Chris Wallace Strikes Back At Jon Stewart: Hannity and O'Reilly's Viewers Better Informed Than Daily Show's
By Noel Sheppard | June 26, 2011 | 13:22
Chris Wallace told Don Imus Thursday he intended to fully respond to the fallout from last week's interview with Jon Stewart.
True to his word, at the conclusion of the most recent "Fox News Sunday," Wallace struck back at Stewart's claim that Fox watchers are the most misinformed media viewers by demonstrating that folks who watch "Hannity" and "The O'Reilly Factor" were actually better informed than "Daily Show" viewers (video follows with transcript and commentary):
CHRIS WALLACE, HOST: Now, the surprising fallout from our interview last Sunday with Jon Stewart. I figured it would get some reaction, but not that it would light up the internet. One of Jon’s arguments was that the bias of the mainstream media is not to push a liberal agenda.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JON STEWART: The bias of the mainstream media is toward sensationalism, conflict, and laziness.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
WALLACE: The Huffington Post seemed to approve that Sunday afternoon when it ran this headline that seemed more appropriate to a declaration of war. Then on Monday, Stewart led his show by complaining about the editing of our interview. True, we did cut our 24-minute conversation down to fourteen. But we posted the full interview on our website. That's the only reason you could see it.
I was more surprised by Jon’s claim we left out the take-away moment: the moment where I gave away the game.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
STEWART: Do you believe that Fox News is exactly the ideological equivalent of…
WALLACE: I think we're the counterweight.
STEWART: …of NBC News?
WALLACE: I think we're the counterweight.
STEWART: You believe that?
WALLACE: I think that they have a liberal agenda and we tell the other side of the story.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
WALLACE: But I made exactly the same point in the interview we ran on the air.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
WALLACE: I don't think our viewers are the least bit disappointed with us. I think our viewers think finally they're getting somebody who tells the other side of the story.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
WALLACE: Jon seemed to think that was a big deal, that I said we tell the other side of the story. While I wish I had said the full story, here is what I meant. As we showed today, we don’t go easy on Republicans. But we try to provide a fuller perspective. For instance, pointing out the strengths and some of the problems with ObamaCare before anyone else did. But let me give you a classic example of what “fair and balanced” means to me.
After Hurricane Katrina, the mainstream media piled on FEMA for the failure to respond to the crisis. And the federal government did a lousy job. But it was Fox News that started reporting on the failure of the first responders, the city of New Orleans, and the state of Louisiana to help people. Yes, we reported FEMA’s problems, but we also told the other side of the story.
And then there was the most heated moment of the interview.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
STEWART: Who is the most consistently misinformed media viewers, the most consistently misinformed? Fox. Fox viewers. Consistently. Every poll.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
WALLACE: The Pulitzer Prize-winning website PolitiFact looked into that statement, and on its Truth-O-Meter it rated Jon’s claim false. But the details are even more interesting. In a survey called “Misinformation in the 2010 Election,” people were asked a series of fact questions like which president signed tarp? But the poll also asked questions like this. “As you know, the American economy had a major downturn starting in the fall of 2008. Do you think that now the American economy is ‘a,’ starting to recover or ‘b,’ still getting worse?” "Starting to recover" was the so-called right answer. If you said, "still getting worse" you were officially misinformed. And if you questioned whether climate change is occurring or whether ObamaCare will add to deficit, you were also mistaken.
Then there was last year's Pew Poll which asked four fact questions like what job did Eric Holder have? It turns out Fox News scored better, not worse, than MSNBC, CNN, the network evening news and the network morning news. As for individual shows, 31 percent of “Hannity” viewers got all four questions correct. 29 percent for “O'Reilly.” And all the way down near the bottom viewers of Jon Stewart’s “Daily Show" at 22 percent.
So folks, all that talk about you’re the most consistently misinformed viewers? I guess the joke is on Jon Stewart.
Indeed it is.
Bravo, Chris! Bravo!
- Noel Sheppard's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
Chris
Submitted by well99 on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 1:33pm.
Nailed it on the head.It is about the questions.The 2010 test should of been for liberals only since the answers were based on their agenda not the facts.Stewie will come back with some tripe.You can bet on that.
I guess I don't understand
Submitted by Kat Outta the Bag on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 1:39pm.
I guess I don't understand what the big deal about the interview is. At the end of the day, what Stewart thinks of me and my watching of Fox News matters nil to me.
