IF FOX HOSTS XENOPHOBES, WHY WOULD THE CBC CONSIDER THEM FOR HOSTING A PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE?
Uh, to possibly upstart Tavis Smiley, perhaps?
Consider what Americablog had to say on the subject:
Aravosis is on CNN. Coulter isn't -- she's hiding out at FOX News, a network that should not host a Democratic debate
by Joe Sudbay (DC) · 3/05/2007 07:58:00 PM ET
Discuss this post here: Comments (309) · digg it · reddit · FARK ·· Link
John is on Paula Zahn tonight. He'll be appearing throughout the hour. However, as John predicted, Coulter chickened out. Instead, she's appearing on the refuge of the right wing: Fox News. And, to top it off, she's going on Sean Hannity's show. Coulter will get some real tough questions over there, huh?
That Fox News where Ann Coulter feels so safe is also the Fox News that is hosting a Democratic candidates debate this summer in Nevada. Fox is a mouthpiece of the GOP and the right wing. And, if anyone had any doubt (not that anyone should), Ann Coulter's appearance there tonight confirms it. The network that gives comfort and cover to Ann Coulter doesn't deserve a Democratic debate. Matt Stoller explains more here. "Fox Attacks" and MoveOn have a petition here.
I'm hearing speculation from all sorts of quarters that Fox News is going to try and co-host a Presidential debate with the Congressional Black Caucus. If this comes to pass, it's a big deal, and a mistake by the CBC. But here's the thing we ought to realize. If it happens, it's partially our fault.First off, I want to know a couple of things:
(a) What jackass in the CBC did FOX approach in making the offer? He/she should be asked to resign their membership in the CBC, and there should be a recall effort on Chairwoman Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick for even considering going to Fox Network for any damned thing. Given their media history regarding CBC members (Maxine Waters and Cynthia McKinney come to mind here), why would the chicken go to the fox and ask for protection from Col. Sanders? Either way, that chicken is toast, because either the Colonel gets him, or the protector shows their true nature and eats him. So why would you think Fox is going to be "fair and balanced" in their coverage of CBC Members and the presidential debates?
(b) See question (a). I'm fresh out of reasons as to why the CBC thinks getting in bed with the Devil is a good idea. Consider this, if you will. Your erstwhile member, former Rep. Harold Ford, Jr. (D-TN) was a Fox News Media Darling. Then, during his Senate race, here comes some ads with some bimbo saying she met Harold at the Playboy Mansion and says, "Harold, call me!" Though you can't see where Fox may have had a hand in Harold's demise in the Senate race, I would bet dollars to donuts, that Rupert Murdoch funneled money to Ford's opponent, the junior Senator from Tennessee, Bob Corker. Ford thought Fox would be "fair and balanced" since they gave him all that media coverage, right?
I'm willing to bet that while they built him up as poster boy for "New Black Leader" they were also acting like the fox in the henhouse, ready to eat him alive. Ask if they ran that ad on their network. Yeah, it was probably to demonstrate their "faux outrage" at what was being done to Harold and his campaign, but if they loved him, they wouldn't have shown those ads; considering how Fox has this great tendency to report only what they consider "Fair And Balanced".
The fact that they constantly give Satan's wife, Ann Coulter, a free pass (especially when she called John Edwards a "faggot") says volumes about how they regard any and everybody who is of color, female, and most of all, LIBERAL.
So, why are the CBC considering going to Fox News for anything? Have they become xenophobes as well?