Edwards caves to nutroots, won’t participate in Fox primary debate; Update: Harold Ford joins Fox News; Update: Bill Richardson RSVPs

posted at 10:13 am on March 7, 2007 by Allahpundit

I liked him best among the Democrats in 2004. This time I like him least. Commanding a share-the-wealth campaign from his mansion; hiring, then firing, then un-firing the Blunder Twins after one too many pretty vicious rants and important action alerts wafted up from the sewer; oscillating between talking tough on Iran before Israelis and talking tough on Israel before Hollywood liberals; and now accepting the Kossacks’ ideological purity test by joining their mendacious jihad against Fox News. What a shameless, pandering jackass. His spokesman tells Kos:

We will not be participating in the Fox debate. We’re going to make lots of appearances in Nevada, including debates. By the end of March, we will have attended three presidential forums in Nevada – and there are already at least three proposed Nevada debates. We’re definitely going to debate in Nevada, but we don’t see why this needs to be one of them.

Responds Screw Them, redefining the word “leadership” to describe people willing to kiss his own ass, “Great job by the Edwards campaign on this, showing real leadership on this issue.”

Exit question: Who would have guessed of the Democratic ticket three years ago that Kerry’s the one with the most backbone?

Update: If you think the nutroots hated the DLC before, just wait.

Update: Richardson can’t afford to miss any media exposure, but still, this is sweet.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Sissy

Wade on March 7, 2007 at 10:16 AM

Someday, there will be a thesis or dissertation written to analyze how a preening, choleric keyboard-banger was able to almost single-handedly define a political party.

Amazing.

Slublog on March 7, 2007 at 10:21 AM

Silky Pony’s gonna be firing his advisors soon.

p0s3r on March 7, 2007 at 10:22 AM

can the repubs go tit for tat, refuse to speak with NBC/ABC/CBS/CNN/MSNBC/NPR/NYT/WAPO?

jp on March 7, 2007 at 10:30 AM

Of course it his nothing to do with the prospect of getting his little wuss-ass handed to him in an actual debate about ideas and motives. OR it could be fear of another hair-preening moment caught on camera. Either way his decisions are based on fear.

bbz123 on March 7, 2007 at 10:31 AM

Having Kos control the entire Democratic Party may be the only thing that can bring the Republicans back.

Attila (Pillage Idiot) on March 7, 2007 at 10:31 AM

All bow on bended knee before the King Fresh Maker!!!

Who would have guessed of the Democratic ticket three years ago that Kerry’s the one with the most backbone?

2 Years ago, I was convinced that the Democratic Party had no solid platform (backbone). I was wrong. This upcoming field has less direction and more political pandering than it’s predecessor.

Ahhhh, the sweet stench of the Winds Of Change.

natesnake on March 7, 2007 at 10:33 AM

Exit question: Who would have guessed of the Democratic ticket three years ago that Kerry’s the one with the most backbone?

Well why do you think he got the nomination?

Alcibiades on March 7, 2007 at 10:34 AM

“WUSS”

joeswampy on March 7, 2007 at 10:35 AM

I’d call him a F@ggot, but then I’d be ostracised and attacked mercilessly by a hypersensitive, self righteous group of Conservative bloggers.

Please don’t write an open letter about me, I was just joking.

JayHaw Phrenzie on March 7, 2007 at 10:37 AM

I think he’d be best taken seriously in total BLACK FACE.

Don’t you?

seejanemom on March 7, 2007 at 10:37 AM

What a faggot

Gregor on March 7, 2007 at 10:40 AM

I’d be interested to know what Kos feels about all this Jesus talk we heard out of Edwards the other day.

Side point: Notice that the Democrats flip out whenever a conservative even hints at bringing up religion? Usually it’s not even a politician, it’s a pundit, and the lefty in the debate screams “Republicans don’t have a monopoly on religion!”, etc. etc. But they love to run around shouting “Jesus was a liberal” and telling us how he’d be… And no one ever has a problem with it. What’s really funny is that it’s Edwards this time, who only let his Christian hating bloggers go after pressure when the story hit the MSM.

