9. It is futile.

Foxx has an agenda and pre-planned spin..no matter how honorable and accurate the Democrats are, they will twist things like a lemon in a juicer. Decline, decline decline.

[Adelante]

11. I absolutely agree

This is a very poor tactic, imo.

[KingofNewOrleans]

18. It's one thing to go on Fox and debate the talking heads

that push the GOP talking points. I've no problem with people doing that. But there is no reason for Fox to "host" a debate among Democrats. After all the point of the Democratic debate is for the Democrats to debate each other, not to argue with some douchebag like Britt Hume all night.

[Smarmie Doofus]

3. An awkward situation for HRC.....

... as she has courted Murdoch in the past and even attended the 10th anniversary "celelebration" of the Fox News Network.

How do you boycott something in 2007 that you celebrated in 2005?

[jzodda]

4. Simple, its never too late to take a stand

2005 is not 2007 and there is nothing wrong with saying that "I made a mistake in 2005" Now she does not readily admit to mistakes but I am sure her campaign can come with a clever way of wording it. In any event shes a politician and if enough people are against this who are going to vote in the primaries: AKA "us" then she will be forced to rethink her position. She also has political cover in that the DNC is not supporting this debate and has publiclly stated why.

[Hekate]

5. Done & greatly appreciated. I hope you don't mind if I borrowed your words.

If Hillary is the only one left on the list, she will have to bow out too.

Hekate

[jzodda]

6. Please borrow!

Spread it around as much as you like, and thanks :)

[BenDavid]

7. I believe HRC will be ready

for any kind of gotcha questions and she will take her cue from The Big Dawg on how to handle faux news mediawhores....I believe many in here that are sooooooooooooo down on HRC fail to understand that she is married to Bill, the best president in my life time....Do you think she will move either that far left or that far right when she becomes the 44th President? No, she will have 8 years to make America proud once again....

[jzodda]

8. I have no doubt that she can answer any questions, but its not the point

The point is Fox News wins by getting the right to ask a question. At least thats my take on this issue. Edwards seems to get that and I would like the others to see it the same way. I am sure all the candidates will be ready for any and all questions but to deny Fox News the credibility it seeks is to deny them the opportunity to ask anything at all.

The last thing Fox News wants is to become the story itself and when that happens, we have won a small victory and maybe even the beginning of a larger scale discussion among the less informed about their practices.

[ClassWarrior]

10. Amen.

K&R

NGU.

[ddeclue]

12. Hillary is NOT Bill - not even close... any more than GHWB is GWB

This is just a silly line of reasoning.

Hillary is nowhere near Bill in terms of speaking ability or ability articulate an argument. FoxNews will eat her lunch if she shows up. The smart thing to do is to delegitimize Fox by not showing up.

Doug D.

[beaconess]

14. If FoxNews would eat her lunch in a debate, she definitely doesn't need to be president n/t

[ddeclue]

16. You're right, she doesn't need to be President...n/t

[caledesi]

24. Excellent post. You nailed it! nt

[mitchtv]

29. Hillary is apparently no leader either

Edwards and Obama have already given it the beso de muerte

[beaconess]

13. IMHO, any candidate who is afraid to face Fox News isn't ready to be president

The presidency isn't a tea party. And campaigns not only help prepare candidates to go into the lion's den, they help to show us what they're made of.

It would lower my opinion of any candidate who turns tail and refuses to debate on Fox because they're afraid they might get picked on.

This is the Big Leagues. I want our candidates to act like it and not run away from adversity.

[ddeclue]

15. It's not "running away from adversity" it's not giving your enemies a free shot.

In the real big leagues you don't give FoxNews the time of day and legitimize them. If you cow-tow to them then you give them credibility which they will then use against you. If you de-legitimize them by not appearing with them, then they lose all their effectiveness with independent voters and Rupert Murdoch strikes out.


Doug D.
Orlando, FL

[caledesi]

25. Another excellent post. I agree. Tampa, FL nt

[jzodda]

20. Again, Respectfully thats missing the point

The point is not the debate, not how hard or adverse it would be. Its about giving Fox News any credibility as a news organization. I would rather let the RNC host the debate instead of giving Fox News the illusion that its a news organization. At least the RNC is honest enough in telling people the reason for its existence. Letting Fox host it lets the deception continue.

[NormanYorkstein]

22. Why should FOX get to sponsor the Dem debate?

That doesn't make any sense. I wouldn't suggest boycotting the entire network, but why let them stage a debate? As Dean correctly pointed out, FOX is a propaganda outlet for the Republican party.

[Cameron27]

28. I agree

:thumbsup:

[tishaLA]

17. Sen. Obama has handled FAUX with aplomb so far

by freezing them out of his campaign after the madrassa flap. I don't think he needs my advice on how to handle the fascists.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

19. Why would HRC drop out? Rupert Murdoch is supporting her

Many progressives are asking HRC to drop out of the Faux debate, as they did during the controversy over the previously scheduled Faux debate. The real question is not whether she should drop out. The real question is what Rupert Murdoch sees in her that made him host a $1,000 a plate fundraiser for her. Surely Murdoch does not have the interests of progressivism at heart when he supports Hillary Clinton...

[mrgorth]

21. I thought

everyone already backed out of the debate, no?

[ClassWarrior]

23. This is another one! Time to fire up those phones and emails again!

NGU.

[MasonJar]

26. Done!

[jzodda]

27. OBAMA HAS DROPPED OUT!!

We are getting somewhere people! Awesome job! Reported on scum Drudge report

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0407/Obama_Ditches_CBCFox_Debate.html

[jzodda]

30. Looks Like Clinton is also backing out!

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/

"Hillary Won't Do Fox Debate Either


The third shoe drops: Hillary's not doing the Fox News/CBC Debate either.

Clinton spokesman Blake Zeff emails, "We're going to participate in the DNC-sanctioned debates only. We've previously committed to participating in the SC and Tavis Smiley debates."

No word yet from Kucinich and Gravel, or the other campaigns, or from Fox, which could presumably do an empty podium hour and confirm to its viewers that Democrats are, in fact, the cowards it's often portrayed them as. Sounds win-win to me."

[Hippo_Tron]

31. I hope the next Dem President revokes Fox's access to the White House Press Room

[Imagevision]

32. Obama, Hilliary and Edwards have all declined Fox debates today