Edwards, Obama effectively scuttle Fox News/CBC debate

The Congressional Black Caucus Institute can’t say it wasn’t warned. Democratic activists and officials implored the CBC Institute not to partner with Fox News for a debate with the Democratic presidential candidates. The CBC Institute struck the deal anyway — assuming that they needed candidates, not activists, to pull off a successful event.

As of today, they have neither.

Late last week, John Edwards, to his credit, announced that he would boycott the debate. Edwards’ deputy campaign manager Jonathan Prince said, “[W]e believe there’s just no reason for Democrats to give Fox a platform to advance the right-wing agenda while pretending they’re objective.”

This afternoon, Barack Obama agreed.

Barack Obama has chosen not to attend September’s Democratic presidential primary debate co-sponsored by the Congressional Black Caucus Institute and Fox News, an aide said, effectively dooming the event.

Obama is the only member of the Congressional Black Caucus running for President, and his decision allows other candidates to skip the debate without facing criticism that they are turning their backs on a leading black institution.

Friday, John Edwards was the first candidate to announce he’d skip the debate. The CBC Institute is hosting one other debate, with CNN in January, in which all candidates are expected to participate.

“CNN seemed like a more appropriate venue,” the aide said, adding that Obama himself had not called CBC leadership or Fox executives to deliver the news. “It was handled at a staff level.”

The aide said that Obama will participate in the six officially-sanctioned Democratic National Committee debates, whose existence provided candidates a measure of cover to drop out of the Fox-sponsored debate.

(For those of you skeptical about reports from The Politico, ABC News confirms the report.)

Kudos to Edwards for stepping up first, and kudos to Obama for following suit. It’s the right call and sends the right message.

I can only imagine the vitriolic response Fox News is going to deliver. You’ll recall, of course, that FNC Chairman Roger Ailes was livid with John Edwards a month ago, after Edwards was the first candidate to back out of a Nevada debate co-sponsored by the Republicans’ network.

“There’s a long tradition of news organizations, national and local, sometimes together, sponsoring presidential and other candidate debates. The organizations and the panelists have been the objects of a lot of advice and even pressure as to how these debates should be conducted and what questions should be asked. This pressure has been successfully resisted, but it’s being tried again this year with the added wrinkle that candidates are being asked to boycott debates because certain groups wants to approve the sponsoring organizations. This pressure must be resisted as it has been in the past. Any candidate for high office of either party who believes he can blacklist any news organization is making a terrible mistake about journalists.”

And if Fox News were a news organization with journalists in its employ, Ailes might have a point.

It’ll be interesting to see how other candidates respond to Edwards and Obama stepping up like this. Guys like Dodd and Biden are anxious to get exposure and make their case to Democratic voters, so they were unlikely to take the lead on this one. But do they show up anyway, or bolt now that the coast is clear?

Richardson was ready to boycott Fox News’ event in Nevada; will he be the third to thumb his nose at the network?

Hillary Clinton has been fairly quiet on the debate over the Dems and Fox News; will she rush to play catch-up?

Regardless, the Congressional Black Caucus Institute clearly chose the wrong partner, picking a Republican network with a history of racial insensitivities that the CBC knew would put candidates in an awkward position. Now they’re bolting. Good.

sometimes things just turn out the way they’re supposed to. if there is any fairness in this world, this will be just the beginning of more problems for faux news.

  • John Edwards proved again that he is willing to take the lead. Excellent! Fox Mews must now go back to stabling a lesser breed of horses.

  • It’ll be interesting to see how other candidates respond to Edwards and Clinton stepping up like this.

    I think you mean Edwards and Obama. Unless I missed Clinton doing something as well, which would be welcome.

  • The candidates should get a list of the inflammatory statements made by the commentators still employed by Fox, and read these at every opportunity until Fox Noise is washed up.

    Fox Noise is it’s own worst enemy. All it needs is more exposure to sunlight, and it will melt like the vampire that it is.

  • nice catch Zeitgeist.

    Unless I’m reading this wrong, Hillary Clinton is in a no-win situation. If she backs out, then it will look like she followed the lead of Edwards and Obama. Clearly following them is not a good position to be in. If she doesn’t back out, she will be seen with second tier candidates *and* will expose herself to Faux News shenanigans.

    Apparently her consultants charged her campaign for $400,000 last quarter. IMHO she is getting ripped off. Someone should have seen this coming and gotten her out front on this issue. At the very least she should have announced her not participating with 24 hours of Edwards backing out.

  • It’ll be interesting to see how other candidates respond to Edwards and Clinton stepping up like this.

    Typos corrected. Thanks.

  • “[W]e believe there’s just no reason for Democrats to give Fox a platform to advance the right-wing agenda while pretending they’re objective.”

    Good for Edwards for giving a short, pithy statement about this. It shows just how easy it can be to make an effective jab and an effective point.

    Hey Biden, Kerry and Clinton – are you listening? Stop with the bloviating. Say you’re not going to waste your time on Fox, you don’t consider it to be a news network, and move on.

  • I bet Hillary goes, unless others (Richardson) drop out. The dimwits who advise her will see this as a free shot to reach the Fox audience.

    I actually kind of hope she goes. Let the pandersation begin!

  • dajafi,

    The dimwits who advise her will see this as a free shot to reach the Fox audience.

    Proving their dimwittedness, no doubt, as Faux “News” chops and mangles her appearance to underscore every potentially negative aspect. Having said that, I think you are right, she will participate unless the 2nd tier players also bow out. At which point her backing out will look even more pathetic.

  • The CBC was very aware of all the objections before they went ahead and partnered with FAUX news anyway. Says a lot about their leadership to just ignore their members and what should have been good judgment.

  • If Clinton even thinks about doing a deal with FOX, she’ll be branded forever as a “Vichy” Democrat. That may be the Rupe’s gameplan, though—to fragment the Dem camp by pulling the Hillary groupies out of the mainstream….

  • This is the second time that Edwards has taken the lead on this issue (the Nevada Faux debate being the first), even though a good case can be made that Obama (because of the CBC connection) should have taken the lead on this one. I’m liking Edwards more and more, though I still think Obama is the stronger candidate (better orator).

  • … and Clinton makes 3. She’s outa there
    http://tinyurl.com/yrqlpg
    Didn’t take her long once Edwards and Obama cracked the ice. Too bad that neither Obama nor she managed a little dig at the Faux, the way Edwards had, but you can’t have everything, I guess. And her statement seems a tad unclear about her participation in the other CBC-sponsored debate (January, with CNN, IIRC). Obama says “6 sanctioned and the other CBC”; she says “only the 6 sanctioned”. Does anyone know if the CBC/CNN debate is one of the “sanctioned-6”?

  • Despite Bush vetoing stem cell research funding, certain Dems have been observed to spontaneously grow some backbone 🙂 Hooray for Edwards!(and to a lesser but still important extent, Obama).

    Suck on this Roger!!

  • Comments are closed.