Fox outrage – Much ado about nothing

I know a number of conservatives who read this site are going to disagree with me on this. They will be angry/disappointed/infuriated. I expect there will be threats to never read this site again.

OK, so be it.

I’ve never let that stop me from putting my thoughts down, and I refuse to do so now, so you’ve received fair warning. Your outrage and threats to leave will be met with the same scorn and ridicule heaped on anyone else who thinks they’re so important, that they need to issue a mighty YAWP! about their intent to boycott my blog.

I’m all about discussion and controversy, so I invite you to discuss and debate. For those of you who want to never come back… Bye, Felicia!

An interesting outrage/controversy/whatever you want to call it has caught my eye this morning. Apparently, there’s conservative outrage, because Fox/Google have invited an anti-Trump Muslim advocate and an a formerly illegal alien who came here as a child, (edited to add information I should have previously researched about this woman) to be among those asking questions of GOP candidate, and that the RNC approved their appearance. Leading the outrage brigade this time around is Michelle Malkin and the always dependable Trump shills at Breitbart, and for the life of me, I can’t figure out what the outrage is about – two questioners out of…. however many questions will be asked in several hours are opponents of the GOP’s immigration views and Trump views on Islam! OH NOEZ!

Here’s the thing…

The same people who whine about the mainstream media being unabashedly biased are screeching when Fox and Google are at least making an attempt to be balanced in this debate.

This is a chance for the candidates to really shine and address some of the completely outlandish policies some of these people espouse, as well as advance the GOP point of view on these issues in a structured, orderly manner. Hell, some of these radical leftists might get a lesson they didn’t really expect. I’m all for that!

Are the GOP candidates really scared of addressing opposition questions? I would think not. I would think they will welcome the opportunity to reply to some of the more idiotic accusations that have been lobbed against them in a formal, mature manner. Is it so horrible to ensure that questions reflect a broad swath of the population? Are they really expecting us to believe that the other point of view doesn’t exist?

Hate to tell you this, people, but the President is not just YOUR president. He’s everyone’s president, despite what some of the more rabid Obama supporters will tell you. So yes, he will face tough questions from audiences. He will face tough questions from the media. Many of the reporters in the White House press corps are and will continue to be hardcore leftists. And guess what! The President will have to face them and answer their questions as directly and seriously as any others! Yes, even questions from the rabid amnesty supporters. Yes, even questions from supporters of the frothing advocates of the current administration’s refugee plans! Yes, even those who lob ridiculous assertions about “Islamophobia.”

So what is so outrageous about Fox/Google making the debate more challenging and more balanced, rather than lobbing the usual softball questions at the candidates, or trying to pit everyone against Trump?

I’ll tell you what. Not a damn thing.

scared-emoticon-square-face_318-58590But now, what you outrageatrons have provided is yet another excuse for Trump to pussy out of this debate. Whereas a few days ago he was whining about Megyn Kelly, he now has the opportunity to claim that he pulled out of the debate, because of some insane Fox/Google conspiracy to load the questioners with his opponents, as well as supporters of amnesty for illegals. Breitbart has already started the outrage machine.

Trump two days ago: I’m going to pull out of the debate, because, MEGYN KELLY IS MEAN!!!!

Internet: This guy is afraid of Megyn Kelly, but promises to face the Russians, Chinese, and Iranians? LULZ

Breitbart today: Oh, noez! Conspiracy! ANTI-TRUMP!!!!

How long before Trump’s campaign jumps on that bandwagon? Noooooo, it wasn’t Megyn Kelly. He’s not afraid of Megyn Kelly! It’s the total lack of fairness! Fox is unfair to him! They’ve loaded the debate with *GASP!* opponents – a whole two of them – and those opponents will be allowed to *GASP!* ask questions!

Bush dealt with some pretty vicious, many times unfair, reporters.

Every President does. It’s part of his job

If a presidential candidate can’t handle a couple of YouTube “celebrities” tossing a couple of questions in his direction, he (or she) does not deserve the post!

Fact is, I’m pretty sure, at least several of the candidates can easily answer the type of questions these illegal alien advocates and jihadist defenders with grace and aplomb, while advancing the GOP point of view with facts. And I’m pretty sure they will.

And that’s why I think the outrage is much ado about nothing.

33 responses

  1. The last elections we had here in the UK were led by debates, and they were, no matter which political party you go for, a joke. Soft lob questions, tame audiences and toothless presenters. A farce wrapped up in a hugbox. There is nothing worse in democracy than those who seek to lead us going unquestioned and unchallenged. Just my two pence worth.

    Like

    1. I absolutely agree!

      Like

  2. I agree with you on most of it. But I am against anyone who is here illegally participating. If they are here in violation of our laws, they have no business getting a seat at the table for anything regarding our elections or the process leading up to them.

