Quote Of The Day
June 7, 2007
“The candidates that can’t face Fox, can’t face Al Qaeda”
Roger Ailes – President of FNC – on the Democratic candidates who backed out of FNC sponsored debates
Posted in Christopher Lee, Democrats, Politics, Quotes, Republicans, War On Terror, al-Qaeda
![[Valid RSS]](valid-rss.png "Validate my RSS feed")
content rss
June 7th, 2007 at 1:24 pm
Good point!
June 7th, 2007 at 5:09 pm
Yeah, but the Loonacrats do not even believe there is a war on terror. For the most part, they think it is made up, or that the USA is the cause.
June 7th, 2007 at 6:39 pm
I find Ailes’ choice of words very interesting: “…candidates who can’t face Fox…”. It’s as if he’s admitting that there’d be something to “face”, as in they’d be playing hardball with their questions in an attempt to make them look bad. It shouldn’t be about “facing Fox”, if the channel is truly “Fair and Balanced”, should it?
Teach,
There is indeed a “war on terror”, only I think it’s different from the war that you and many others are picturing. I don’t think it should be thought of as a war in which we are dropping bombs and killing anyone suspected of being or harboring terrorists. The Iraq War should be a pretty good indicator for you that that type of “solution” just isn’t cutting it. We’re making more and more enemies as we go, making it much easier for the terrorists to recruit. So, maybe rather than your failed “war” on terror, we should employ a more intelligent strategy that involves an understanding of Islam, the differences between its sects, and what causes a Muslim man to decide to join a terrorist organization. Then, we can combat their ideologies of hatred with our good deeds and diplomacy. Otherwise, I think we are no better than them – filled with hatred for people we don’t know, and willing to dehumanize them to the point that we don’t care if they are detained indefinitely, tortured, or even killed, without so much as a glimpse at the facts involved with their situation. It’s un-American, if you ask me.
So, yes, I think we’re in a war on terror, but I don’t think it’s the bloody war you envision.
June 8th, 2007 at 6:00 am
a good question will make a good candidate shine, a good question is a substantive one, honest people do not fear tough questioning, weasel-like pandering Idjits do. notice the republicans went to cnn and msnbc knowing they would get baiting questions, and did, and did quite well with them, although the fox debate was best because Brit asked substantive questions and got substantive answers, while on cnn the liberals got stupid questions and looked foolish, while the conservatives got wolf’s baiting questions and made good answers, unafraid of stating their true beliefs.
June 8th, 2007 at 7:59 am
I hate partisan bickering and I think the comment by Roger Ailes sounds too much like a school-yard bully, but Mark has a point. The MSNBC debate was the worst so far. The questions were terrible and the host was impatient and often rude. The CNN debate went well but the FOX debate was better. I’m disappointed that some of the Democratic candidates pulled out. I’m also disappointed that FOX couldn’t come up with a more mature response than the rhetorical equivalent of… “You’re just chicken!â€
June 8th, 2007 at 8:38 am
But Ailes does make a point. If a presidential candidate won’t even go to a news network because they don’t agree with one another how can they possibly handle someone who wants to kill us?
June 8th, 2007 at 9:32 am
You may be right Chris, but I just think the point could have been made with more class and subtlety. I also think this has more to do with choosing your audience. A Presidential campaign is very different from running the country let alone fighting the war on terror. As a candidate President Bush wasn’t exactly known for choosing venues with potentially critical audiences.
Ultimately, when I think of the qualifications that our next President will need to successfully defeat Muslim extremists, participation in a debate hosted by FOX is not the first on my list. It’s too bad that this has become just another partisan talking point instead of a real discussion of what it’s going to take to win the war.
June 8th, 2007 at 11:37 am
I think Roger was succinct, what other reason could you come up with? actually, the candidates themselves said as much, beside the fact they snubbed the congressional black caucus just to snub fox, which shows how much they don’t value their black constituents and how much they do value move-on.org’s money.
they knew that Hume and Wallace would ask questions they do not want to answer, yet the republicans knew the same about Blitzer and Matthews, but they didn’t shrink away from stating their mind. the democrats did. make excuses for them if you must, but the simple fact is one group doesn’t mind answering questions from the other side and the other group does. I think because they know they would have to lie to get elected.