Have you ever appeared on Fox News, Dan? And did Shep mention me?

agreed! you go, girl!

Hm. I'm not sure, Dan. I get that one doesn't want to lend them an air of legitimacy, but given the size of their audience, isn't it too much to hope for to think that you - and all the rest of the boycotting progressive/liberals - can starve the beast? Isn't it maybe more realistic to figure that Fox is here to stay for the foreseeable future, and that it might be at least potentially helpful to have someone expressing liberal views from time to time?

Barring editing tricks, of course. If they try that shit even once, then yeah, never go back.

Fox IS all about their editing tricks. It's actually kind of impressive(I used to be a recording engineer for TV talk shows). A skilled engineer can easily make a person sound like an idiot by fiddling with his knobs.

starve. the crazy bitches. OUT. every thinking/non-crazy person should follow suit. don't begin to legitimize their propagandist filth with your presence. it's nothing but the 700 club for teabagers. worse.

As I recall Obama boycotted them too in 2008. I see no reason to give them any legitimacy, either. Bleugh.

But wait Dan... you told Bill O'Reilly no, and then you gave him my phone number.

yeah, most Fox followers don't really care about hearing any reasonable arguments. hell, we're having a party over in the comments on this story:

http://www.myfoxny.com/dpp/news/local_ne…

i'm posting as Saint Andeol, come join the fun and play "Tell the bigots they're going to Hell". they LOVE that.

Good idea. And all the Republicans should refuse to appear on the liberal channels, too (which is pretty much all the rest of them). Wouldn't that be fun?

#9: they already do.

@9 & 10
"Liberal Media" or "liberal channels" is one of the great myths that the republicans created. They us it to bash any media outlet that reports on anything they're trying to get away with.

Liberals should definitely NOT appear on FOX news.

I'd make an allowance for someone who's sole purpose was to mock whatever show he/she was on.

The idea that MSNBC (partially owned by GE) and CNN are liberal channels is funny. Sure MSNBC has Maddow and Olbermann for a little bit. Then the channel directors constantly strive to balance it all out with the rest of their pro-war, pro-establishment coverage, unlike the consistent, unified message at FOX. DemocracyNOW!, now that's some good liberal shit, and shows just how centrist and conservative MSNBC and CNN are the vast majority of the time.

Good for you. Having to argue for basic decency, and having to listen to counter-arguments for inalienable rights, is a waste of time. It would as productive as inviting Calderan to the Whitman/Brown gubernatorial debates, to—you know, add balance, in case anyone thinks California still belongs to Mexico.

Even if Dan is allowed to go unedited, the FOX audience, no matter how valid the points a liberal guest may make, is unpenetrable to anything that counters their warped world view. It therefore makes no sense to engage them.

THANK YOU, @11.

Oh please, I enjoy the banter. I watch O'Reilly, I watch Obermann, and Maddow. Whether of not you think liberals should appear, most will anyway. Very strange that us progressives are starting to shun the viewpoints of our adversaries at a time when open and heated debate is, well, very healthy for a society.

If they were a legitimate new channel that just tended to veer right due to topic choices etc I would say YES but they seriously become nothing more than the mouthpiece of the Far Right with occasional exceptions. It truly is just a propaganda tool for one party and 99% opinion so I have to say NO.

Well, only if you think they'd be fair and balanced. (LOL)

Well, yeah. Think of the contrast.

Liberals:
intelligent, open-minded, spell correctly, use correct grammar, write complete sentences, graduate 4th grade (usually... at least), don't kick the dog, don't huff gas and paint, don't shoot people, don't like it when others shoot people, like seeing conservatives get shot, don't take a giant shit all over the electoral process, believe that by working together we all can have a better world and wince when paying taxes but understand paying our own way is a necessary evil... among many other positive qualities

Conservatives:
crap all over everything and wonder why nobody likes them...

So, yeah, I think liberals should go on Fucks Gnus whenever they can. They present a great contrast to the usual right wing geeks who think pounding sand up their asses is fun.

No. FOX is at war with liberals, dems, progressives. WAR. You don't fucking hang around people who are at war with you, simple as that.

@3 The only role that liberal guests get on FauxNews is as bait, to help rile up the flamingly regressive audience that they've attracted already. Bait the mob, and then feed them more of the right-wing bullshit that they crave. Rinse, repeat.

Even if a liberal guest had the most emotional persuasive and logically obvious points to make, the FuxNews audience would a) be impervious to it, and b) slaver at the prospect of a slapdown by the host. And, then sit there in their warm glow, passively soaking up the advertising that the channel exists, at great profit, to deliver to them.

