Note to Dems: please stop praising Fox News

April 24, 2008

I had hoped Democrats were already on the same page on this one. Fox News is a partisan news outlet, which exists to promote the Republican agenda. The network doesn’t work especially hard to hide its ideology or partisanship, and this isn’t especially controversial anymore.

Which is precisely why Terry McAuliffe, chairman of Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign and a former chairman of the Democratic National Committee, shouldn’t praise Fox News while appearing on the network.

On Tuesday night, after Clinton’s victory in the Pennsylvania primary, McAuliffe said, “Let me congratulate Fox because you were the first ones to call it for Hillary Clinton. Fair and balanced Fox. You beat them all.” When the correspondent kicked it back to the studio, Brit Hume told the audience, while partially laughing, “It certainly is nice to hear none other than Terry McAuliffe, acknowledging that we were first on this call and that saying that as other Clinton representatives have, that we are fair and balanced. We certainly try to be. We’ll take that and be proud of it.”

How proud of it? Now, the Republican network is using the words of Clinton’s campaign chairman in a promo commercial.

Didn’t we just go through this a few weeks ago?

Actually, yes. Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell (D), a prominent Clinton campaign surrogate, appeared on “Fox and Friends” in late March, and told Steve Doocy:

“I think during this entire primary coverage, starting in Iowa and up to the present — FOX has done the fairest job, and remained the most objective of all the cable networks. You hate both of our candidates. No, I’m only kidding. But you actually have done a very balanced job of reporting the news, and some of the other stations are just caught up with Senator Obama, who is a great guy, but Senator Obama can do no wrong, and Senator Clinton can do no right.”

It’s especially frustrating because I’m fairly certain Hillary Clinton doesn’t agree with either of her two close allies. She seemed to make her perspective clear when she pulled out of a Fox News-sponsored debate last year, arguing that she considers the network a partisan outfit. In this sense, I really doubt that McAuliffe and Rendell are part of a deliberate strategy from the Clinton campaign to curry favor with the Republican news network.

What we’re left with, though, are two former DNC chairmen, both prominent voices in the party and surrogates for a leading Democratic presidential candidate, going out of their way to help defend Fox News (while the current DNC chairman, Howard Dean, frequently does the opposite).

This really isn’t helpful, guys.

Fox: We decide…What to report.

  • Clinton dead-enders are disgusting.

    Sorry I haven’t deeper analysis to offer.
    But this simply can’t be spun any other way.

  • McAuliffe’s cheerleading is a lot like those bozos who proclaimed that the Titanic would never sink. A bit of throw-up just emerged into my throat . Hillary is a GOP in Democratic clothing.I say FOX should hire Terry to run McCain’s campaign.

  • This is now a pattern with the Clinton campaign, and anyone who doesn’t get that she will say anything just doesn’t get it. I’t’s not just praise for those who smeared the Clintons, but Tuzla, Ireland peace, Kosovo, free trade with Columbia, the Obama cult myth, and bomb Iran denials.

    “Everyone in politics lies, but they do it with such ease, it’s troubling,” – David Geffen

  • It’s not the dem’s, it’s the clintons. I don’t think they are dems anymore, blew dogs maybe. Get it straight please!

  • Boys and Girls, you are witnessing the death-rattle of the DLC. First Lieberman’s re-election campaign, now McAuliffe, Lanny Davis, et. al.

    This election cycle appears to be finishing them off.

  • Where is the virtue in calling an election early, anyway? Why is that an achievement for a news channel?

    I can see why it’s an advantage for a candidate — especially in 2000, when it made Bush the presumptive winner. However, that would mean that “fair and balanced FOX” is excellent only because they satisfy one of the candidates.

  • I really doubt that McAuliffe and Rendell are part of a deliberate strategy from the Clinton campaign to curry favor with the Republican news network.

    Just another example of Clinton embracing the ol’ Republican double standard.

