Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [utepprogressives] Republicans Stampede Away from YouTube Debate

Expand Messages
  • Greg Cannon
    This reminds me of the great outcry a few months ago when Democrats refused to debate on FOX: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0307/3069.html Nevada Dems
    Message 1 of 1 , Jul 27, 2007
      This reminds me of the great outcry a few months ago
      when Democrats refused to debate on FOX:

      Nevada Dems Nix Fox Debate

      By: Ryan Grim
      March 12, 2007 11:59 AM EST

      The Nevada State Democratic Party is pulling out of a
      controversial presidential debate scheduled for Aug.
      14 in Reno and co-hosted by Fox News, according to a
      letter released late Friday from state party chairman
      Tom Collins and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid

      The letter said Nevada Democrats had entered into the
      agreement with Fox, despite strong opposition from
      Democratic activist groups such as MoveOn.org, as a
      way of finding "new ways to talk to new people."

      But Collins and Reid wrote that comments on Thursday
      by FOX News Chairman and CEO Roger Ailes, when he
      jokingly compared Democratic presidential candidate
      Barack Obama, the junior senator from Illinois, to
      Osama bin Laden, "went too far," and prompted Nevada
      Democrats to end the partnership.

      "We cannot, as good Democrats, put our party in a
      position to defend such comments," the letter said.
      "In light of his comments, we have concluded that it
      is not possible to hold a presidential debate that
      will focus on our candidates and are therefore
      cancelling our August debate. We take no pleasure in
      this, but it is the only course of action."

      The debate was to be hosted by Fox News Channel and
      Fox News Radio, the Nevada State Democratic Party and
      the Western Majority Project.

      A statement released Friday night from Fox Vice
      President David Rhodes said: "News organizations will
      want to think twice before getting involved in the
      Nevada Democratic Caucus, which appears to be
      controlled by radical fringe, out-of-state in interest
      groups, not the Nevada Democratic Party. In the past,
      MoveOn.org has said they 'own' the Democratic party.
      While most Democrats don't agree with that, it's
      clearly the case in Nevada."

      --- Julie Keller <julieannkeller@...> wrote:


      Except for McCain and Paul.


      Continuing Rush’s content (in thepost directly below)
      that YouTube is a gigantic liberal conspiracy,Jose
      Antonio Vargas at WashingtonPost.com learnsthat so
      far, only two Republican candidates have signed up for
      theirYouTube/CNN debate.

      . . . But so far, only Sen. John McCain (Ariz.)
      andRep. Ron Paul (Tex.) have agreed to participate in
      the debate,co-hosted by Republican Party of Florida in
      St. Petersburg. . . .
      Sources familiar with the Guiliani campaign said he’s
      unlikely toparticipate. . . .

      In an interview Wednesday with the Manchester (N.H.)
      Union Leader,Romney said he’s not a fan of the
      CNN/YouTube format. Referring to thevideo of a snowman
      asking the Democratic candidates about globalwarming,
      Romney quipped, “I think the presidency ought to be
      held at ahigher level than having to answer questions
      from a snowman.” . . .

      “We’re very hopeful that all the campaigns will get on
      board,”said Steve Grove, head of news and politics at

      Added state Republican spokeswoman Erin VanSickle:
      “It’s animportant debate in an important battleground
      state that just moved itsprimary to Jan. 29th. In
      other words, we have every confidence thatthey will
      attend. They can’t afford not to.”


      When in the course of human events, it becomes
      necessary for onepeople to dissolve the political
      bands which have connected them withanother, and to
      assume among the powers of the earth, the separate
      andequal station to which the Laws of Nature and of
      Nature's God entitlethem, a decent respect to the
      opinions of mankind requires that theyshould declare
      the causes which impel them to the separation.

      We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men
      are createdequal, that they are endowed by their
      Creator with certain inalienablerights, that among
      these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

      That to secure these rights, governments are
      instituted among men,deriving their just powers from
      the consent of the governed. Thatwhenever any form of
      government becomes destructive of these ends, itis the
      right of the people to alter or abolish it, and to
      institute newgovernment, laying its foundation on such
      principles and organizing itspowers in such form, as
      to them shall seem most likely to effect theirsafety
      and happiness.

      Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long
      established shouldnot be changed for light and
      transient causes; and accordingly allexperience hath
      shown, that mankind are more disposed to suffer,
      whileevils are sufferable, than to right themselves by
      abolishing the formsto which they are accustomed.

      But when a long train of abuses and usurpations,
      pursuing invariablythe same object evinces a design to
      reduce them under absolutedespotism, it is their
      right, it is their duty, to throw off suchgovernment,
      and to provide new guards for their future security.

      So,can we ITMFA?
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.