Sunday, March 11, 2007

Dems Surrender to; What Chance Have They Against Jihad?

Oh, my, my, my.

The Democratic candidates for the 2008 Presidential race
have summarily picked up their toys and gone home, rather than honoring their agreement to participate in a televised debate that was to be co-hosted by the (evil!) Fox News Channel, in Nevada.

Did they realize that they won't be tossed the softball questions from the swooning MSM that they have traditionally relied upon to make them look good? Or that the accepted premise that no matter what they say, they "mean well" (whereas non-leftists are just, well, "mean"), would be challenged?
Or was it that the Dems and their seething, leftarded, loonbatted base decided it would be better for them to take the hit now, rather than to stand up to FNC and be scrutinized in a "fair and balanced" way?

NO, apparently the DNC's stunning "cut and run" was due to pressure and threats from the tin-foil hat nutjobs at who claim they have "bought and paid for and own"* the DNC? (*see here and here and here). From the speed with which the DNC did an about-face, it's clear that isn't just blowing smoke --- they do own the DNC, lock, stock and barrel.

If the DNC can't even stand up to or the Fox News Channel, what possible chance do they have against jihadist butchers and their enablers, who must now be laughing their asses off at the prospect of a Democratic president in 2008?!

Let's keep a close eye on who the jihadists (and their apologists in CAIR, etc.) direct their money, support and endorsements to in the 2008 election circus.



The Politico:

In announcing the event, a statement posted by the state Democratic Party has Reid offering high praise of the debate partnership with Fox.

“This is more great news for Nevada,” he said in the statement. “I'm happy FOX News will be a partner for the August presidential debate. Western issues will be a major focus of this debate in particular. With FOX News as our partner, candidates will have an opportunity to not only speak to Nevada voters, but voters across the West who will be instrumental to electing a Democratic president in 2008.

Ailes lauded the idea, too: “FOX News is proud to be a leader in coverage of the 2008 campaign season and a co-host of this important presidential debate. We look forward to working with the Nevada Democratic Party and the Western Majority Project."

But apparently demanded that the DNC summarily withdraw from the debate (is this "cut and run" or "strategic redeployment"?), and like good little minions, Harry Reid and the rest of the"owned" Democrats snapped to attention and promptly surrendered the Nevada theater of battle to Fox News.

March 14 - Update at HotAir here.

March 14 - Update 2: Apparently the Nevada Democratic Party has been taking lessons in reality-manipulation and -denial from HuffPost (see here and here)... because the link to the press release listed above, in which Reid expresses his happiness at FNC hosting this debate is *poof* GONE!!! Just like it never existed.

The link now only produces a blank page. But if you do a search on the key words highlighted, you'll find plenty of citations to the mystery press release. News flash, Democrats: Just taking down a key link doesn't change the reality that the press release was genuine, and was accurately quoted.



"My name is Ayman al Zawahiri, #2 in command of al Qaeda, and I approve this message:

"We heartily endorse John Edwards for President of the United States!!! He is the living embodiment of the spineless, sissified American that we jihadists believe you to be, and with him at the helm of your infidel nation, we know that it'll only be a matter of time before he sees the need to negotiate your surrender to us. After all, Edwards can't even stand up to that infidel Fox News Channel. So please, you Democrats, see that Edwards is your nominee!!!

"Thank you, you infidel pigs, and may Allah (PBUH) strike you down if you don't follow my request!!! (Well, he's going to strike you down anyway, but via this method, you can buy yourselves a little more time)."





Where did THIS come from!?!? (Hat tip:


Representative Dennis Kucinich (D-OH), one of the most loonbatted, leftist members of Congress, came out today with a HUGE swipe against Edwards, the DNC and by extension, the seething leftards at Excerpt:

If you want to be the President of the United States, you can’t be afraid to deal with people with whom you disagree politically,” Kucinich said. “No one is further removed from Fox’s political philosophy than I am, but fear should not dictate decisions that affect hundreds of millions of Americans and billions of others around the world who are starving for real leadership.”

Kucinich said “the public deserves honest, open, and fair public debate, and the media have a responsibility to demand that candidates come forward now, before the next war vote in Congress, to explain themselves.”

“I’m prepared to discuss the war, health care, trade, or any other issue anytime, anywhere, with any audience, answering any question from any media. And any candidate who won’t shouldn’t be President of the United States.”

WOW!!! And although there's almost no one I disagree with more on pretty much every issue than Kucinich, how refreshing it is to hear any Democrat (even those like him, who are cloaked socialists) come out with this kind of backbone, and Jeffersonian principles (limited as they are, to open public debate; we'll discuss his and others socialists' attempts to subvert our Constitution, economic liberty, property rights, etc., another time).

Kudos, Dennis, from JQWorld.

Original content is © Copyright 2007 by Jon Quixote. Email to


indycubsfan said...

I guess its that great liberal ideal of open debate and tolerance that they are displaying. If the Republicans refused a debate sponsored by CBS news the lame stream media would go batty. This is just another example of liberals being intolerant and scared of an open debate were anything can be discussed.