    Fox News is “fair and balanced” because they attack Obama, but not Clinton. (Ignore the fact that Fox News and the other Republicans want Clinton to be their opponent in November.)

    Obama was “whining” when he complained about the questions in the ABC debate, but Clinton’s complaints about questions in ealier debates was constructive criticism.

    Obama is using “Rovian tactics” if he attacks Clinton, but when Clinton attacks Obama it’s merely the “fun” and “exciting” part of the campaign.

    Tony Snow would be so proud.

  • Obama has the right idea– shut Fox News out and marginalize ’em.

    A Martian looking at Clinton’s surrogates praising Fox, the Scaife’s and Moon’s
    endorsements of Clinton in their newspapers, and the NC GOP’s anti-Obama
    ad would have to conclude that Senator Clinton is running for the Republican
    nomination.

  • Never forget that the Clintons are charter members of the DLC, the group that was created to participate in the Publican corporatist conspiracy against Americans. If any single entity is responsible for the ‘spinelessness’ of the Democratic Party, it is the DLC. Both Clintons will tow the corporatist line whenever it counts, then turn around and lie and say they didn’t. And McCauliffe was also with the DLC from the beginning. We need to eject them like we ejected Lieberman, brush off our shoulders, and Move On!

  • You know that these people are all going to the same cocktail parties in Washington, so getting buddy-buddy with someone you constantly see in your same social circles is nothing new.
    It is called the village, and they are the villagers. They have little connection to us out here in reality world. They used to hate the Clintons as outsiders, but after being there for 16 years they are full fledged fellow villagers.

  • You can tell me Terry MCauliffe is not a schmuck. But you won’t convince me.

  • They are sucking off Fox because they know their best chance of reaching the slack-jawed hillbillies who are her base is through Fox. Fox is happy to reciprocate for now, because they want Clinton to be the nominee. That way, it doesn’t matter who wins, as both are Money Party candidates.

    I’ve been watching this thing closely for years, and I find it impossible to reach any other conclusion.

  • beep52’s comment last night about that this is not Dem vs Rep, but really Status Quo vs Change. Obama represents the most powerful challenge to their little group of kingmakers/ideabreakers/dealmakers in almost 50 years.

    This primary will end up being a necessary DLC/Clinton ectomy for the Democratic Party.

  • “It’s especially frustrating because I’m fairly certain Hillary Clinton doesn’t agree with either of her two close allies. She seemed to make her perspective clear when she pulled out of a Fox News-sponsored debate last year, arguing that she considers the network a partisan outfit.”

    I’m not sure this was the case. If I remember correctly, she originally agreed to the debate, and was roundly criticized — particularly because she was crossing a boycott that had been established by the party leadership. I remember calling her office with my concerns. Only after criticism did she back out.

    Does anybody have a similar recollection? I’m at work, and will admit that I do not have time to research the issue fairly.

  • Let me seeee…

    According to the Clinton campaign, you can tell a lot about Obama by the people he associates with, people like Wright, Rezko and Ayers.

    Now wouldn’t that same logic also apply to the Clintons associating with the likes of Richard Mellon Scaife, Rupert Murdoch and Fox News?

    Just saying, what’s good for the goose should also be good for the gander, agreed?

  • What do you expect from Clinton supporter’s ? The Clinton’s keep leaning further and further towards the neocons in their effort to get elected. Just another reason to not elect her..You can’t trust someone who has to lean on others so visibly to get elected. HC will be untrustworthy in the White house. Day 1 and she will say we have leave the troops in Iraq despite all her peresidential campaign promises. The Clinton’s will just be Bush continued.

    What victory did Clinton Have/ she did not win enough popular votes to pass Obama’s popular vote. TheClinton’s are still behind in delegates and super delegates are politicians and will vote the way of furthering their career and will go for the winning ticket.What’s the sense of siding with a loser.

  • Laura @ 15,
    That sounds about right. I seem to remember she was late in the game on the the Fox boycott. Now it’s become clear that she’s working for the same corporatist forces as McBush, she’s a little less fussy.