    Like

    1. I’m not 100 percent sure, but the story said she WAS an illegal immigrant, so I’m assuming she got a green card or something, but I don’t know for sure. I’ve never even heard of this chick before, which tells you how much I follow these vapid celebrity YouTube stars.

      Like

    2. She HAS to have been legalized at some point. She apparently was in the military. She joined the military after high school and served in Iraq for more than a year. She worked as a mechanic before starting her YouTube career in 2008. She was brought over as a kid, and gained citizenship later.

      Liked by 1 person

  3. Our debates are bad jokes and its about time someone objected to the questioners and methods employed. Remember Candy Crowley? Because Romney was a whimp he accepted such an orifice and thereby lost an election.

    To continue down this road annoints the media and its abusers. I appauld Trump and all who speak out against these obscene practices which insult the American electorate.

    If Fox were some concerned why not ask the candidates about Obama’s executive orders, his gun control measures, unilateral release of terrorists, Obama’s treaties that are not treaties?

    But no let’s not invite ordinary citizens lets invite illegal aliens, fringe loons, and extremeists, because these will make the debates more meaningful.

    Right.

    Like

    1. How do you know what they will or will not ask? The moderators may very well ask those questions. These are two questions out of what will probably be DOZENS. The assumption is ridiculous.

      Like

  4. Agreed. Conservatives need to quit whining about the media and fight the damn fight.

    Like

  5. Good stuff.

    I definitely think he’s afraid of what Megan Kelly can do to his image. He already proved it. But it’s not so much fear of her individually as fear of being exposed in a way that he can expose himself if she asks the right questions.

    He’s used to being the boss. Nobody gets to pin him down. And that might work as a president. But it’s not going to work on the road to the presidency.

    Like

    1. Actually, after his little dust-up with Megan Kelly, his poll numbers went UP. (Why is another matter.)

      Like

      1. I doubt that has anything to do with Kelly. He’s afraid to be questioned substantively while he’s ahead in Iowa, and it’s so close between him and Cruz. I think Mark Levin was dead on about that.

        Like

  6. If I were were expecting anything use of the debates, I’d more be concerned about what a beauty & fashion vlogger would contribute, than her immigration status.

    Like

    1. That’s about it. Although, I will say that she’s a military veteran, so she could conceivably ask a relevant question. Or… she could bloviate about immigration.

      Like

  7. Passing strange…for years people on the left have been bashing Fox News for being conservative, and today now I see folks on the right bashing Fox News for not being conservative. I guess, as always, it depends on whose ox is being gored.

    Liked by 1 person

  8. I seriously doubt that Trump “fears” Megan Kelly. Like I said above, after his last dust-up with her, HIS poll numbers took a jump UP. I’m NOT a Trump fan and think skipping this event is stupid…so did Ronald Reagan after he lost Iowa and then fired his campaign staff for “advising” him to skip it. (Incidentally that’s when he brought Edwin Meese on board.) Neither do I believe that he’s skipping it because he doesn’t like who the questioners will be. So far, I’ve seen little evidence that Trump “fears” anyone.

    Like

  9. What the hell is this? An entire blog post without a single naughty word? Who are you and what have you done with the real Nicki? Bring back the real Nicki or I will never read your blog again!

    You know that some dumbass had to say it. So … you’re welcome🙂

    Like

    1. You just made me crack up with that. Too awesome!

      Like

  10. The tone of the comments so far don’t match your expectations. Were you just giving us some drama queenery? Or are you confusing us with SJW’s?
    Point 1: The debates and the campaigns are more than ever show biz aka politics aka soap opera aka reality tv. Fox brought in ringers to juice the mood. Surprise.
    Point 2: The ringers aren’t just advocates, they’re VICTIMS, sob, sob. Okay, for balance, Fox should bring in, say, the mother of a person murdered by an illegal alien to ask Rubio a pointed question or two about amnesty.
    Great blog, by the way.

    Like

    1. The tone of the comments so far don’t match your expectations. Were you just giving us some drama queenery? Or are you confusing us with SJW’s?

      OK, I have no idea what that means at all.

      Yes, the debates are show biz. That said… so far it’s been pretty decent. Policy questions, taking the candidates to task on things they’ve said and some of the flip flops they’ve had.

      The “ringers” so far haven’t been at all objectionable. Both the YouTubers so far have been American military veterans. The first guy, in particular, asked a very good question about technology. The Dulce Candy chick kind of lobbed a very general, meh sort of question. The Islamist chick hasn’t been on yet.

      Like

    2. Those “ringers” were completely anti-climactic, as I predicted. They weren’t victims. The Islamist chick was kind of annoying, but meh…

      Like

    3. I’ll explain the joke. “I know a number of conservatives who read this site are going to disagree with me on this. They will be angry/disappointed/infuriated. I expect there will be threats to never read this site again.” Those are the expectations that comments have so far not met, nicht wahr? “…drama queenery?” I.e. shall I take your expectations as friendly hyperbole? “…blah, blah, SJW…” Hey, I don’t see anybody taking fatal offense at event the slightest ideological wobble. I hope that clarifies my obscure offhand remarks.