Well, fuck no! Break the cycle. Boycott those scumbags!

Occasionally a liberal will go on FOX News and win the debate.

But most of the time the liberal commentators are chosen to be ineffectual, or the format is set against them (i.e. the conservative host won't let them finish more than one sentence at a time).

I think you should go on Fox News, however, you should do it ONLY on your terms to make it fair. In-studio, in-person, and for an extended period of time.

It is inevitable that "liberals" get asked on, but via satellite, where the host can easily drown out the volume, cut you off, and generally always has the upper hand, and only for a few brief moments. You always have to limit it to face-to-face discussion where you have equal power to rebut and refute the bullshit spewed, and where you're not just one satellite image in the corner against several other conservatives and a conservative host.

Fox News is only willing to give actual time, and barely at that, to pretend-liberals like Juan Williams or Alan Colmes, and other no-name asshat centrist-conservative blobs. Their other trick is to roll out Pat Caddell, a vehement conservative whom they always label as a "democratic pollster" once again to pretend that they have any liberals on their channel at all.

If you do it, sit a the table, in person and face-to-face, live where they can't edit you down to the parts they like. That is the ONLY way to have a fair conversation.

But I don't think boycotting Fox News altogether is effective. I do think you should boycott their unfair abuse of the rare liberal guest with unscrupulous tactics by only doing it in the way I suggest.

After DADT, I think the White House pissed me off most when they gave Fox a front row seat in the press room, therefore legitimizing them! Unfortunately they are the king of cable news...

I think the Fox Propaganda Machine needs to stopped at all costs. I would think that one step in the right direction would be to commence the starvation of these fucks.

Dan, if you ever do decide to go on Fox make sure you have your own unedited copy of the tape. You know they're going to give your words their own spin and that way you can call them out as liars when you show the unedited version.

Would you go on the Klan Channel? Would you go on the Nazi Channel? Would you go on the Ahmadinejad Channel? Would you go on the Apartheid Channel?

Why on God's green earth would you appear on a channel that loathes your very existence?

Fox News is pure propaganda. No good can be served by paying any attention to it. The old mafiosi had it right. Fox News is dead to me.

So he didn't mention me?

@17: We're not shunning the viewpoints, we're shunning the loony, imaginary "reality" that is being engaged via an uncritical viewpoint. I'm okay with the uncritical viewpoints/frames themselves (though not happy about them), but I will not abide out-and-out delusion as a "valid" difference of "opinion". Christine O'Donnell, for example, believes in actual, literal witchcraft (something that even most people with an imaginary god-friend have gotten past), as well as American companies "cross-breeding humans and animals" to create "mice with fully-functioning human brains". Glenn beck thinks (or claims to think) Obama is a socialist (he's very much a Liberal Capitalist, though not a Neo-Liberal) who's using Nazi tactics to orchestrate a 50's-paranoia-style Communist coup, and his "evidence" is a series of hard-to-follow word games and image juxtaposition. The vocal advocates of the Far-Right think our Constitution establishes USA as a Christian nation. These are not differing "viewpoints" with which one can engage in healthy debate, they're delusions. We can't debate social perspective or public policy when we're not even dealing with the same reality.

@27: www.newshounds.us - they watch FOX so you don't have to. It allows you to keep up with what FOX is doing without actually having to sit through their programming, causing your brain to start leaking out of your ears or your head to *POP*. The Daily Show also keeps an eye on them, though less-extensively.

@29: Right. I'm ALL for Leftists/Progressives going on Right-leaning actual news or debate shows or actual news/debate shows on Right-leaning channels/networks. Same goes for Rightists/umm... what's the Right's more-extreme branch? "Reactionary" sounds too negatively connotative, and I won't use "Conservative" because they don't want to conserve anything, they want radical change, seemingly toward a structure of little-to no central government and corporate governance on the local level. Anyway, FOX "News" is not a news channel. All reporters and organizations have biases, and legitimate news organizations will attempt to correct for or balance these biases in order to make an attempt at objective coverage. FOX does not do this: they explicitly (though not admitted publicly) manufacture a consistent, overtly biased, and sometimes fictional narrative/frame for all of their programming, which makes them a propaganda outlet. No one should be lending them legitimacy, Dems or Reps (at least no one who actually believes in the democratic process, which requires voters to make intelligent, accurately-informed decisions).

@30: Y u mad tho?

@35: U mad?

@11 partly, but there are liberal propaghanda shows and channels too. The major difference is that there are less radical leftist or libertarian (actual libertarianism, not republicans masquerading as such) voices broadcasted.