  • It’s mathematical. Democrats do not praise Fox. Clintonians praise Fox. Therefore (at the very least on this particular issue), Clintonians are not Democrats and, likewise, Democrats are not Clintonians.

  • Laura has it right. Clinton committed to the Fox debate and only pulled out when all the other candidates had done so and the pressure was mounting.

  • All the money Hillary is raising should be credited to John McCain’s campaign account. Her fundraising is only hurting Democrats. And she’s building up the very people who are going to tear down the Dems in November.

  • The Clinton camp can’t bite the hand that feeds.

    Since when is it ‘fair and balanced’ to be the first to jump to a conclusion?

    Rendell and McAuliffe are part of the problem. They are exactly the reason there is an ongoing battle for the soul of the party, and fortunately, they are losing.

    They should be used to it by now.

  • after all these years of being married to bill, hillary’s used to being used & abused by the men in her life, something she’ll sadly be forced to realize were she somehow able to get the nomination. If she thinks the Fox News love is going to continue, she’s in for a rude awakening. It’ll be the political equivalent of an abused wife telling her ER doctor that she fell & smacked her eye on a door knob. Lots of excuses to hide the fact that she ddn’t walk away when she should’ve.

  • What does it say about Clinton that the only place she’s getting positive press is Fox?

  • Laura and PeteCO: If I remember right the sequence was:

    1) Edwards backed out of FOX, called a spade a spade.
    2) Obama and Hillary followed suit about the same time.
    3) Nevada Dems were looking for a way out of the CBC/Fox debate without angering Fox viewers
    4) Roger Ailes went on stage and joked about Obama/Osama
    5) Nevada Dems jumped on that (as if they had no other reason to consider Fox as a propoganda outlet) and pulled out of the debate.

    I may be way off on this.

  • It’s especially frustrating because I’m fairly certain Hillary Clinton doesn’t agree with either of her two close allies. She seemed to make her perspective clear when she pulled out of a Fox News-sponsored debate last year, arguing that she considers the network a partisan outfit. In this sense, I really doubt that McAuliffe and Rendell are part of a deliberate strategy from the Clinton campaign to curry favor with the Republican news network.

    I think it’s very sweet and nice of you to say this. But, I don’t think it’s true, at all. If she didn’t agree with this strategy, it would never have happened again after Rendell did it. Then she could say he went out on his own, as he’s wont to do, and separate yourself from it. But, when it’s repeated and by McAuliffe? I just don’t think there’s any doubt then. When she cozies up to Scaife her very own self? No doubt about it.

    She’s playing a dangerous game. She knows why they are being “fair and balanced” to her — it’s for the money they stand to make if she’s continues and if she’s the nominee. They’ve got decades of dirt, old dirt, new dirt, true dirt, false dirt and it’s uh, burning a hole in their pockets (hot dirt?).

    She’s betting she can outrun them and that if this goes on long enough they won’t have time to really hurt her between the nomination and November. They’re betting on profits. We all lose in this little game of Republican chicken.

  • Gawd, I shouldn’t have watched this so early. Now I know a little what it’s like to have morning sickness. 🙁

  • I guess it depends upon what you mean by “fair and balanced” because I suspect Hillary thinks her campaign has been “fab” too. This is just typical Clinton politics: they say and do anything to get what they want.

  • I never was a Clinton supporter, however, I was willing to give her a chance given the current state of affairs. That is changing – very quickly. My patients is running thin. If the Clinton campaign keeps pushing the way they have – they’re going to push this independent fence sitter over to the Obama side. I’m way beyond sick and tired of Rovian politics.

  • Why doesn’t Obama just give up?

    He has too many negatives. Maybe he could win the primary, but there is no way that he could win the Presidential election. Obama really should support Hillary.

    Hers’ a list of items that he has to fight about with McCain:
    1.)Reverend Wright: He still is supporting this man. Obama compares him to an old uncle. Has anyone seen this man’s videos? It is frightening.

