Good, Hillary deserves to catch hell on this, she is showing once again that she doesn't give a damn about progressive values or integrity in the media. Obama should under no circumstances agree to this.

Obama shows up on FoxNews after the state of the Union, and no one says anything.

Hillary accepts a debate on FoxNews, and the so-called progressive blogosphere goes crazy.

does anyone see a double-standard here?

Two pro-Obama posts in a row. Geez.

She's going to be on there during the general election, both show up on their shows, so it's not really a big deal. While it is the Republican News Channel, it is still watched by a few folks around the country. As p_ukasiak writes, drop the double-standard BS. Besides, the so-called progressive blogosphere and netroots folks need to realize they are a very small, even if distinct minority more vocal than their numbers mean at the polls. Clinton and Obama are running to be president of the country, which includes viewers on the Republican News Channel.

What the hell is going on over at intrade? HRC is dropping like the stock market did today. What do they know that I don't?

Of course, I need only look at the market's reaction after Iowa... Right?

When you are out of money, debates are a great way to get free media exposure.

Maybe she can debate Mike Gravel if Obama doesn't show. I'm sure he would love the invite.

The original point, such as it is, was that debating on FOX would give the channel legitimacy as a news organisation which it is not. Whether interviews "violate" this principle is not in the least clear to me.

Before apoplexy strikes anyone, it is worthwhile to point out that, by my count, Clinton has appeared on FOX four times and Obama twice since the previous FOX debate-debate some 9 months ago, so neither candidate has fully shunned the channel.

Let her debate! Sheesh!

Hillary just pulled a smart political move. It's a catch-22. She may inflame the net-roots, but if Obama backs down, she'll be able to spin it that he's too weak to confront her in a debate, and too timid to challenge Faux News moderators. This is a really smart tactic.

It's dirty as hell, but smart. The problem is, the liberal bloggers can bitch all they want, in the end, the vast majority of the electorate who will vote in primary elections after Feb. 5th will not know or care what bloggers think. Also, I doubt any high ranking dems will speak out, and none of the other media outlets will touch the story.

F'ing brilliant political move. I'm so glad I didn't vote for her today.

Obama 08'.

Good for Hillary! Why wouldn’t she accept an invitation from Fox when they have been way fairer and balance in covering the democratic race between herself and Obama? The elite liberal media could not be more unfair to her so she certainly doesn’t owe then any loyalty and the same applies to the netroots. I think most centrist thinking democrats such as myself really like the fact that when Hillary is elected President she will not be beholden to the nutty far left that dominate the netroots. So, this is definitely a plus in Hillary’s cap for the general.

God Himself could not bestow legitimacy (SP) on Fox. Bill Clinton won points for Democrats by slapping down Chris Wallace at a time when Dems were being characterized as wimps. Democrats have nothing to lose and much to gain by debating on Fox.

Let's be honest. Has anyone seen how HRC has been constantly trashed on the other cable channels. MSNBC, with ringmaster Chris Matthews, has been obsessed with her every move. The New York Times, with thier FEMBOTS, Maureen Dowd and Gail Collins are doing to her what they did to Al Gore in 2000. I look forward to HRC giving FOX a smackdown if they get out of line. Let the FOX audience see what real candidates look like.

I agree with dkorer and anonymous. The coverage that Hillary has gotten on the other news channels has been horrendous, specially on MSNBC with Tweety. Can't really say that Fox has been bad by comparison.
However, I think the original objective of avoiding giving legitimacy to Fox is still valid and worthy. Anybody doubt that when the general election campaign gets underway we will start hearing more on Fox about Travelgate, Vince Foster's assasination, and/or Obama's terrorist education in a madrassa?
And if when either one gets elected you can be guaranteed they will get plenty of the fair and balanced treatment.
They will be well-advised to steer clear from Fox and explain why, like Edwards did earlier.

you see previous candidates (like Kerry) on Fox many times and other Democrats. Al Sharpton is a regular there as well. They hysteria over Fox is over-the-top and crosses the line into intolerance. A candidate should not be afraid to talk to any group of Americans with the exception of those who promote violence, bigotry, or intolerance of others. After all, they are vying to be the President for all Americans.

But isn't Clinton going to be embarrassed when the first question on the FAUXNews debate is "Why do you both hate America?"

I thoought Obama was reaching out to the Republicans, that he was a uniter, yada, yada, yada. I guess his reaching out is like W's- it's only on his terms.