Change the channel
Submitted by Texndoc on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 3:11pm.
Whenever he's on anything else, I change the channel and Fox News is no different. I'm sick to death of discussions and interviews with or about him.
You're right it doesn't matter to us,.
Submitted by Mark81150 on Mon, 06/27/2011 - 12:02pm.
It can have a highly corosive effect on what independent who don't watch FOX may believe though. That only matters in the context of who has credibility and who does not. When Stewart runs a virtual jihad against FOX he stops being a funny man, and becomes a propagandist for the prog agenda, something independents would only know if they watch FOX.
That's less likely if Stewart poisins the well in advance, telling viewers NO,, DON"T LOOK THERE!!! THERE BE TROLLS UNDER YOUR BED!!!... He might sincerely believe the nonsense he spouts, or (using the prog straw argument) he's too smart to believe the crap he says, too busy being a hack to care that he supports a fictional narrative. For money or for his ideology, he's selling lies wrapped in clown papper.
He wins, if we don't bother engaging in the fight.
What's a truly open minded college kid to think?, if after watching Stewie with his friends week after week, and thinking,.. that just don't sound right..... he is left with no counter argument to Stewie's propaganda blitz. His "friends" will browbeat him to conformiity, as progs always do to an opposing view.
Chris is right here, that fighting for your reputation against libel and slander is always right.
Stewart's show draws about a
Submitted by Bruzilla on Mon, 06/27/2011 - 2:57pm.
Stewart's show draws about a .7 in the ratings, which is about half the number of the worst sitcoms. If he were on network TV, he would have been cancelled years ago for performance that low. There's probably a lot more political hacks, who have well-defined political views, watching that show than Independents trying to form an opinion on anything.
He draws ratings similar to
Submitted by balboa on Mon, 06/27/2011 - 3:10pm.
He draws ratings similar to Leno and Letterman, so not sure that's true.
Ah, but his clips are
Submitted by amyshulk on Mon, 06/27/2011 - 8:19pm.
Ah, but his clips are replayed on *other* shows - Morning Joe shows them without comment/context quite often.
.
Ronald Reagan
My point was that it's not
Submitted by balboa on Mon, 06/27/2011 - 8:45pm.
My point was that it's not true that if Stewart were on one of the networks he'd be canceled.
Liberals do not get irony
Submitted by wahappened on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 1:46pm.
Isn't it ironic that Stewart is the one that's misinformed?
"Never argue with an idiot. They'll pull you down to their level then beat you with their experience."
Edmund Burke
wallace rules
Submitted by right of way on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 1:48pm.
i like bret bair, but i wish chris wallace would host the six o'clock news on fox.
what's sad is that the daily show's audience considers it a factural news broadcast.
that truth must not be told
Submitted by ohio granny on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 1:55pm.
That Fox news has the most informed viewers mjust not be told because that must mean the MSM does not inform their viewers. When 90 percent (or more) from the MSM admit they are democrats and vote democratic, why in the world would anyone except a fool believe anything they have to say.
MSM = same as the democRAT party, liars who will say or do anything to stay in power.
Well done,
Submitted by Bob K on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 2:12pm.
but on this side, we already knew it. Stewart will keep on making his claim(s) and his viewers will not change their opinion even when presented with the facts. They hear and believe what they have been trained and conditioned to. I mean come on, most of them consider Stewart's show as being a news show.
Yes, whenever I hear Stewart
Submitted by redfish on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 2:18pm.
Yes, whenever I hear Stewart say something like "I'm a comedian, not a journalist" my first reaction is to want to say "tell that to your viewers".
They'll say the same thing, of course, but they believe everything he reports as fact.
Well, Stewart can always use
Submitted by motherbelt on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 2:27pm.
Well, Stewart can always use his fall-back excuse: It's a fake news show!!
So he's not obliged to keep his viewers "informed." He is, after all, a comedian!
Dennis Miller is another comic who now does commentary. But when he does, he is dead serious. Even if he injects humor into it, he never claims to be doing just a routine.
Stewart, on the other hand, wants to go back and forth at will, and without warning. He wants to be taken seriously, but he also wants to play fast and loose with the facts, because, he's a comedian!
Now Miller I like. While he
Submitted by Kat Outta the Bag on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 4:29pm.
