also-

I never understand the argument that going there Legitimizes FOX

It is in the interest of the Democratic party for our candidates to make their case to these people.

I disagree with the theory that people shouldn't go on Fox. I've appeared on their network dozens of times if not more as a legal analyst. My view is if I can convince one person of my position, or even to make them think about it, it's worth it.

I don't think Obama did anything different on Fox than he ever does (dogwhistle to selfish Independant creative class types that he won't burden them with an FDR type of real Democratic policy).

Clinton clearly laid out her good domestic policy ideas on Fox a while back...so its not going on there thats a problem: its whether you get pushed around by crappy editing.

Obama was not able to prevent that, even with an unedited interview. Clinton did herself far more damage by allowing 60 minutes to keep on pushing and pushing her in order to frame "As far as I know...?" as if that was her answer when her answer had already been her immediate: "Of course not."

Shows are lame or good regardless of  who shows up on them.

What does Kos really fear bout Hillary going on O'Reilly's program?  That she's acknowledging Fox as a legitimate media outlet?  (I doubt it) or that she won't end up pandering to his audience the way that Obama would?  

Senator Clinton shows that she can go where she wants and says what she has to say.  Courage?  One could say that she's being brave facing her detractors (like Olberman).  

But it shows that SHE has the fortitude of character because she is there, in their face, for them to call her out.  I doubt her interview will go the same way Wallace and WJC did.

Hillary is very smart.  It's not like she's going to go on O'Reilly and say "G D America" or "we're giving AIDS to people of color"

Obama supporters will say she's pandering while OBama was 'reaching out.'  Reaching down more like it with his aloof approach.

Say what you will about Fox but they do reach a pretty good size electorate a lot of people who can be swayed to vote for Hillary.  As never a Clinton lover (even though he did good things for the country) I am appalled at how she has been treated in the press & could see myself voting for her in the GE.  Personally I'm sick & tired of the Hannity's, Limbaugh's, etc. speaking for the conservative base only.  

Speaking for myself only (hmmm where have I heard that before -- BTD hehe) I'm just sick of these "gotcha" politics.  I think the Repub went too far in going after the Clintons while in office.  

Now I get my news from several sources on both sides of the aisle - NYT, WashPo, local paper - Post Dispatch, CNN.com, MSNBC.com, Foxnews.com talkleft.com.  

Now I vehemently disagree with the republican base on a lot of issues (yes, rich people should pay more).  Sorry for getting off topic.

I read an article awhile back  (can't remember where) that said people are only reading/watching from their own side's political perspective & not trying to understand the other side.  

I think however, that BTD is right about  HRC's appearance on Fox. It has been correctly outed by Dems as not a network news outlet, but rather as a propaganda arm of the RNC, and thus should not be legitimized by Dems. Period.

MSNBC is our enemy, MSNBC has never been our friend.

Or should I say Hillary's friend?  Or better yet, Obama's enemy?

They've been throwing wrench after wrench into her campaign and she keeps going. They're the perma-loser braniacs I hope this campaign, GE and WH win or loss will -- oh pantheon of dearly departed great liberals and democrats please -- sweep out of power for good.

Today, I see that MSN has followed the "yellow-journalism" path.

I love reading about the press in our history.  It's always been about yellow journalism.

Read about Billy the Kid.  That will convince you that nothing much has changed.

Obama: when Wright equates US Govt involvement in Aids, Farrakhan a great voice, terrorism against US.

I am denouncing clearly and unequicably.

Comments resurfacing and expoitation of old divisions, whatever his intention that is what occurred.  Not our campaign not what i stand, for does not speak for me or campaign can not stop him from making these outrageous remarks.  When I say these remarks are appalling, I mean it. Distressed this has caused a distraction from what the campaign should be about the Amer people, They want some help is securing a better life for themselve and their children and for Wright to think it is appropriate to command the stage in the midst to of this debate not only saddens me, makes me angry.

My guess, Wright has nothing on him and it was ok to throw him under the bus.

The attitude about Fox=bad is old school.  They're all biased, use their platforms for bad intentions, say nasty, horrible things about Democratic candidates which work at destroying the Democratic party.  To say one is worse than the other is certainly a venture into koolaid drinking.

Both candidates seem to think they're going to get Republicans to vote for them in Indiana, I guess.

They all cover politics only when there's a horse race.  They are all, except for FOX, in the tank for Obama beyond all rhyme and reason.  They've let Bush trample on the Constitution, The Bill of Rights, and the separation of powers with barely a complaint. Their definition of "substance" comes down to gotchas and neighborhood-bar opinions.

Has anybody heard the TV networks apologizing for using the Pentagon's paid military advisors as "independent" military analysts? No, I didn't think so.

I can't imagine that Hillary could possibly get less respect from O'Reilly than she could from Olbermann or Russert, so, again, what's the big deal?