    2.)Louis Farrakhan: Reverend Wright’s church, Osama’s church, supports Farrakhan. Farrakhan is against the Jewish people and very controversial, to say the least. He is frightening also.

    3.)Obama has a Muslim father. Obama might say he is a Christian, but Muslims don’t think so. Are there any radical Muslims anywhere that might just say to other radical leaders that Americans support Muslims? Muslims don’t necessarily hear the news properly. That would be frightening.

    5.)Elitist Attitude: McCain has already said that he thinks Obama’s comments were Elitist. That is probably the worst McCain could address. He will attack him for not being like one of the “boys”.

    6.)Racist Attitude: McCain has addressed Obama’s comments about being a “typical white person”. He talked about this on a radio station and during his famous race speech.

    7.)Unpatriotic: Not a big deal, but it will be when McCain decides to ask him again why he doesn’t wear an American flag pin. What would be the harm if Obama would just wear one to satisfy Americans?

    8.)William Ayers, the terrorist that has bombed the pentagon: Obama was on a board “The Woods Foundation” with this man. Would anyone go to a board meeting with a man that doesn’t feel one bit of remorse for bombing US buildings?

    9.)Tony Rezko, criminal from Chicago: Obama first said he hardly knew him during a debate. Now Obama has revealed he bought land from him and took money from him for his campaign. Don’t’ think that this won’t be brought up again and again. Obama knew this man for over 17 years.

    10.)Barack Hussein Obama: Even his name will become an issue. Democrats will hear the Republicans blast his name everywhere.

    It’s not one issue. This is just a sampling of the many issues that Obama would have to address again and again.

    Please, wake up America! There is no way Obama can win this general election. Stop thinking he’s the Democratic savior. He should really step aside and let Clinton win this race.

    Please think with your brain and not with your heart. Unless you want McCain to win this election, stop supporting Obama and support Senator Clinton.

    The media has painted Senator Clinton as unlikable, then why is she winning in big states? They have and Obama has attacked her from the start of this primary. What has she done to hurt America? What has she done not to show support for Americans. She is a Democrat and will win this election. She has been vetted and people have trashed her for years. There is no more they can throw at her. Obama has too many issues and who knows what else will become a problem.

    What exactly has Obama done that shows all that he has done for us? Change what? If it’s just being a Democrat, so is Senator Clinton. He has done nothing to prove his big “change”.

    Wake up Americans!

  • 11.) Obama won’t appear on FoxNews like good corporate suck-ups are supposed to do. This is very troubling for all fans of patriotic “fair and balanced” news.

    There, got it on topic for you.

  • What does it say about Clinton that the only place she’s getting positive press is Fox?

    It says that I don’t trust her as far as I could throw the Sears Tower. When Fox becomes the outlet for a dem, we are seriously off base.

    Fox is not news, it is pure spin, opinion, and full of crap.

  • Obama has a Muslim father. Obama might say he is a Christian, but Muslims don’t think so.

    Obama’s father was an atheist.

  • Haven’t you guys learned yet that clinton is just a republican in disguise? -axt113

    What disguise? 🙂

    It says that I don’t trust her as far as I could throw the Sears Tower. -MsJoanne

    Careful, MsJoanne or you’ll end up as a defendant in the new trial.

    🙂

  • It’s just like our pals in the Middle East always say: “The enemy of my enemy is my friend.” Still, a little subtlety would be nice.

  • McAuliffe AGAIN?

    The same Terry McAuliffe whose disgusting comments on immigration — aiming not just at Republicans but at the Tancredo wing of the Party were the reason I first doubted that I could vote for Hillary is she were nominated.

    (Remember this? It was on KPCC-FM last February.
    “I couldn’t agree more. We’ve got to shut these borders down. These people shouldn’t be coming in this country. We need to enforce our border protections. We have to do something for the people who have been here for years and have paid taxes — you know, we’re for the people who have been in this country and paying taxes and raising their family. But for the people who have not been here, who have been here illegally and have taken advantage of the situation, we need to have a plan to get them back to the countries they came from, and more important, which is the first thing John talks about, we have gotta shut these borders down. I couldn’t agree more.