By the way what do they think Fox is going to do at this debate. Fox will be respectful of the event and provide an audience that these loony dems might not otherwise reach. Its not like Fox is going to sabotage the debate, they know that the moonbatocracy will be combing over any sort of bias with a fine toothed comb. I doubt that fox will "create documents" or do some other phony scam during the debate.


Liberals are hypocrites they claim to be this ideology that is open to all sides of a debate in truth they are the most intolerant closed minded people in America.

JonQuixote said...

Hi Mark:

I guess Bubba Clinton's meltdown with Chris Wallace (a registered Democrat) really had some long legs, eh?

Look at the intolerance that leftist intellectuals and their student minins show on college campuses... you can burn the American flag, claim America is evil, the source of all the world's problems, etc., but if you dare even step on the flags of Hamas or Hezbollah... "HATE CRIME!!!"

So long as they control the venue, and therefore the perception, the little babies are happy.

And read here how happy Dingy Harry Reid was, until a few days ago, to have the Dems participate in this debate:

Frickin' liars... and crybabies.

darwinita said...

G'morning Jon-

I just don't see this the way you do. If Ailes can make jokes mistaking a candidate for a terrorist, that's a pretty clear indication that the organization will take its cue from its leader. How can Dems even get a fair shake?

It's not cowardice, it's not weakness, it's a decision not to play on Fox's field with all the muck that's on it. Another adjective would be distaste.

You know I lean left, but I watch Fox news on the treadmill at the gym. I see enough to know that it's as partisan as MSNBC, just leaning away.

Until we, right and left, realize that all this demagoguery is destructive at its core, we're going to continue with the stupidity on both sides.

The debates should be publicly funded, moderated by a panel of journalists left right and center, and broadcast from CSPAN. I'm astonishingly tired of all the sandbox name-calling.

You say that "If the Republicans refused a debate sponsored by CBS news the lame stream media would go batty. This is just another example of liberals being intolerant and scared of an open debate w[h]ere anything can be discussed." Well, isn't Fox doing exactly that? Going batty? Perhaps the right is concerned that the Dems pulling out of a Fox-sponsored anything is yet another indictment of the the neocon philosophy they push so regularly. Let's not even get into the Fox Scooter Libby "not guilty" headline- yeah, not guilty on 1 of 5 charges! If that ain't spin too, then I'm Thalia.

Dear, we could debate this all day long, and fling links at each other. We'd not be listening to each other, merely waiting to make our next point. BOTH left AND right are guilty of this.

I state again that the discussion needs to be elevated beyond parties to good GOVERNANCE- the parties need to be CHECKED as to their mandate of involvement in the elections.

Stop the money-grubbing.
Stop the smear campaigns.
Stop the attack ads.

This is a link to the Arizona Secretary of State website. This office sends to every registereed voter a thick ole pamphlet outlining candidates, positions, endorsements, and arguments. A similar pamphlet was sent out on the resolutions debated on the ballot. I sat down before Election Day with a pencil and some coffee, and read pros and cons on everything and everyone. I paid NO attention to the TV ads once I realized what a resource my tax dollars were providing.

The system ,as it is, is broken, and left AND right are contributing to its further malaise.

I shall continue to exhort you to elevate your focus to a higher purpose than continuing to flail about in the muck.

We all know both sides suck. Let's work together to un-suck them.

JonQuixote said...


Hi Darwinita:

I agree with some of your points, but disagree with others. Big surprise, eh? :)

Public financing is a no-go. I don't want my tax dollars going to support Dennis Kucinich or AlGore any more than you want yours going to support Jerry Falwell or Newt Gingrich.

Re Obama, the joke was on Bush, not on the Dems - which Obama himself got, but the leftoons and their masters in refused to accept.

At least FNC labels its right and left commenters, and gives them a fair chance to express their views. This is completely unlike the rest of the MSM which claims to be "objective," yet practically every story is presented from a leftist point of view. A great example of this was Katie, last night, implying very strongly that "health care" is (or ought to be) a "right" in the Declaration of Independence:

As to the smear attacks, what is going on today is a walk in the park compared to the smears that were routine early in America's founding. I'm not saying it's right, but once you get into having government controlling speech, we are doomed.

Of course we should raise the level of discourse. But when schools (run by whom?) are graduating "citizens" who have no understanding of our history, of our Constitution, of basic civics, the are of course susceptible to the sound-bite smear politics that determines the outcomes of elections. Wiser people can see behind the spin to the truth.

All I'm saying is that freedom is what will lead us to a better place - not more government controls, more government education, more left-right polarization, which is exactly what the Dems and the Reps have designed to keep out third parties.

I like what AZ did re elections, but I'm curious - did the candidates have a chance to check and correct what's being said about them?

Freedom to contribute to the candidate of your choice, and not be forced to contribute to anyone else. The obigation of campaigns to disclose all this, and let the voters decide - or don't, and let them form their own conclusions about that too.

I admire your willingness to listen to Fox. I myself spend a fair amount of time with NPR and PBS, if for no other reason than to observe how they both spin every issue to advance a leftist interpetation.

If US politics were left to you and me, I'm sure we'd help set a new tone. :) And while we might disagree on some things, maybe some very big things, we could do it without calling each other names, claiming the other is a demon-spawn, etc.



JonQuixote said...


Oh, and Darwinita, one more thing:

I won't dispute that FNC leans right. No question.

But to deny that 90+% of the MSM leans or is firmly rooted in the left, as repeated surveys show, is really to evade the very reason why FNC kicks the crap out of their competitors in ratings.

FNC was responding to market demand to finally have a place to get news that wasn't constantly spinning things from a left perspective.

If all the other MSM were doing such a good job, FNC would have died in its infancy, because it would have had no market.

And for the DNC and their leftist puppeteers to shut out this top-of-the-heap ratings powerhouse because they didn't get a joke that its chief told, is really pretty stupid.

Again, IMHO. :)


darwinita said...

Whew! good stuff happening here.
1) I do realize that the Ailes joke was a slap at Bush, but it would be disingenuous not to acknowledge the left-handed slap at Barack Obama an the way to it.

2)Do you really think that those who are ill should be left to suffer? How would you provide health care for the poor in your view? I'm not claiming to have the answers, I'm just wondering if this isn't a human rights issue as opposed to a right/left issue.

Granted, Katie Couric is a ferret-faced thing. I will also grant you that FNC is filling a niche. Journalism has its roots in liberal traditions such as honesty, open informational access, and other such gems. Has it maintained its objectivity? Well, mayhap not. However, Journalism in and of itself will have to adapt to the changing environment it lives within- we discussed it as a hydra not long ago. The Hydra's conservative head is well represented at ole FNC.

It's wicked easy to maintain objectivity and excise politics when there's only one or two major news outlets in the country, as there were up until the last part of the 20th century. Of course, the yellow journalism of the 19th century was infinitely more virulent than the attack ads of today, but they also reached an infinitely more limited audience.

I propose a vision of "media in adolescence:" it learned to walk until the internet, and now we're experiencing a growth spurt and its accompanying pangs. We're in such flux, it's hard to know how the formats will shake themselves out. We could call the biases on both sides "pimples of propaganda..."

I watch Fox for the same reason you listen to NPR, and I'm sure with the equivalent annoyance- I've had people ask me if something smelled while I was on the elliptical; my face was that disgusted at Hannity or Hume.

Don't get me wrong- I know Olbermann is equally as biased; I just generally agree with him.

He's wicked hot, too. Yum, yum!:0)

I think we could do well together if we ruled the world. Let's get on that!

PS- You and I both know that the joke was the excuse. The Dems were craving a way out after Edwards bailed. I just think that the exodus was justified, and that the debates should definitely be on a neutral site, not a left OR right site.

JonQuixote said...


Oh, Darwinita. You are the card... :)

Re health care, no sane person (this excludes HuffTards[tm]) wants poor people to suffer. But the medical care they require has to be provided out of voluntary charity, not at the end of a gun. No one has a "right" to any human-produced value, be it service or product. I don't care whether it's of a bricklayer or an accountant or a day-laborer.

Re the media, survey after survey showed the leftist tilt of the MSM, up to and beyond FNC. I am an advocate of full media freedom; let them succeed or fail based on the marketplace. But whereas you like Olbermann, I don't, and would resent having to be forced to support his rants through my tax dollars. Case in point as to why I despise NPR and PBS, but figure as long as I'm having to help pay for them, I may as well listen sometimes.

Re Edwards and the FNC debate, well, what you said echoes what I did; but I went further (via my faux email from al Zawahiri): if he and the rest of the Dems can't stand up to FNC, how the hell are they going to stand up to jihadists, or our other enemies?

He is a blow-dry pinup girl who has no business doing anything other than being a demagoguic trial lawyer, who has no spine and no convictions, and yet he's being received like a rock star only slightly less appealing than Obama, all because of... what? Nothing. He has accomplished nothing except turning himself into an uber millionaire and building himself a super-mansion while scolding the rest of us for our "selfishness." I mean, this is an SNL script on hypocrisy come to life.

Oh well, sorry for the screed... I'm actually smiling and it's a lovely day so I am OUTTA HERE. :)


PS: If we ruled the world, I do think it would be better. You could teach them how to use the elliptical machines, and I'd teach them why they can't step on first unless they've received the consent from, or have already paid its owner. :)


darwinita said...

you didn't know I was this much fun over at huffpoo, now, didja? ;)

the slower pacing here allows for more development of thought.

Rent "Serenity" this weekend- you'll be glad you did.

JonQuixote said...


I humbly admit, I had no idea. :)

The rest of this week is going to be brutal, but I've got "Serenity" on my list for my next Blockbuster run. Thanks for the rec.

Over and out!


Anonymous said...

Jon, you fucking little right wing neonazis piece of shit. You lie and you suck. Fuck you asshole.

JonQuixote said...

Isn't that sweet?

For those readers unaccustomed to comments such as the one above, meet today's cultured leftist, as polished by The Huffington Post and DailyKos.