Why Are Dems Scared Of Fox News?

[Gunny]

So are all the other libs on Fox just as dumb as Alan?

Since I don't know who "all the othe libs" would be, be specific. Name names.

 

[red states rule]

They just use weak people who cant debate, and arent quick witted enough to protect themselves against agressive questions,

The guests stammer or agree with the hosts, they are weak in defending their standpoints.

Fox wouldnt allow Libs who are fierce debaters and intelligent enough to quickly rebutt an attack, for fear of making Liberalsim look in any way respectable.

So now Juan Williams, Mary Ann Marsh, Mort Kondracke, Wesley Clark, Martin Frost, Bob Beckel, Bob Shrum, Eleanor Clift, Laura Swartz, Nina Eason, Ellis Heinnigan, Jane Fleming (Young Dems of America), and David Corn are weak people who cant debate?

 

[Gunny]

They just use weak people who cant debate, and arent quick witted enough to protect themselves against agressive questions,

The guests stammer or agree with the hosts, they are weak in defending their standpoints.

Fox wouldnt allow Libs who are fierce debaters and intelligent enough to quickly rebutt an attack, for fear of making Liberalsim look in any way respectable.

And my argument to that would be they aren't exactly using the cream of the crop in Sean Hannity. He's just a talking point parrot, and an annoying little bastard with one navy blue suit and red tie in his closet.

 

[Gunny]

So now Juan Williams, Mary Ann Marsh, Mort Kondracke, Wesley Clark, Martin Frost, Bob Beckel, Bob Shrum, Eleanor Clift, Laura Swartz, Nina Eason, Ellis Heinnigan, Jane Fleming (Young Dems of America), and David Corn are weak people who cant debate?

Who?

 

[Superlative]

Who?

exactly.

 

[red states rule]

Who?

Playing dumb or just dumb?

 

[Gunny]

Playing dumb or just dumb?

I recognize one name (count 'em) on your list of "highly qualified" debaters, and Wesley Clark is a dumbass. One only hopes he was a better general than he is a politician.

As I previously stated, I think the quality, or lack thereof, of liberal voices is nicely offset by the lack of quality conservative voices. Probably why I don't watch many of those shows at all. Each side just lines up its parrots and has at it.

You would fit in well. A voicebox for ralking points without substance.

Care to pick one of your talking points and debate it in depth with me in your own words, without leaning on mass article spamming to make your argument?

 

[Shattered]

I recognize one name (count 'em) on your list of "highly qualified" debaters, and Wesley Clark is a dumbass. One only hopes he was a better general than he is a politician.

As I previously stated, I think the quality, or lack thereof, of liberal voices is nicely offset by the lack of quality conservative voices. Probably why I don't watch many of those shows at all. Each side just lines up its parrots and has at it.

You would fit in well. A voicebox for ralking points without substance.

Care to pick one of your talking points and debate it in depth with me in your own words, without leaning on mass article spamming to make your argument?

What makes you any more special than the dozens of other people that have asked him to do the same?

 

[Gunny]

What makes you any more special than the dozens of other people that have asked him to do the same?

You DO have a point.

However, he asked if I was dumb. I'm offering him the opportunity to find out for himself.

 

[Shattered]

You DO have a point.

However, he asked if I was dumb. I'm offering him the opportunity to find out for himself.

I guess if he had to ask, he already has his answer, and will head for the hills at any given moment..(Or, at least whichever hill doesn't have you standing on top of it).

 

[red states rule]

I recognize one name (count 'em) on your list of "highly qualified" debaters, and Wesley Clark is a dumbass. One only hopes he was a better general than he is a politician.

As I previously stated, I think the quality, or lack thereof, of liberal voices is nicely offset by the lack of quality conservative voices. Probably why I don't watch many of those shows at all. Each side just lines up its parrots and has at it.

You would fit in well. A voicebox for ralking points without substance.

Care to pick one of your talking points and debate it in depth with me in your own words, without leaning on mass article spamming to make your argument?

So what is your beef with the rest of the libs I listed?

Or are they disqualified from bieng liberals if they appear on Fox?

 

[red states rule]

What makes you any more special than the dozens of other people that have asked him to do the same?

Because you don't like the answers is not my problem

Learn to deal with it

 

[maineman]

Because you don't like the answers is not my problem

Learn to deal with it

you never answer questions...you just spam


let's try a couple just for fun:

will you explain your claim that America has had a 60% decrease in casualties in Iraq due to the surge?

will you explain why the size of AL Gore's electric bill is relevant to his position on global warming given the fact that all of his electricity is green?

 

[Gunny]

So what is your beef with the rest of the libs I listed?

Or are they disqualified from bieng liberals if they appear on Fox?

I have no beef with them. Never heard of them. THAT is my point.

Both sides would be served better to ditch the parrots and allow people that wish to honestly discuss the issues and their differences and see if a compromise can be reached that satsifies both sides.

Instead, they get idiots and parrots who make a living off of creating controversy, not solving the issues and let them beat on each other for 30 minutes. It's called entertainment with little if any real political value except to people like you who are willing to believe the stupid shit.

 

[Gunny]

Because you don't like the answers is not my problem

Learn to deal with it

Giving benefit of doubt that you may have just missed my challenge, I will reissue it.

Pick a topic and argue your side from your point of view in your own words without spamming links as defelctive responses.

I'll argue the other side.

 

[Gunny]

I guess if he had to ask, he already has his answer, and will head for the hills at any given moment..(Or, at least whichever hill doesn't have you standing on top of it).

I wonder whereabouts that young lad has run his little ass off to?

 

[Shattered]

I wonder whereabouts that young lad has run his little ass off to?

Hiding behind mothers skirts, no doubt.

 

[red states rule]

I recognize one name (count 'em) on your list of "highly qualified" debaters, and Wesley Clark is a dumbass. One only hopes he was a better general than he is a politician.

As I previously stated, I think the quality, or lack thereof, of liberal voices is nicely offset by the lack of quality conservative voices. Probably why I don't watch many of those shows at all. Each side just lines up its parrots and has at it.

You would fit in well. A voicebox for ralking points without substance.

Care to pick one of your talking points and debate it in depth with me in your own words, without leaning on mass article spamming to make your argument?

My list of libs include people who headed up Presidential campaigns, reporters for the Washington Post, Boston Globe, and NPR

Still not liberal enough for you?

 

[Gunny]

My list of libs include people who headed up Presidential campaigns, reporters for the Washington Post, Boston Globe, and NPR

Still not liberal enough for you?

And don't you usually call the WP, Boston Globe and/or NPR journalists idiots? Being a journalist does not necessarily qualify one as a good debater. Being a good debater does not necessarily make one a good, or convincing presence on TV.

Botton line is, I don't give much credence to either right or left in these TV debates, regardless what channel they are on. They just sit there and bounce talking points without substance off one another.

I'm just seeing the humor in watching "Mr Libs suck, Libs did this, Libs Did That, yada, yada, yada," defend their intellect.

 

[Shattered]

And don't you usually call the WP, Boston Globe and/or NPR journalists idiots? Being a journalist does not necessarily qualify one as a good debater. Being a good debater does not necessarily make one a good, or convincing presence on TV.

Botton line is, I don't give much credence to either right or left in these TV debates, regardless what channel they are on. They just sit there and bounce talking points without substance off one another.

I'm just seeing the humor in watching "Mr Libs suck, Libs did this, Libs Did That, yada, yada, yada," defend their intellect.

I see he's still skirting the very last question of your previous post.. Quoted around it, tho..