Now Miller I like. While he admits he's still liberal on some social issues, on most other issues he's seen the light. He reads all that he can and knows his stuff and when confronted with a slightly different point of view he'll concede that he hadn't thought of it that way and keeps an open mind.
Stewie
Submitted by Marsh on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 2:27pm.
will have a rebuttal tomorrow. He won't let this pass.
Agreed,
Submitted by Mark81150 on Mon, 06/27/2011 - 12:44pm.
If Stewie just ignored it, his audience would never hear of it, they just never watch FOX, they just like Stewie beating down those stodgy old conservatives like Mom or Dad.
Stewie's immense ego can't handle that,
He will respond.
"Struck back"! Way to strike
Submitted by balboa on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 2:31pm.
"Struck back"! Way to strike back Wallace! Strike a blow!
Stewart already aired the correction, fwiw.
For what it's worth?
Submitted by UpNorth on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 2:44pm.
In Stewie's case, not much at all.
The Pulitzer Prize-winning website PolitiFact? Isn't that the
Submitted by Rush Fan on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 3:12pm.
same website that pushes the Global Warming agenda. The same website that wrote this about the Climategate emails:
I am constantly amazed and disappointed when supposedly "fair and balanced" journalist such as Chris Wallace, as well as some conservative journalist, will tout and give credibility to PolitiFact, as if it is an unbiased fact checker of the truth. PolitiFact primarily supports leftist principles such as Global Warming. That should come as no surprise, as the owner of PolitiFact is the liberal St. Petersburg Times.
Does the Pulitzer Prize award signify an achievement? Yes, if you are a liberal. The Pulitzer Prize is run by liberals for liberals. Guess who was recently elected to the Pulitzer Prize Board.? Why no other than leftist Eugene Robinson of the Washington Post, who is a fixture on MSNBC.
As for Jon Stewart, he is not only just another misguided liberal, but uninformed and full of himself. He may be funnier than Alan Colmes or Keith Olbermann, but otherwise there is little difference between them.But, but
Submitted by Tomorama on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 3:34pm.
Rush fan, that actually makes it better for Fox when a left leaning website even says Stewie is full of shi*......
If it were a Conservatibve leaning site it would as usual be poo poo'ed.................
I would NEVER have Wallace take over for Brett at 06:00 that is crazy talk.
He can take Shemps spot at 07:00 and make it the best two hours on Fox NEWS.
Next to Red Eye and News watch of course.
This is why I love Chris Wallace
Submitted by Lord-come-soon-please on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 3:14pm.
He really should be more of a major player on Fox's lineup. He always has the facts straight, and he doesn't let ANYONE get away with partisan bullshlitz - on the left or the right. The thing that makes his presentation different - he actually presents the "other side" of arguments, something the Obama media would never consider doing.
Stewart didn't look like a
Submitted by AngryInOhio on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 3:19pm.
Stewart didn't look like a comedian in that clip talking about Fox viewers, he looked like an angry liberal spitting out the words.
That kind of anger is where
Submitted by amyshulk on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 10:39pm.
That kind of anger is where we get mobs from - so much for "sanity" huh?
Ronald Reagan
Only brain lazy liberals believe Stewart, Colbert, Maddow...
Submitted by gruyere cheese on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 4:07pm.
Objective journalism is studying every side, angles of a discussion or story. The difference with Libs TV viewers is that they only watch their bubble heads and believe in anything they say. They don't fact check, they don't read other online or printed stories that offer a different perspective on the story. I watch Fox, MessnBC, CNN and the other networks and in the end, I am the one that forms and opinion based on what I listen to by different cable people. Fact checking is to much of a job for liberals and so; bashing Fox News is easier than putting their brain cells to work.
News?
Submitted by jschau on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 4:31pm.
The saddest commentary is that many many people watch Jon Stewart for their news coverage. My daughter among them. "I know it's not news, but he makes valid points." He is a bigoted leftist who uses "it's a comedy show" to have it both ways anytime he says something outrageous and/or untrue.
Chris Wallace can be an unprofessional IDIOT sometimes.
Submitted by Rush Fan on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 4:44pm.
For those of you praising Chris Wallace, I assume you missed his Fox News Sunday program today, where he asked Michelle Bachmann the following question:
Wallace to Bachmann: ARE YOU A FLAKE?
Bachmann replied: That would be insulting to say something like that. Here is the VIDEO.