RightWinged on March 7, 2007 at 10:40 AM

Meant as a school yard taunt, of course.

Gregor on March 7, 2007 at 10:41 AM

Don’t do it again, Gregor.

Allahpundit on March 7, 2007 at 10:41 AM

What an Ann Coulter.

Enrique on March 7, 2007 at 10:42 AM

He can channel the words of an unborn baby in court, but he can’t Fox News Channel.

saint kansas on March 7, 2007 at 10:44 AM

Maybe he is affraid AC will be there.

Wade on March 7, 2007 at 10:45 AM

JayHaw—-

I gladly signed that letter, but am not self righteous or hypersensitive. HARDLY.

What I am is HYPER AWARE of the fallout for the Republican Party.

AND NOWHERE IN THE LETTER DID WE DEMAND THAT SHE APOLOGIZE.

CPAC got what it paid for.

We were merely asking that in the future, CPAC NOT PAY HER TO MAKE US LOOK LIKE THE DEMONS THE DEMS THINK WE ARE.

Why don’t you just make a BIG FAT JUICY check out to Edwards For President there, JAYHAW.

AND LEARN SOME READING COMPREHENSION and CRITICAL THINKING SKILLS WHILE YOU ARE AT IT.

seejanemom on March 7, 2007 at 10:45 AM

THE LETTER, JAHAW, for your CRITCAL READING pleasure.

seejanemom on March 7, 2007 at 10:47 AM

Maybe he is affraid afraid (scared) AC will be there

Wade on March 7, 2007 at 10:48 AM

.. if he can’t stand the “heat” from Fox News, what ever will he do against terrorists?

yo on March 7, 2007 at 10:49 AM

I’d be interested to know what Kos feels about all this Jesus talk we heard out of Edwards the other day.

Since it was from the ‘social justice’ Jesus, I’m sure we’ll hear nothing about it. The SJ Jesus is just alright with Kos.

Slublog on March 7, 2007 at 10:49 AM

Gregor on March 7, 2007 at 10:40 AM

shame shame shame. The word police caught you. Next time you go to rehab.

Wade on March 7, 2007 at 10:50 AM

shame shame shame. The word police caught you. Next time you go to rehab.

Wade on March 7, 2007 at 10:50 AM

Yes, censored by the same blog which publishes the Mohammed cartoons and attacks censorship. It’s not what you say. It’s who it offends. I made the mistake of offending the host.

Gregor on March 7, 2007 at 10:54 AM

The reality:
Critics of Putin are dropping literally like flies. Edwards wants to be president.
Imagine:
This scenario: US-Russia summit. Edwards prepares by reading all the talking points notes. Putin prepares by watching the video of Edwards preening in his girlie compact mirror.
Who do you think is going to walk way from that meeting with what he wants, and then some?

naliaka on March 7, 2007 at 10:54 AM

And for his backing down, how does this show “leadership”? How exactly does Kos define leadership?

CrimsonFisted on March 7, 2007 at 10:54 AM

Wattsa madder Johnnie! Your little black dress in the cleaners?

Dread Pirate Roberts VI on March 7, 2007 at 10:55 AM

AND LEARN SOME READING COMPREHENSION and CRITICAL THINKING SKILLS WHILE YOU ARE AT IT.

seejanemom on March 7, 2007 at 10:45 AM

I think your response to my post is a textbook example of hypersensitivity.

JayHaw Phrenzie on March 7, 2007 at 10:58 AM

Can a gay person call Edwards that word?

marianpaul on March 7, 2007 at 11:00 AM

So Johnny will only debate in friendly venues.

Well, here’s a heads-up, Silky. The world’s not a friendly venue right now, and if you can’t stand up to Markos, you’re certainly not going to be able to stand up to Mookie or Mahmoud.

Funny thing is, even money on the Fox moderator being Brit Hume, known to be a very fair interviewer.