      Like

      1. Ah! Gotcha. LOL

        Well, so far, so good. I’m certainly glad no one got butthurt, but it has happened before.🙂

        Like

    4. There’s been a fair amount of butthurt in the comments here in the past. These were people who were offended by any number of things. Nicki’s language (which I find to be one of her more endearing qualities), Nicki’s opinion (it seems they’re more offended that she has the temerity to express an opinion rather than what the opinion is), and finally, they never seem to read the disclaimer warning them of language and opinions. It’s a blog. Who woulda thunk there’d be an opinion posted?

      Liked by 1 person

  11. My personal guess the reason why Trump skipped the debate is not because he is afraid. I would say it’s probably because the idiot with his huge ego ran his and left him in a no win position, that would leave him looking bad. I’d bet he figured he was a big enough deal that Fox would bend to his will of not having Megyn Kelly host out of spite. By forcing Fox to submit to his will that would have made him seem even stronger to his followers, and probably a few really needed points in the polls.

    Trump however never considered the possibility that Fox would dare to ignore his demands. That left him between a rock an a hard place as no mater what he would have chosen to do in response it would not look good on him. Either he did not go to the debate which opens him to attacks, or he gives in to fox making himself look weak (and I’d be willing to bet even if every one was a Tumptard and pretended the incident never happened, his ego would not tolerate the possibility of being perceived as weak). So out of those two Skipping the event was probably the least damaging to him, since he can sort of try to spin it as him being strong.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. I think that’s definitely a part of it.

      Like

  12. At some point the candidate is going to have to face a hostile audience. I’d rather they get experience now rather than on-the-job-training. But this? This isn’t even all that hostile. I think Trump just wanted a reason to pussy out so he could make some sort of ‘stand’, whatever he thinks it’s about.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Thinking out loud The Strumpet says, “In order to win, I need people to vote for me. People vote for a winner and they vote against a loser. So I create conflict and structure it so that I will win and those other bozos will lose. So I overcome in the completely artificial conflict and I win the nomination.”

      It should matter that The Strumpet created the conflict from used toilet tissue where no conflict had previously existed. Is that what we want from a president?

      I don’t give a damn if you are a “the most genuine conservative”, I care about your position on the issues. Looking at the current WH resident, first term senators are not on my Christmas list but the other choices don’t look so good either. At some point, and it cannot be too soon for me, the Republican candidates will stop running against each other and start to run against Missus Clintoon and her magic completely public email server and Mister Sandman and their platforms. I hope that the Republican party can reassemble itself and do what needs to be done.

      Liked by 1 person

  13. Hmmmm. Seems that the so-called debate invitees with questions didn’t include any rednecks, Hawaiian surfers, Tulsa BBQ restaurant owners, or keep-on-naming-thems. There must be an A-list of cause celebres which doesn’t include Nancy Nine2Fives or her counterparts.

    Like

    1. But it did include two military veterans and one sow. 2/3 ain’t bad.🙂

      Like

  14. Just a quick note of my opinion of why Trump may have chosen to not debate the others in Iowa. I think he must have figured he had nothing to win, and more to lose. If he did well, or even just ok, he would not have gained much, but if he did poorly, he could have lost ground, which at this point I am thinking he really cannot afford to loose, as I am hoping that it is closer than polls might indicate.
    The event he staged raising money for veteran causes and which I saw was gleefully carried by CNN was a thumb in the eye of FOX news and so far I have not seen much said about it, although to be honest I have not been paying much attention to the news media lately. That event was a calculated move on his part and shows that even though he is a slimy guy, he is a very crafty business man who knows how to manipulate people and opinions.
    He is one person we all need to watch out for. I don’t like snakes, but at least with a snake, I understand that they are not evil, they are just being what they were designed to be. With Donald Trump, I am not so certain.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Mark Levin basically said the same thing. I think I agree. There was much more substance in this debate than in the others in which he participated. He couldn’t hang, so he bailed. The result was higher ratings than the last debate in which he participated, so…

      Like

  15. Really?? This is a guy who has built up a very large real-estate company, a field which is overflowing with sharks and alligators. Any you think he is afraid of some TV news-reader? And you think he figures that he’ll get whatever he asks for and never figures that he will be told “No”, so he doesn’t have a plan for when an opponent doesn’t give in?
    Really??

    Go watch the Halperin clip of Jan 29, where he says that Trump thinks ten steps ahead.

    It is understandable why some people don’t like Trump, but, Geesh, don’t be willfully stupid about him.

    Like

  16. […] drama started early, with Trump leading the pack with stupid statements, narcissistic demands, a drama queen boycott of the Iowa debate, and ultimately a meltdown on Twitter about how […]

    Like

%d bloggers like this: