Skip to content
Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Washington Post)   Scorecard: When Democrats refused to debate on Fox, they were wisely avoiding a biased turkey shoot. When Republicans refuse to debate on YouTube/CNN, they're yellow-bellied cowards   (washingtonpost.com) divider line
    More: Obvious  
•       •       •

642 clicks; posted to Politics » on 28 Jul 2007 at 4:56 PM (15 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



108 Comments     (+0 »)


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2007-07-28 2:04:55 PM  
Plenty of people were calling the Democrats yellow-bellied cowards. But I'm sure you knew that, submoron.
 
2007-07-28 2:07:58 PM  
I don't blame the Democrats for not going on Fox - as a republican - as a conservative - and as a thinking adult - I can admit that Fox is most definitely a news source with an agenda.

That being said - I missed the part in the article that the submitter linked to that accused the Republicans as being yellow bellied cowards. Perhaps the submitter linked the wrong article?
 
2007-07-28 2:10:32 PM  
Since most of the Republican party leadership are chicken-hawks and yellow-bellied cowards at least part of the headline is accurate.
 
2007-07-28 2:17:54 PM  
Seems like good decisions for both parties. Bad for us but probably wise for them.
 
2007-07-28 2:26:43 PM  
What crazy wit you have there submitter.
 
2007-07-28 2:32:26 PM  
When CNN starts editing out Republicans' rebuttals, gearing questions for Republican failure, and having "microphone problems" whenever they have a strong point to make, we can talk.
 
2007-07-28 2:32:47 PM  
If you were a Republican would you want to face questioning from anyone you didn't share a cocktail weiner with? Didn't think so.
 
2007-07-28 2:33:39 PM  
How does one go about debating on YouTube? I thought it was nothing but pre-recorded vids. Maybe it's like playing chess by mail: you record your response, send it in, it gets played, then your opponent(s) do the same?
 
2007-07-28 2:34:11 PM  
Fox News != the American people.
 
2007-07-28 2:34:45 PM  
Well, the impeached clinton-hydra clearly ended the tradition of dignity where the Presidency is concerned.

Still, you would think that, as a nation, we would prefer that candidates for this office not have to respond to talking bunnies, or whatever, during a serious debate over issues of national policy.
 
2007-07-28 2:34:47 PM  
submitter: When Republicans refuse to debate on YouTube/CNN, they're yellow-bellied cowards

No, but if you needed to make the case that they're all stiff old white men who don't get the internet this would be a great example.
 
2007-07-28 2:38:09 PM  
dameron: No, but if you needed to make the case that they're all stiff old white men who don't get the internet this would be a great example.

HA! Exactly! That applies to all of the candidates. Except maybe for Obama. He's an awkward black teenager.
 
2007-07-28 2:42:31 PM  
I called this in the thread that was going on during the first YouTube/CNN debate. Only an idiot would take part in that joke of a platform after watching the kind of sh*t that got selected when the Democrats "debated". This scores points for the Republicans big time, as the first one only succeeded in making the Democrats look like clowns, furthering the perception that they can't be taken seriously.
 
2007-07-28 2:44:59 PM  
Action Replay Nick: This scores points for the Republicans big time, as the first one only succeeded in making the Democrats look like clowns, furthering the perception that they can't be taken seriously.

The Republicans certainly need it. I take them very seriously. In a "how serious would you consider syphilis" kind of way.
 
2007-07-28 2:49:51 PM  
thamike
The Republicans certainly need it. I take them very seriously. In a "how serious would you consider syphilis" kind of way.

I wrote them all off when their debate turned into a giant preach-off. Well, all of them except Ron Paul. I know he's religious but he doesn't let his religion seep into his political philosophy. Not that he has any chance in hell of winning.
 
2007-07-28 2:55:54 PM  
Having authored the Swiftboat vets and the "Call me" sluts, I'm surprised the Republicans are suddenly conceding the rabble-video space.
 
2007-07-28 2:57:32 PM  
At least we'll know what all of them were doing on 9/11, as that is the most important issue...


msnbcmedia3.msn.comView Full Size


I'm siiiinging in the rubble...
 
2007-07-28 2:58:01 PM  
I guess the new standard for greenlit articles is a trolling headline.

"How come Lieberuhhhls suck so much ass? They don't and this has nothing to do with the linked article, I was just hoping for a greenlight!"

"New evidence suggests Republitards have 10 fewer IQ points than average! No they don't, I just needed to get this article greenlit!"

A++++++ would greenlight again!
 
2007-07-28 3:03:46 PM  
Am I the only one who thinks the major plus of Totalfark is not to give a sh*t what gets greenlighted?
 
2007-07-28 3:06:42 PM  
I think that's a plus. timmy's probably going through a dry spell. Trolling headlines have always been greenlit over boring, sensible headlines.
 
2007-07-28 3:07:58 PM  
"The candidates that can't face Fox, can't face Al Qaeda," said Mr. Ailes. "And that's what's coming."

That was followed by applause from the crowd which featured several News Corp. executives and journalists from Murdoch-owned papers-Richard Johnson, the Post's Page Six editor, for one.


Can we switch YouTube for Fox in this sentence?
 
2007-07-28 3:11:35 PM  
Action Replay Nick: I think that's a plus. timmy's probably going through a dry spell. Trolling headlines have always been greenlit over boring, sensible headlines.

It makes sense, doesn't it? Fark already has our money. Trolling headlines get more hits. TF is for the craziness and wit. Fark is business. Think of TF as the VIP room. Do we really care how watered-down the drinks that they schlep to the bridge-and-tunnel crowd who wait in line are? Champagne room, b*tches.
 
2007-07-28 3:24:54 PM  
Mighty_Dog: Still, you would think that, as a nation, we would prefer that candidates for this office not have to respond to talking bunnies, or whatever, during a serious debate over issues of national policy.T

God forbid they would ever have to answer any questions from the citizens of the United States of America. That would be un-American!
 
2007-07-28 3:25:24 PM  
thamike: Am I the only one who thinks the major plus of Totalfark is not to give a sh*t what gets greenlighted?

yes

I don't care what's grrenlit. I do care if the entire purpose of the headline is false, spurious and simply a troll which, is against the rules.

Action Replay Nick: Trolling headlines have always been greenlit over boring, sensible headlines.

no.

FUNNY headlines used to be the norm. Because you used to have to be pretty damn funny to get a greenlight, back when a greenlight meant something.

and seriously? is there anyone with 1/2 a brain that conflates and equivocates Fox News and YouTube? and if they have half a brain and they do such a thing, wouldn't the only REAL purpose be cheerleading for their "home team?"

i am, at this exact moment, over it. enjoy the pointless debate with the same handful of people, rehashing the same stuff you have no control over.

shooot me an email when one of you convinces someone to "switch teams." no, hell, submit a thread about it, it would be monumental.
 
2007-07-28 3:31:04 PM  
timmy_the_tooth: yes

I don't care what's grrenlit.


You..uh..contradicted yourself there, as that would make two of us.
 
2007-07-28 3:34:53 PM  
thamike: You..uh..contradicted yourself there

no

my complaint was with the trolling headlines.

not the articles greenlit.
 
2007-07-28 3:43:25 PM  
If I were a Republican candidate, I'd sure as hell avoid the public as much as possible...
 
2007-07-28 3:45:50 PM  
Let me spell it out for you:

timmy_the_tooth: I guess the new standard for greenlit articles is a trolling headline.


thamike: Am I the only one who thinks the major plus of Totalfark is not to give a sh*t what gets greenlighted?


timmy_the_tooth: yes

I don't care what's grrenlit.



How can I be the only one when you share the same feeling?

You see? It is this kind of sh*t that annoys me. Not what gets greenlighted. I have to actually go back and retype sh*t that is sitting right there for you. Sh*t you wrote. I have to rehash an entire conversation for someone who, even when in agreement with me, is so set up to be a contrarian that they can't even concur with others without prefacing their agreement with a contradiction. Semantic blockage.

My advice? Forget about what color the headline is and you'll notice that a very large cross-section of submitted headlines are humorless, poorly worded, trolling, offensive, and bleak.

Really. Who gives a sh*t?
 
2007-07-28 3:58:05 PM  
what=but. Not quite sure how that happened
 
2007-07-28 3:59:40 PM  
Personally, I love the trolling headline greenlights. Without them, I'd have zero links approved.
 
2007-07-28 4:11:47 PM  
thamike: what=but. Not quite sure how that happened

Good move, Swift
 
2007-07-28 4:12:28 PM  
thamike: what=but. Not quite sure how that happened

Now this really pisses me off I mean, you go to all the trouble to craft a witty response and don't proof for content.

But who really cares? not me. That's for damn sure. Here's to another glorious typo
 
2007-07-28 4:14:01 PM  
i don't think it's the CNN part they're worried about, it's the YouTube.
 
2007-07-28 4:23:50 PM  
Submissions are coming in saying the whole thing has been postponed indefinitely. Imagine my utter shock and amazement. I really feel kind of bad for the Democrats for falling into such an obvious trap. The CNN/YouTube debate reminded me of something out of Idiocracy and all it succeeded in doing was further disgrace our country and make me want to blow my brains out. Staged videos of hicks delivering their questions in the form of a country song. Directed at presidential candidates. Really, the whole thing was disgusting.
 
2007-07-28 4:37:06 PM  
Feel the frustration.
 
2007-07-28 4:41:58 PM  
Action Replay Nick: The CNN/YouTube debate reminded me of something out of Idiocracy and all it succeeded in doing was further disgrace our country and make me want to blow my brains out. Staged videos of hicks delivering their questions in the form of a country song. Directed at presidential candidates. Really, the whole thing was disgusting.

So you are saying that the Republicans are ivory-tower elites now?
 
2007-07-28 4:49:49 PM  
thamike: Feel the frustration.

I'm trying.

(hmmmph)

[image from i129.photobucket.com too old to be available]
 
2007-07-28 4:58:46 PM  
Republicans called Democrats cowards for not wanting to talk to the reporters on Fox News.

Democrats and EVERYONE ON EARTH THAT ISN'T A REPUBLICAN call the Republicans cowards for not talking to the real people in America.

My difference

let me show it to you.
 
2007-07-28 5:00:49 PM  
If anyone honestly thinks that YouTube/CNN travesty was "talking to real people", I'd question their sensibilities.
 
2007-07-28 5:02:30 PM  
CNN is a news network. Fox is an entertainment network. Avoiding an impartial debate because you're afraid of answering questions makes you a coward. Avoiding a network that will intentionally fabricate stories to slander your name is common sense.
 
2007-07-28 5:03:27 PM  
Fox Opinion is the propaganda arm of the RNC. YouTube is anyone who chooses to post.

I understand the democrats position. Republicans are farked here though. Why not just come out and say they can't/won't/are too afraid to answer questions from the general public?
 
2007-07-28 5:10:34 PM  
Krymore
CNN is a news network. Fox is an entertainment network.

Did you SEE the first YouTube debate? Yeah, serious news and hard hitting questions... from a f*cking sock puppet snowman and two singing hillbillies with a guitar.
 
2007-07-28 5:13:41 PM  
 
2007-07-28 5:19:02 PM  
If there's anything George bush has taught us, it's that Pube-lickans are no good unless they are giving carefully scripted answers to audiences full of hand-picked shills. Stick'em in front of a real audience and watch the stupid come out.
 
2007-07-28 5:19:13 PM  
Action Replay Nick:
Did you SEE the first YouTube debate? Yeah, serious news and hard hitting questions... from a f*cking sock puppet snowman and two singing hillbillies with a guitar.


That's still quite a bit better than intentionally fabricating stories about how particular presidential candidates "were secretly trained in a terrorist school" just to slander their name. Better a sock puppet asking questions than a team of technicians strategically cutting off microphones.
 
2007-07-28 5:21:17 PM  
Krymore
Better a sock puppet asking questions than a team of technicians strategically cutting off microphones.

I agree that Fox News is garbage, but that doesn't mitigate the fact that the CNN/YouTube debate was a pathetic joke.
 
2007-07-28 5:24:47 PM  
vdantev
it's that Pube-lickans are no good unless they are giving carefully scripted

Don't feign ignorance, the Democrats were giving scripted answers in their debate. At one point, Hillary rattled off about a half-dozen names that there is no way she remembered after hearing them once briefly delivered by some mushmouth on the internet in a compressed video of lousy quality.
 
2007-07-28 5:27:54 PM  
I don't think CNN is quite gay enough for a Republican debate. Maybe they could invite some young boys in there to spice it up enough for them to be tempted.
 
2007-07-28 5:28:56 PM  
Action Replay Nick: Krymore
Better a sock puppet asking questions than a team of technicians strategically cutting off microphones.

I agree that Fox News is garbage, but that doesn't mitigate the fact that the CNN/YouTube debate was a pathetic joke.


The current state of our 2 party system is a pathetic joke!

These candidates don't want to answer real questions from people outside of the corporate media structure!
 
2007-07-28 5:29:01 PM  
Well, I think the Republicans have a good point here, so let me address it in a way they understand: On September 11th, this country was attacked by evil. 9/11 taught as many things, and that is that partisanship should not be tolerated. Republicans should respect the venues of the media, even if they are biased, and even though Democrats refuse to learn for themselves from less biased outlets such as Fox News. This is a post 9/11 world, as citizens we need news outlets to form our thoughts, and we need reporters to form our opinions. The media can only be trusted if it is fair and balanced. All Americans made mistakes on 9/11--we trusted the wrong sources, even Republicans who failed to heed the information in our own talking points memos. And so we didn't have any warning. But we must be vigiliant today, for our future, and for Iraq's future. Republicans will enter the fray, as facts and figures will always come out on top of any discussion--no matter how biased, or even juvenile, it may be. Republicans can speak with one voice, one video at a time. It may not be the debate the Democrats want, but traditional media has shown its worth, and Republicans will stick to traditional real debate. New media is leveraged on old media, and the President respects the working and effective methods of debate we currently have, and Republicans will venture onto the Internet in their own way.

Thank you and God Bless America.
 
Displayed 50 of 108 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.