Senator, your Lightweight is showing again.

eeyore on March 7, 2007 at 11:11 AM

>tit for tat

Watch out! There are a bunch of people around that will interpret that first word in the worst possible way and start crying!!!

Get back walking on those eggshells!

Doghouse on March 7, 2007 at 11:14 AM

Oh, yes, I forgot.

Bundle of sticks! Bundle of sticks! Bundle of sticks!

Doghouse on March 7, 2007 at 11:16 AM

It’s okay to publish the Mohammed cartoons, mock Christianity, post Photoshopped pics humiliating various candidates, and insinuate that half the readers of the blog are nutjobs …

but don’t dare offend a gay person.

Gregor on March 7, 2007 at 11:19 AM

Fag simply has too many meanings. It is also too derogatory. We used “homo” in the school yard back in the day.

Valiant on March 7, 2007 at 11:21 AM

I don’t like when Gregor used that word but there is a strong hint of hypocrisy coming from this site right now.

marianpaul on March 7, 2007 at 11:23 AM

Oh, the humanity!

A blog is enforcing basic decency standards!

First they came for the school-yard taunters, and I did not speak up…

Slublog on March 7, 2007 at 11:28 AM

Can a gay person call Edwards that word?

marianpaul on March 7, 2007 at 11:00 AM

Good question, but legislation will likely prevent even that.

Rick on March 7, 2007 at 11:34 AM

I’d be interested to know what Kos feels about all this Jesus talk we heard out of Edwards the other day.

I’m pretty sure he thinks exactly what we immediately thought:

“Wow, John Edwards is being really insincere in an effort to pander to religious voters.”

Enrique on March 7, 2007 at 11:39 AM

So I am not misunderstood, I do not condone the use of derogatory remarks as they detract from intelligent debate. The HA terms of use are clear on not being offensive. As a private enterprise, the HA owners are allowed to be offensive at their discretion while users must be respectful- as we should.

Valiant on March 7, 2007 at 11:40 AM

I’d like to withdraw my above sarcastic response and apologize for using that word. After additional thought on the subject, I realize that I would have most likely deleted such a comment from my own blog also.

Gregor on March 7, 2007 at 11:48 AM

You know Rupert Murdoch has to love this sort of thing.

Can you imagine having the ability to drive millions of people completely insane by simply starting up a news channel?

I’m sure Fox’s promo people are already working up the spots.

Slublog on March 7, 2007 at 11:59 AM

We’re definitely going to debate in Nevada, but we don’t see why this needs to be one of them.

Oh, maybe because that’s the one that’s going to be televised on the most watched cable news network in the country? I’m just guessing here. But why would you want to debate in front of an enormous audience of people who you hope will vote for you?

Pablo on March 7, 2007 at 12:12 PM

It’s not what you say. It’s who it offends. I made the mistake of offending the host.

Poor you.

Jim Treacher on March 7, 2007 at 12:13 PM

I’d like to withdraw my above sarcastic response and apologize for using that word.

Same here.

Jim Treacher on March 7, 2007 at 12:17 PM

Poor you.

Livia? :-)

Slublog on March 7, 2007 at 12:17 PM

If anyone ever wanted to be consigned to total irrelevance as a Presidential candidate, I would suggest to them that they not participate in the Presidential campaign debates.

Way to go, Johnny E.

James on March 7, 2007 at 12:25 PM

A candidate expects to gain traction by not participating in a debate. Besides being a “pandering jackass” he’s just simply dumber than a box of rocks.

Anwyn on March 7, 2007 at 12:27 PM

I’m calling an IMPORTANT ACTION ALERT! We can’t let them get away with this!

Nethicus on March 7, 2007 at 12:28 PM

What an utter lightweight. If the pandering is this bad now (although at least Edwards doesn’t have to fake a Southern accent), what will it look like in a year?

ReubenJCogburn on March 7, 2007 at 12:31 PM

My prediction: we can soon look forward to seeing him featured on ‘Pander-gone.’

