Who's Afraid of Brit Hume?

As reported in none other than The New York Times, Sen. Christopher Dodd and Gov. Bill Richardson have declined an invitation to attend and participate in a debate among Democrat presidential hopefuls in September at Detroit. Sen. Dodd and Gov. Richardson join Hillary Clinton, John Edwards, and Barack Obama in spurning this particular opportunity.

Why would five candidates decide to skip a chance to promote their candidacies against their opponents on a national stage? Are they afraid of stepping foot in Detroit? Perhaps they are. But one of the event's sponsors is the Congressional Black Caucus, so that's a good thing, right?

The other sponsor is the Fox News Channel.

While Mr. Edwards is the only one of the candidates to explicitly announce his distaste for Fox and, therefore, refuses to appear, it is not a stretch to say that the other candidates think alike and are attempting to sate the once-fringe wing of the party that now calls the tune. As it is with many among this element, this so-called protest is nothing more than a base appeal to the practitioners of political incandescent rage rooted in total ignorance.

Can anyone point to an example of when someone on the left has yielded some sort of concrete proof for the assertion that FNC is a right-wing organ? That is to say, can someone on the left convincingly explain their hatred of this channel without repeating the daily mantra from Keith Olbermann beamed in through their tin-foil hat?

Just what is it about FNC in general - or assuming he will moderate the debate - Brit Hume in particular - that these candidates find so objectionable? Do they really believe Mr. Hume will open up the questioning by turning to Sen. Clinton to ask "When exactly did you stop beating your wife?" and then snicker as he chest bumps Rupert Murdoch?

Or are they afraid that Mr. Hume might actually ask them to explain the myriad of inconsistencies, lies, and general ridiculousness that characterizes this bunch of candidates in a way that Chris Matthews or Charles Gibson wouldn't dare? Are they afraid that Mr. Hume might ask them to answer the hypothetical question he posed to the Republican candidates regarding a simultaneous nuclear attack on two American cities and how they would squeeze info out of captured terrorists?

It would be refreshing if someone in the media would think to ask these clowns if they have ever spent any time at all, you know, watching the Fox News Channel. Have these candidates ever watched "Special Report"? If so, would they disagree that it is a serious newscast or insist it is a series of segments featuring the recitation of Rovian fax blizzards?

Another question: When will Sen. Clinton or Sen. Obama issue a press release to announce that, in conjunction with their refusal to appear in a debate co-sponsored by FNC, they will henceforth instruct their minions to quickly switch off National Public Radio the instant Mara Liasson and Juan Williams are heard on the air? After all, they have the stink of "Special Report" and "Fox News Sunday" all over them, so they must be sinister in some respect and unworthy of the candidates' attention.

The left likes to belittle Bill O'Reilly and uses him as the poster boy for FNC's supposed partisanship and Republican hackery. Yes, Mr. O'Reilly can be a pompous blowhard toward guests - but he has been a pompous blowhard toward guests of all stripes; left, right, black, white, liberal, conservative. Anyone who has watched "The Factor" for more than 30 minutes (if you can stand the shouting) can see that. Can someone like Mr. Olbermann really claim that he has the diversity of guests that has Mr. O'Reilly?

This latest "Fox Flap" is just more proof that the current crop of Democrat presidential aspirants are unserious people, which is most dangerous in these very serious times. If political figures ceased appearing in front of what they think are partisan news organizations, President Bush would have thus far called exactly zero press conference. Any presidential candidate who cannot "stand up" to Fox News Channel and face its "challenge" is really unworthy of being in the race at all, let alone making life-and-death decisions in the Oval Office.

As it stands, FNC could really induce a most severe outburst of whining from the fab five by placing a lectern for each candidate on the stage in Detroit and leaving it there for the broadcast's duration whether the candidates show up or not.

Cheap trick or the truth? You decide.

Matt May welcomes comments at matthewtmay@yahoo.com
As reported in none other than The New York Times, Sen. Christopher Dodd and Gov. Bill Richardson have declined an invitation to attend and participate in a debate among Democrat presidential hopefuls in September at Detroit. Sen. Dodd and Gov. Richardson join Hillary Clinton, John Edwards, and Barack Obama in spurning this particular opportunity.

Why would five candidates decide to skip a chance to promote their candidacies against their opponents on a national stage? Are they afraid of stepping foot in Detroit? Perhaps they are. But one of the event's sponsors is the Congressional Black Caucus, so that's a good thing, right?

The other sponsor is the Fox News Channel.

While Mr. Edwards is the only one of the candidates to explicitly announce his distaste for Fox and, therefore, refuses to appear, it is not a stretch to say that the other candidates think alike and are attempting to sate the once-fringe wing of the party that now calls the tune. As it is with many among this element, this so-called protest is nothing more than a base appeal to the practitioners of political incandescent rage rooted in total ignorance.

Can anyone point to an example of when someone on the left has yielded some sort of concrete proof for the assertion that FNC is a right-wing organ? That is to say, can someone on the left convincingly explain their hatred of this channel without repeating the daily mantra from Keith Olbermann beamed in through their tin-foil hat?

Just what is it about FNC in general - or assuming he will moderate the debate - Brit Hume in particular - that these candidates find so objectionable? Do they really believe Mr. Hume will open up the questioning by turning to Sen. Clinton to ask "When exactly did you stop beating your wife?" and then snicker as he chest bumps Rupert Murdoch?

Or are they afraid that Mr. Hume might actually ask them to explain the myriad of inconsistencies, lies, and general ridiculousness that characterizes this bunch of candidates in a way that Chris Matthews or Charles Gibson wouldn't dare? Are they afraid that Mr. Hume might ask them to answer the hypothetical question he posed to the Republican candidates regarding a simultaneous nuclear attack on two American cities and how they would squeeze info out of captured terrorists?

It would be refreshing if someone in the media would think to ask these clowns if they have ever spent any time at all, you know, watching the Fox News Channel. Have these candidates ever watched "Special Report"? If so, would they disagree that it is a serious newscast or insist it is a series of segments featuring the recitation of Rovian fax blizzards?

Another question: When will Sen. Clinton or Sen. Obama issue a press release to announce that, in conjunction with their refusal to appear in a debate co-sponsored by FNC, they will henceforth instruct their minions to quickly switch off National Public Radio the instant Mara Liasson and Juan Williams are heard on the air? After all, they have the stink of "Special Report" and "Fox News Sunday" all over them, so they must be sinister in some respect and unworthy of the candidates' attention.

The left likes to belittle Bill O'Reilly and uses him as the poster boy for FNC's supposed partisanship and Republican hackery. Yes, Mr. O'Reilly can be a pompous blowhard toward guests - but he has been a pompous blowhard toward guests of all stripes; left, right, black, white, liberal, conservative. Anyone who has watched "The Factor" for more than 30 minutes (if you can stand the shouting) can see that. Can someone like Mr. Olbermann really claim that he has the diversity of guests that has Mr. O'Reilly?

This latest "Fox Flap" is just more proof that the current crop of Democrat presidential aspirants are unserious people, which is most dangerous in these very serious times. If political figures ceased appearing in front of what they think are partisan news organizations, President Bush would have thus far called exactly zero press conference. Any presidential candidate who cannot "stand up" to Fox News Channel and face its "challenge" is really unworthy of being in the race at all, let alone making life-and-death decisions in the Oval Office.

As it stands, FNC could really induce a most severe outburst of whining from the fab five by placing a lectern for each candidate on the stage in Detroit and leaving it there for the broadcast's duration whether the candidates show up or not.

Cheap trick or the truth? You decide.

Matt May welcomes comments at matthewtmay@yahoo.com