Stupid Democrats!
After John Edwards and Hillary Clinton, even Barack Obama decided to pull out of a debate being sponsored by Fox News. How stupid can these Democrats get? Non-Americans often wonder how is it that someone like George Bush managed to win two terms. How the Republicans managed to control all arms of the government for so long. And most of the answer is right here. Because Democrats are just way stupider. And for them to win elections, Republicans don't just have to be plain normal bad and incompetent. Republicans have to be really far out wrong, idiotic and complete failures. In other words, Democrats can win elections only if they are handed those elections on a golden platter like the 2006 midterm elections.
Is Fox News conservative, biased and a right wing propaganda machine? Of course it is. Which is the precise reason why any competitor with any amount of fortitude would go on their territory and kick their ass. It's the same reason why an away victory is much more significant in sports than a home victory. If you think you are right, and have everything figured out enough to be the President, you will appear on any show. If you don't you are no better than Bush who, at a tough time before the November elections, appeared only on Bill O'reilly's show where he was served softball questions.
Besides, Fox News has massive ratings. Sure, its viewers are mostly conservative. But it does not mean that none of them can be swayed. A significant number of their viewers are probably just right-of-center, and tired of the Republicans' incompetence, could change their mind. Why else have the approval ratings for a president who won the popular vote dropped to 30%? By refusing to appear on Fox News you are just strengthening the opinion that there really are two Americas, irrevocably divided. Have these people forgotten that a person as polarising and extreme as Ronald Reagan won 49 out of 50 states in his 1984 re-election? You think he did it by just faing friendly crowds?
Why go as far back as Reagan? Look at Bill Clinton. He had the balls to go on Chris Wallace's show on Fox News for an interview, knowing fully well that Matthews will ask him partisan and loaded questions. And Clinton responded passionately, and with substance in his arguments, and really, in the eyes of any fair observer, soundly whipped Chris Wallace. Even the most rabid conservative who saw that interview must have paused and thought at least for a moment, "Hey, Bill Clinton probably did do a lot to fight Laden and 9/11 was really caused mainly by Bush's incompetence".
Edwards, Clinton and Obama have all proven to be rather yellow by turning down Fox, and missed out on a great opportunity to sway many of the fence-sitters. And if this were a stock market, I would sell the Democrat shares and buy Republican heavily.
Is Fox News conservative, biased and a right wing propaganda machine? Of course it is. Which is the precise reason why any competitor with any amount of fortitude would go on their territory and kick their ass. It's the same reason why an away victory is much more significant in sports than a home victory. If you think you are right, and have everything figured out enough to be the President, you will appear on any show. If you don't you are no better than Bush who, at a tough time before the November elections, appeared only on Bill O'reilly's show where he was served softball questions.
Besides, Fox News has massive ratings. Sure, its viewers are mostly conservative. But it does not mean that none of them can be swayed. A significant number of their viewers are probably just right-of-center, and tired of the Republicans' incompetence, could change their mind. Why else have the approval ratings for a president who won the popular vote dropped to 30%? By refusing to appear on Fox News you are just strengthening the opinion that there really are two Americas, irrevocably divided. Have these people forgotten that a person as polarising and extreme as Ronald Reagan won 49 out of 50 states in his 1984 re-election? You think he did it by just faing friendly crowds?
Why go as far back as Reagan? Look at Bill Clinton. He had the balls to go on Chris Wallace's show on Fox News for an interview, knowing fully well that Matthews will ask him partisan and loaded questions. And Clinton responded passionately, and with substance in his arguments, and really, in the eyes of any fair observer, soundly whipped Chris Wallace. Even the most rabid conservative who saw that interview must have paused and thought at least for a moment, "Hey, Bill Clinton probably did do a lot to fight Laden and 9/11 was really caused mainly by Bush's incompetence".
Edwards, Clinton and Obama have all proven to be rather yellow by turning down Fox, and missed out on a great opportunity to sway many of the fence-sitters. And if this were a stock market, I would sell the Democrat shares and buy Republican heavily.