James on March 7, 2007 at 12:31 PM

Silky Pony, with a wire up his rectum?

PinkyBigglesworth on March 7, 2007 at 12:39 PM

Unless the other dems follow suit, he could end up a big loser. Passing an opportunity to appear on the most watched news channel while your opponents are getting their face time? Seems Edwards has already decided who he wants to represent if he’s president.

taznar on March 7, 2007 at 12:40 PM

Edwards won’t lose from this, guys. He’s pandering to the Nuts. And those guys, and 527s like MoveOn.org, are an effective and powerful source of money to get a message out.

Nethicus on March 7, 2007 at 12:45 PM

This empty suit better not whine when he doesn’t get any coverage from the No. 1 cable network.

What an idiot.

JammieWearingFool on March 7, 2007 at 12:48 PM

But I thought we were supposed to be working with our enemies? Is Fox News a greater threat to the left than Syria, Iran, NK, or Alqaeda?

Pam on March 7, 2007 at 1:19 PM

I find simply amazing the lengths the left will go to in order to run away from the truth. God forbid! There’s a news channel that doesn’t tell the lies the liars like. Ban it! Burn it! Run away! Run away!!!

warriorlawyer on March 7, 2007 at 1:21 PM

Let me get this straight … a *politician* is going to refuse to debate on the highest rated cable channel in America; the channel with the most viewers of any news channel in the country?

They bash Fox because they say there isn’t enough coverage of the left and when Fox bends over backwards to put them on their network, they refuse to participate … so they themselves are creating the reality they accuse Fox of creating.

What idiots!

crosspatch on March 7, 2007 at 1:41 PM

Ban it! Burn it! Run away! Run away!!!

warriorlawyer on March 7, 2007 at 1:21 PM

As Bullwinkle used to say, WatsomataU?
Everybody knows that:
Liberals are the CHAMPIONS of free speech –
just like Islam is a religion of peace.

/sarcasm off

CyberCipher on March 7, 2007 at 1:43 PM

I’d like to withdraw my above sarcastic response and apologize for using that word. After additional thought on the subject, I realize that I would have most likely deleted such a comment from my own blog also.

Gregor on March 7, 2007 at 11:48 AM

As far as I am concerned you have nothing to apologize for. Political correctness is out of control and will remain so as long as people try to control the WORDS and used by others. Presidents Lincoln’s quote about all the people some of the time, applies to political correctness. It is only a word and a thought. While the owner pf this site has the right to edit at will, it needs to be pointed out many authored articles on HA are offensive to others. It is all in the frame of reference of the reader.

Wade on March 7, 2007 at 1:49 PM

It looks to me like the religion of Political Correctness is winning the race to become the inevitable one world religion. Heck, Islam is nothing but a piker in comparison to P.C. and its adherents.

So sad.

Fatal on March 7, 2007 at 2:13 PM

What a wimp. Big surprise – like always Silky Pony and friends are afraid of us. Lol. I love it actually. Go ahead and cut your nose off to spite your face. Preach to the choir. Seriously; how stupid can you be?

foxforce91 on March 7, 2007 at 2:14 PM

I repeat: in Europe, “fagott” means bassoon. Many fine orchestras employ many fine bassoon players. In fact, there’s a good chance Edwards himself enjoys some fine bassoon music. I see no reason why Ann Coulter’s erudite cultural reference should in any way disparage anyone’s predilection for double-reed instruments.

Halley on March 7, 2007 at 2:16 PM

I don’t get how Edwards thinks he’s going to bolster his chances of winning the donkey party nomination, not to mention the presidency, by competing with Dennis Kucinich in currying favor with the moonbats.

Doesn’t make any sense.

But then again, neither does Edwards: running as a faux populist while building himself a massive mansion replete with its own theater, sports complex and narcissistic “John’s Room,” then claiming that Jesus would be “appalled” at the “selfishness” of Americans while he’s built his own personal fortune by profiteering off of the misfortune and suffering of others …

A sense of self-irony would go far toward letting Edwards discover who he really is.