Of course, the LEFT immediately picked up that comment. How much do you want to bet that whenever Michelle Bachman is interviewed by CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN, that the interviewer will ask the "FLAKE" question. If she is our presidential nominee, I can imagine Wolf Blitzer asking her during one of the debates: "There are some who think you are a FLAKE. Are you?"
Huffington Post: Chris Wallace Asks Michele Bachmann: 'Are You A Flake?'
Politico: Bachmann: I'm serious, not a flake
Way to go Chris!
He obviously asked that so
Submitted by balboa on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 4:50pm.
He obviously asked that so she could answer those criticisms of her. And she has said some nutty things.
I'd wager she knows
Submitted by theduck6 on Mon, 06/27/2011 - 7:13am.
there are not 57 states or pick any Biden gaffe from the drop down menu.
Is that a shovel ready gaffe or a gaffe in serious need of a shovel? :0)
Doubtful
Submitted by ckc1227 on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 5:03pm.
"How much do you want to bet that whenever Michelle Bachman is interviewed by CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN, that the interviewer will ask the "FLAKE" question."
They will most likely ask why are you such a flake, implying that it's already confirmed that she is.
She should have said
Submitted by motherbelt on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 5:12pm.
She should have said President Obama said that 10,000 people had died in a Missouri tornado, and he had visited 57 states....do you think HE's a flake?
Chris Wallace apologized. But it wasn't a true apology.
Submitted by Rush Fan on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 5:39pm.
It was the type of apology that liberals often give. Something such as "If you were offended, I apologize."
Here is the VIDEO.
It's still my opinion that Wallace is unprofessional and disrespectful. Keep it up Chris and the Daily Kos will vote you Man of the Year!
Bachmann's answer was
Submitted by motherbelt on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 6:18pm.
Bachmann's answer was stellar! She showed that her professional and life experiences FAR outstrip those of the current WH occupant when HE ran for the office.
Karl Rove had it right when he asked (paraphrasing) How did a nobody who did diddly-squat in the Senate [and elsewhere, I would add] get elected president??
Agreed.
Submitted by HelenS on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 6:12pm.
I watched the interview this morning and Chris Wallace was shamefully crass.
I can't believe he asked that jackassinine question. And as I've watched him on and off over the years, i can say that I've never heard him ask a comperably insulting question of any other guest on his program, even those who clearly ARE flakes!
I've wondered about him and his position on and off, but this embarrassment this morning has caused me to consider him an MSM-plant or a sell-out, or whatever he might be. But as a faux conservative he has now failed.
I hope someone can find a way to comment to him just how tacky and shameful his interview was.
And he wants to reprimand Stewart?
Me - "The libs/dems of today are the Quislings of former years - the cowards who would vote a fraud into office in exchange for handouts from the devil."
According to Wallace's
Submitted by motherbelt on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 6:25pm.
According to Wallace's apology that will air tomorrow, a LOT of people already did let him know. And I agree with you 100%...I don't recall him ever asking anyone else so insulting a question.
Obama and Bachmann "misstatements"
Submitted by Jer on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 7:04pm.
I like the quip someone made regarding then Senator Obama's "tornado killed 10,000" blunder: "Right...ten thousand, give or take 9,988" [The actual figure was 12 deaths.]
But, that and the 57 states, "corpseman", Medal of Honor recipient misidentification, etc. are gaffes--in some instances unintentional verbal slips and in others misstatements resulting from ignorance. On the other hand, Bachmann has made several deliberate but somewhat bizarre claims, and those are what presumably prompted Wallace's "flakey' query that he posed to her. Nevertheless, I agree the phrasing of the question in that manner was inappropriate and unprofessional.
Jer
How do you figure
Submitted by Boudin on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 7:30pm.
Obama's are mistakes and Bachmann's are deliberate?
The Cambridge police remark
Submitted by balboa on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 7:49pm.
The Cambridge police remark was deliberate for sure, as was Bachmann's swine flu comment, the anti-American statement, etc.
I dont know what the problem is with the Anti American comment
Submitted by Boudin on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 8:07pm.
I think its true. Heck, just read his books. Before he was POTUS, when did he ever have anything good to say about the USA?
That wasn't the sum of my figuring, Boudin...
Submitted by Jer on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 8:08pm.
you misunderstood my comment.
Jer
Hey, Jer
Submitted by 26CX on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 7:38pm.
