Why should Dean or any candidate interview O'Reilly or Hannity?

They are smart not to. What the average listener might not realize is the tricks these guys use to control the interview. Often, the guest's mike is lowered below the host making them sound weak, especially if it's a liberal guest. They break for ads as soon as they sense they are losing an argument. They cut off the interviewee anytime a solid argument is being made or the guest's comfort level is gaining. They cut the interview short if they are losing. They do all in their power to embarrass and belittle guest they disagree with. Unless you are really quick against the ropes like a Sharpton, you are doomed to look bad on these shows. I strongly suggest our candidates stay off these one sided shows on Faux!

There is no reason for any of our candidates to provide entertainment for Fox's audience or ratings for their shows.

and makes the pundit look more powerful then they are. Our candidates need to stand up to these jerks and put them in their place. Plus it would be a good test to see which candidates have the right stuff.

Don't Koppel and Larry King get higher ratings than O'Reilly and Hannity? That would mean that, in addition to avoiding the bullying tactics of those two, the candidate can reach a wider audience, especially with prospective voters, i.e. voters who aren't already committed to voting Republican no matter what.

tail between his legs about a week before he announced
he was running!!

Asman today on fox. He got his points across very well and didnt let him control the interview. Clark started shouting at the guy and all he could do was grin sheepishly and cut the interview short.

It's as simple as following the example of the Texas Lawmakers.

A determined 90 day boycott of Fox News by all elected Democrats.

Their "fair and balanced" fig-leaf would forever be removed.

They could still have Zell, what the hell.

these putz--and that's what they need to do--by appearing, regardless of how they do, they give these cretins legitimacy.

they just shit on people period... it isn't journalism.

They have no obligation to go on Faux any more than they are obligated to go on Comedy Central or E - though they'd get a fairer shake on them than Faux.

It would send an extremely powerful message if Dems scoffed at Faux and refused to appear. A slight chuckle and a knowing smile would also help. Why should the Dems allow themselves to be used to promote the rw agenda? How many times has a Dem done well on Faux only to have his appearance re-interpreted a week later by that same host as "so-and-so was hopelessly spinning?" Believe me, Dems would be no worse off having Faux portray them as afraid to come on their network than they are now - villified for making an appearance.

In addition, the other networks would most likely give the Dems more air time, if nothing else than to rub Faux's nose in the fact that they got them while Faux couldn't.

It's like the schoolyard bully - he has no power except that ceded to him by his victims...and Faux is the biggest bully on the media block.

all say no to Fox and Hardball and etc. Unfortunately, after you cross all the rightwing-ish Hardball wannabe clones off the list, you're left with a pretty short list.

Amen. Hallelujah. Preach It to the Rafters.

n/t

Sit right across the table with the Fox News personality. Plug their book(s) a little -- and say you disagree with what he wrote on page X.

Otherwise, don't bother.

Stop taking so much CRAP and accepting lies w/o challange, for one thing.

They should read DU,and use some of the techniques and talking points I see here. Or at least somthing like that! Whoever is telling them that voters dont like passion and some confrontation is
wrong, I think...

I like the hint that Clark may be wise to this- I've seen him handle spin pretty good on a couple of occasions- I hope to see more from all DEMS...

I'm serious- I know about 200 DUers who could advocate better for DEMS than many of our guys...