Yes, I know those are words no one thought I'd ever say... especially me. But here goes:The Los Angeles Times this morning had an entertainment op-ed piece about the upcoming Democratic Presidential Debate (sponsored by the Black Congressional Caucus and Fox News). More to the point, the article was about how the three leading Democratic Party candidates are boycotting the event. They claim — and with good cause — that the channel presenting is unfairly bashes them, and is largely a tool or mouthpiece for their opponents.
No one can deny that Fox News gives the Dems are hard time. (And they deserve it, sometimes.) Hillary, Obama and Edwards all have a point: Fox news is anything but fair and balanced. But I wonder if the boycott accomplishes the things they think it will. Of all the demographics out there, I would think the Fox folks are the ones most in need of a little information on the Democratic candidates. And as for the candidates, what better way to get their message out to the people — all people — than a debate on a channel they wouldn't otherwise have open access to?
(On a side note, I find it laughable that Obama's African American supporters are backing him up on this one. I mean, it's co-sponsored by the Black caucus, and he bailed on them, the moment things got tough. What's he gonna be like in, oh I don't know... an international incident?!)The bottom line: I can't support the boycott of the Fox News debate for one simple reason. Our country needs someone who can rise above the petty fights in the political realm, and really get down to problem solving: the environment, the war, the state of education and a long list of other issues all go way up on the list; they go way above the "problem" of bias in media.
No comments:
Post a Comment