    … I don’t care if you’re a Democrat or a Republican, we all agree you’ve gotta shut the borders down. People who are coming into this nation taking our jobs.”

    And of course, when challenged on a statement by her campaign manager, the Clinton campaign denied that they represented the Senator’s position. And kept McAuliffe on.)

    Watching the Clinton campaign, and trying to get inside the ‘reality’ they are seeing makes me want to ask a Clinton supporter if they can direct me to the Mad Hatter’s cottage. I’m thirsty and want a cup of tea before I choose my flamingo for the croquet match. Because it is perfectly obvious that they are firmly convinced this particular ‘caucus-race’ is being conducted in (and by the rules of) the wonderous land down the rabbit hole.

    (One final note. One group that provided the margin of victory for Hillary in various states was Hispanics. Imagine if the Obama campaign had used the quote above in ads on Spanish-language radio. But the difference between the two campaigns might come down to the fact that it really is hard to imagine him using this type of tactic — or her refraining from using it.)

  • #30, Very Concerned American – Are you sure that you are not another Insane Fake Professor satire?
    Seldom do we run into the literal example of a “concern troll.”

  • Fox, Scaife, Limbaugh.

    This was in bad taste the first time I said it, and still is, but I have to repeat it.

    HOW does this differ from a woman who was gang-raped, and later contacts the same gang to convince them to hand out the same treatment to a rival — believing, incorrectly, that by doing so she’s also ensuring her own safety?

    Will someone PLEASE throw a bucket of water over the WBE!

  • I must agree that MSM has been very biased, and despite the fact that FOX is a republican front, they are proving to be LESS biased in their coverage of the democratic primaries.

    So, please stop trying to discount the truth just because it invovles FOX.

  • Greg, re #45

    Do you know anything about Fox or the right-wing base of the GOP? Perhaps you’re too young to remember impeachment or the better part of the 90s? With Fox’s help the hard-right of the GOP actually got Clinton impeached and reported every hair-brained anti-Clinton attack that ever existed. (Vince Foster, Whitewater, Paula Jones, Gennifer Flowers, Troopergate, etc. Need I go on?) The Vast Right Wing Conspriracy was real– seriously. Although less a conspiracy than just a well-funded network of rabid anti-Clinton mad tin-hatters. So maybe you don’t understand why it’s so nuts that she’d turn to any of them for help getting out her message now.

    Guess who was behind the VRWC financially? Richard Mellon Scaife

    Guess who Clinton turned to for an endorsement? Richard Mellon Scaife

    Guess whose newspaper endorsed Clinton in Pittsburgh? Richard Mellon Scaife

    Um, they’re less biased in their coverage because they’re openly in favor of Hillary?They *need* Hillary– for ratings and revenue. If they don’t have Hillary to run against they don’t have a way to make money NOR do they have a Plan B to get the party behind McCain. Hillary– even more than Bill– has been their best fund-raising tool since the late 90s. Ever since she left the White House they have been talking about the SCARY idea of her presidency. So why is she even giving them the time of day? Does she have no self-respect? no scruples at all?

    Also, what makes you think Fox is being more fair unless you actually watch them for election coverage?

  • I actually think Obama going on Chris Wallace makes a little sense– he actually needs to show that he can go up against right-wing attacks. In the same way I feel that the NC GOP’s anti-Obama ad needs to happen so that people can see what kind of effect it might have. If it does little or nothing in NC then we can all worry less about the impact of it in the GE. If anything, it might help counter the silly Obama is a muslim rumor.

  • I think that you all should be asking yourselves what is wrong with the “liberal” media when Clinton folks think that Fox has been fair. I don’ t think its a problem with Clinton people…

    • Comments are closed.