An interesting dynamic.

I'll be surprised if Clinton and Obama don't both back out tomorrow. Because neither's gonna wanna be the third of the Big Three to back out. Obama backs out tomorrow, how does Clinton look, following the leaders? Feeble. Second out might still seema vaguely legit ... but third? No way.

My guess is that Richardson figures that NV is his best chance at a good early showing, and if the top tier pulls out from the debate, all the better for him.

Western Governor, Western Issues.

WTF is what?

I'm not sure how this hurts Edwards. Whatever benefit you get from sharing a stage with 8 other candidates in March (if any, which I kinda doubt), that's outweighed by the love you get from the most passionate of Nevada Democratic activists for snubbing Fox. And if he's alone on this, that love only has one outlet.

Unlike Hillary who hates the netroots, Edwards is a supporter of ours.  If you recall, he was out campaigning for Lamont when Bill Clinton was pimping Lieberman.  Another reason why I move more and more firmly into the Edwards camp is his willingness to come to the front - or lead as it is sometimes called.  While Obama and Hillary wait for the polls to tell them what they think, Edwards is speaking up and out.  Add in labors support, Edwards support for defunding Iraq, and that makes Edwards the most moderate and middle class supportive candidate out there.  Obama and Hillary are plastics poured into whatever molds industry, politics, and self-interests provide.  

I'm still of the belief that Hillary made the deal with Murdoch, and that is why everyone is silent about it.  But, then again, it could just be my tin foil has slipped a little.

at the same time

Yes, that's a point for Richardson. He did make a decision. Unfortunately, it's as good a decision as Bush's decision to invade Iraq.

I wonder if the debate will be shown on the equivalent of our WTTG (broadcast), Fox cable, or both.

But yeah, their local Fox stations look exactly the same as ours -- Wednesday schedule for LV's Fox 5 (same channel!) local news station:

8:00  American Idol
9:00  Wedding Bells
10:00 Fox 5 News at 10pm
11:00 Everybody Loves Raymond

Well, he's a Zellocrat, then.

...she's happy to bolster the legitimacy of Rupert Murdoch's Republican propaganda network as long as he's giving her money.

Apologies to anyone who saw me say nearly the same thing over in Kosland, but it's the same shit, different website.
"Wuss" is just another ad hominen variant of "faggot." Why are you resorting to exactly the tactics and memes of Ann Coulter? I think you are a troll or conservative or something.

From Digby:

The underlying premise of the modern conservative movement is that the entire Democratic party consists of a bunch of fags and dykes who are both too effeminate and too masculine to properly lead the nation. Coulter says it out loud. Dowd hints at it broadly. And the entire press corps giggles and swoons at this shallow, sophomoric concept like a bunch of junior high pom pom girls.

From Glenn Greenwald:

Coulter insisted last night that she did not intend the remark as an anti-gay slur -- that she did not intend to suggest that John Edwards, husband and father, was gay -- but instead only used the word as a "schoolyard taunt," to call him a sissy. And that is true. Her aim was not to suggest that Edwards is actually gay, but simply to feminize him like they do with all male Democratic or liberal political leaders.

The enemy formation of Democrats that you make your own by calling Edwards a wuss and a coward makes me wonder whether you're a winger yourself.
You are not going to convince me--or anyone else--that our candidates are going to avoid Fox News slurs by going on Fox News and subjecting themselves to political character assasination.

I'm sorry to say this Marasaud but the only reason Murdoch is even supporting Hillary Clinton this time around is because he knows damned-well that the GOP Presidential lineup offers slim pickings at best. Rupert Murdoch's game is protecting both the gains that the Conservative movement managed to accumulate during the height of the Corporate Counter Revolution and his own bottom line. Rupert Murdoch realises that DLCer heavyweight Hillary Clinton is the Democratic candidate whose potential presidency is least least likely to affect either of these things. It matters not to Murdoch that Hillary is Liberal on social issues as long as she refrains from any form of economic populism. With both movement Conservatives and GOP lawmakers, a Hillary Administration would be a win-win situation because Hillary does not speak of economic justice when economic justice threatens the kleptocracy. That, and a Hillary Presidency would help give undeserved lagetemacy to the proponents of the fake culture wars in the eyes of millions of right wing evangelicals.

Really? Are you truly surprised?