Spurius Ligustinus on March 7, 2007 at 2:22 PM

Does anyone really think he’s credible?

The English have a word for cigarettes. F@&

Kini on March 7, 2007 at 2:30 PM

Allahpundit’s stance on the f-bomb isn’t just about being PC, its because the rampant and flagrant use of the f-bomb is just bad business.

p0s3r on March 7, 2007 at 2:47 PM

Allahpundit’s stance on the f-bomb isn’t just about being PC, its because the rampant and flagrant use of the f-bomb is just bad business.

p0s3r on March 7, 2007 at 2:47 PM

This is why I changed my opinion. You can’t operate a blog, publish a newspaper, or run a business where the customers cringe while visiting. I try to imagine my mother reading a blog filled with comments that include the F-words and other obnoxious language, and although she would agree with the subject matter, she would refuse to come back.

As a writer, and a business owner, you can’t have that. What if the business was an attorney’s office, or a restaurant, or a book store? Would the employees talk that way? Would the owners allow customers to yell obnoxious comments in the lobby?

Didn’t we all just finish off a week of bashing Amanda Marcotte for being obnoxious?

I was wrong. Allah is smart to not allow this to happen.

Gregor on March 7, 2007 at 3:07 PM

Allahpundit’s stance on the f-bomb isn’t just about being PC, its because the rampant and flagrant use of the f-bomb is just bad business.

p0s3r on March 7, 2007 at 2:47 PM

You speaking for AP?

Wade on March 7, 2007 at 3:11 PM

Who is this John Edwards person of whom you speak?

Capitalist Infidel on March 7, 2007 at 3:23 PM

John Edwards is a poofer.

DoctorDentons on March 7, 2007 at 3:35 PM

As a writer, and a business owner, you can’t have that. What if the business was an attorney’s office, or a restaurant, or a book store? Would the employees talk that way? Would the owners allow customers to yell obnoxious comments in the lobby?

Maybe not such a good example. There is no question on the leanings of this site and if it is intended to be neutral then the authors have a long way to go not to offend people. All of us speak of hypocrisy, is this not an example here?

As far as bashing Marcotte, she was employed by someone running for POTUS, not Gregor.

Many visitors are going to cringe here because of the political leanings even with PC applied. I do not condone run away filth and unfounded attacks upon any person or persons. In this case we are talking about a one word used in post and in a speech and all of a sudden it is a word banned by many. I think much to do about nothing. The word faggot will only be replaced, in time, by another word someone does not like. It will offend someone…

Look at how many times words pertaining to blacks have been changed. Nigger, Negro, colored, black, African-American. African-American offends me the most because hyphenated names I fell divide people, not unite.

I am done with this subject here, it is silly.

Wade on March 7, 2007 at 3:35 PM

Gregor,

You are right that AP and Hot Air has the right to censor comments as they see fit. You were also right in saying that given their past stances it makes them and AP in particular quite hypocrtical to do so in this case.

bj1126 on March 7, 2007 at 3:41 PM

What Pablo and Anwyn said, except that Edwards is now only focused on the primaries. But his ‘sissy’ image will stick for the general election, and he couldn’t think that far.

Gregor on March 7, 2007 at 11:48 AM

Confession is at 5p.m. or 17:00.

Leadership, all of it, the little which is left, is terribly indignant.

Entelechy on March 7, 2007 at 3:42 PM

It is curious that after he fired the virulently anti-Christian bloggers he had on his staff, Edwards decided that it would be useful to start channelling Jesus (just like he had spoken for unborn babies). What a crock…

Spurlee on March 7, 2007 at 3:49 PM

@Wade
I guess my word choice was poor. I’m not speaking for AP nor trying to, that was just my own interpretation.

p0s3r on March 7, 2007 at 3:59 PM

p0s3r on March 7, 2007 at 3:59 PM

Understood. My 1st read of both AP and Gregor was both were joking. And would have continued to think that of Gregor until he apologized.

I guess my years in the Marines have made me very tolerant to name calling and slang words.

Wade on March 7, 2007 at 4:09 PM

I’m as sick of hearing about Coulter as I am the “Naked Idol”.

What’s even worse is all the idiotic “fag means cigarettes/ bundle of sticks/frackin instruments” posts.

Morons sheepishly playing semantics.

reaganaut on March 7, 2007 at 4:15 PM

Maybe not such a good example. There is no question on the leanings of this site and if it is intended to be neutral then the authors have a long way to go not to offend people.

Many visitors are going to cringe here because of the political leanings even with PC applied.

Wade on March 7, 2007 at 3:35 PM

I would never suggest that we avoid voicing our opinions to avoid “offending” people. “Offending people” was not my concern when I suggested that Allah should be banning the f-word. It was merely due to the unacceptability of certain words which are considered to be “cuss words.”

There’s a difference between offending someone because they don’t agree with your political beliefs, and offending someone by using obnoxious language.

I think so anyway. But that’s my opinion of course.

My 1st read of both AP and Gregor was both were joking. And would have continued to think that of Gregor until he apologized.

Wade on March 7, 2007 at 4:09 PM

Yes, I was joking and I think it was obvious. I also think Allah set that up, and expected the word to fly. With what happened with Coulter over the last few days, it’s silly to think one could post such a story and not have the word thrown out there as a joke.

I was trying to make the point that I wasn’t going to cave to the demands of the left in the same way that Michelle Malkin and HotAir posted the Mohammed cartoons simply to show they had the free will to allow themselves to do so.

I still believe that, but what I’m saying is that Allah is merely trying to protect his business, and I understand the need to keep the comment section clean from profanity.

Ann Coulter however, voiced the word in a public speech and used it in a manner specifically designed to make a point, which turned out to have been totally accurate. If you use a certain word, you’ll be forced to go through rehab.

She was correct, and that’s sad.

As for avoiding offending people, give me a break. It’s impossible. What doesn’t offend one person, offends the next.

I don’t really care if anyone is offended by what I see as the truth. I think homosexuality is disgusting, perverted, and shameful. I don’t really care if it’s within ones power or if it’s a choice. Now I know that’s going to offend some of our homosexual readers, but I have every right to voice that opinion, just as they have a right to voice their distaste for Islam, or for liberals. It’s how you go about it.

If someone wants to ban me for expressing my distaste for homosexuality, so be it. But that would be a far different, and far more scary trend than simply keeping your business clean. I think I can find a better way of expressing that then to blurt out the f-word.

Gregor on March 7, 2007 at 5:02 PM

They bash Fox because they say there isn’t enough coverage of the left and when Fox bends over backwards to put them on their network, they refuse to participate … so they themselves are creating the reality they accuse Fox of creating.

They can’t help it, creating reality is their only skill. Edwards apparently didn’t learn anything from the Lamont debacle, pandering to the nutroots to win the primary is not a viable long term strategy.

B Moe on March 7, 2007 at 5:05 PM

What a shameless, pandering jackass.

yes, he is a shameless, pandering jackass….and he listens to Cher.

Metro on March 7, 2007 at 6:16 PM

“FAGGOT”!!!

I also noticed how the nutroots at KOS are seriously in love with this sissy-mary. I have never read KOS before, but those people are seriously screwed up. I can see them going for hillary or the savior, but edwards hypocrisy is so blatently obvious you’d have to have your head buried in the sand to consider that guy.

csdeven on March 7, 2007 at 6:35 PM

OK. I didn’t realize the “F” bomb was a no-no. It wont happen again.

Can you give a list of words that are PC that we can use?

csdeven on March 7, 2007 at 6:38 PM

Bill Richardson is the scariest dem out there. I think he will put the Hildebeast, the Savior, and Silky Pony, into distant memory by the time the primaries come around.

csdeven on March 7, 2007 at 6:42 PM

Edwards refusal will work against him in the coming months. I can just imagine how may times people will accuse him of being unwilling to debate in public.

“Excuse me Mr. Edwards, does this mean that you will not debate your proposals with the members of Congress as well?”

“Mr. Edwards, does this mean that you will end debate with North Kora and just capitulate to their demands if elected President?”

“Mr. Edwards, since you refuse to debate your fellow presidential candidates, does this you will not debate with other countries as President?”

Man, this is going to be fun to watch!

RedinBlueCounty on March 7, 2007 at 6:42 PM

OK. I didn’t realize the “F” bomb was a no-no. It wont happen again.

Can you give a list of words that are PC that we can use?

csdeven on March 7, 2007 at 6:38 PM

How is using the “F” word here any different from the sites where people call President Bush a Nazi or a criminal? There is no difference. Let’s not turn Hotair into another daily kos or DU.

RedinBlueCounty on March 7, 2007 at 6:46 PM

RedinBlueCounty on March 7, 2007 at 6:46 PM

Well, agruable we are much classier than them, but the point of this scandle is that the word was not used in the context that it is being censored for.

But, like always, I defer to the boss.

csdeven on March 7, 2007 at 6:54 PM

I see in your update link to Kos he (and Air America) are pissed because Fox won’t allow Air America to be part of the debate….. First of all, Air America still exists? Secondly, well, I was going to mock what an idiotic idea that would be, but then again, Kos is an idiot.

RightWinged on March 7, 2007 at 7:03 PM

I also noticed how the nutroots at KOS are seriously in love with this sissy-mary. I have never read KOS before, but those people are seriously screwed up. I can see them going for hillary or the savior, but edwards hypocrisy is so blatently obvious you’d have to have your head buried in the sand to consider that guy.

csdeven on March 7, 2007 at 6:35 PM

Pony Boy can’t decide which way the wind is blowing, but he sure as hell is trying to go with it. The libs love someone that appears to be fighting their fight – and that’s what Pony is trying his best to show them. That way, when he “waffles” on them, he blames the right-wing propoganda machine – then claims he had no other choice. The left then sees it as typical right-wing suppression.

Rick on March 7, 2007 at 7:19 PM

Kos is an idiot.

RightWinged on March 7, 2007 at 7:03 PM

Oh no!! Another crazy righty blogger is hurling slurs at those on the left that are just speaking freely.

SARCASM

Rick on March 7, 2007 at 7:22 PM

First of all, Air America still exists?

RightWinged on March 7, 2007 at 7:03 PM

It’s like Jason from Friday the 13th or Michael Myers from Halloween.

Rick on March 7, 2007 at 7:26 PM

I have a slight correction to a quote in that last update link. It says:

“To state the obvious: Fox is a feisty conservative cable network and Air America is a feisty progressive radio network.”

But it should say “… Fox is a feisty conservative cable network that gets the highest ratings of any cable news channel and Air America is a feisty progressive radio station that has almost no audience at all.”

Now why would Fox want to share hosting of an event with an outlet that reaches practically nobody? The act of doing so would basically be giving away free advertising.

Nobody cares what Air America thinks or wants, that is obvious by the size of their listener base.

crosspatch on March 7, 2007 at 8:23 PM

I gladly signed that letter, but am not self righteous or hypersensitive. HARDLY.

What I am is HYPER AWARE of the fallout for the Republican Party.

AND NOWHERE IN THE LETTER DID WE DEMAND THAT SHE APOLOGIZE.

CPAC got what it paid for.

We were merely asking that in the future, CPAC NOT PAY HER TO MAKE US LOOK LIKE THE DEMONS THE DEMS THINK WE ARE.

I would prefer if the letter asked them to hold the conference somewhere that grass roots conservatives could actually attend, rather than just the elites… now that letter I would sign.

Gianni on March 8, 2007 at 3:09 AM