Was this statement by Obama an unintentional verbal slip, or a misstatement resulting from ignorance:
"Now, I don't know, not having been there and not seeing all the facts, what role race played in that. But I think it's fair to say, number one, any of us would be pretty angry; number two, that the Cambridge police acted stupidly in arresting somebody when there was already proof that they were in their own home; and, number three, what I think we know separate and apart from this incident is that there's a long history in this country of African-Americans and Latinos being stopped by law enforcement disproportionately. That's just a fact," Obama said.
CX...
Submitted by Jer on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 8:13pm.
I've already commented on and criticized Obama's initial (knee-jerk) reaction to that incident at least twice at NB, as well as other ill-advised statements he has made.
Would you like to rehash each one of them?
Jer
Maybe some other time, Jer,
Submitted by 26CX on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 8:19pm.
But tonight I'm just interested in knowing whether, based on your post above, you think this statement by Obama was an unintentional verbal slip, or a misstatement resulting from ignorance.
Between those two categories, more in the latter.
Submitted by Jer on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 8:31pm.
But you're missing the point.
Jer
No way, Jer.
Submitted by 26CX on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 8:37pm.
Obama's was a deliberate statement.
And if, as you say, I am missing the point, please feel free to elucidate.
So what, CX?
Submitted by Jer on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 9:43pm.
I didn't intend for those two alternatives to exhaust the entire range of possibilities for categorizing incorrect, improper, poorly phrased, misused, mispronounced, ill-advised, impertinent, impolitic, imprudent or objectionable words or combination of words spoken by--or actions of--a politician.
motherbelt had referred to the "57 states" and "10,000 tornado death" comments by Obama as potential instances of 'flakiness'.
However, I believed those--and the additional examples I listed--would be more appropriately placed in the verbal "gaffe" category rather than within the realm of some of the more unusual claims of Michele Bachmann.
And, Obama's ill-advised and ill-informed reaction to the Gates incident would, in my opinion, fall under some other category of "did he/she really say that" boneheadedness.
Jer
So, Jer,
Submitted by 26CX on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 9:55pm.
If I understand your response correctly, you were limiting the examples of Obama's questionable comments to those specifically identified by Motherbelt and you, but leaving the "realm of some of the more unusual claims of Michelle Bachmann" wide open to anything she's said?
Aren't you skewing the comparison heavily against Bachmann by doing that?
Oooh oooh Jer*
Submitted by cajun2 on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 9:50pm.
But you're missing the point.
Jer, can I use that line next time I'm losing an arguement?
cajun...
Submitted by Jer on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 10:12pm.
No.
Jer
;-( *
Submitted by cajun2 on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 10:16pm.
;-)
Good thing
Submitted by Boudin on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 10:28pm.
You dont lose arguments then,,,,, eh
cajun, maybe Boudin will license rights to his
Submitted by Jer on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 10:48pm.
regrettably far too frequently applicable "Drat! Wrong again" lamentation.
Jer
sorry Jer*
Submitted by cajun2 on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 11:10pm.
Never heard that one before. No sale.
should have elaborated...
Submitted by Jer on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 11:24pm.
"frequently applicable, infrequently employed." Boudin has probably abandoned his copyright. Use it or lose it.
Jer
Use it or lose it*
Submitted by cajun2 on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 11:29pm.
Error in the licensing agreement. If you never NEED to use it, lose it.
→ Jer, just tryin' to help
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 11:38pm.
I think the copyright on "Curses! Foiled again!" might have run out with Oilcan Harry of Mighty Mouse fame.
There might be case law to support its use. Go to the Law Library and read up on Snoopy vs Red Baron
I'm gonna go with it...
Submitted by Jer on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 11:52pm.
perfect summation for my sailing against the current only to be capsized by a tidal wave of rebuke.
Jer
Sorry, Jer,
Submitted by UpNorth on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 7:43pm.
what you stated can't be true, Obysmal has never made a "verbal slip, or misstatement resulting from ignorance". Moooschelle said so, he's got a mind like a steel trap, he's smarter than the people who brief him', yada yada.
So, either he deliberately didn't do even the most basic background before he spoke to the 10th Mountain, and before he numbered the U.S. states the same as Muslim states, and didn't bother to ask any of the crew on Marine 1 how to pronounce "corpsman", or he just didn't give a rip, because he won.
So, regarding the number of states in the United States, which was it, ignorance, or an unintentional verbal slip?
Jer
Submitted by well99 on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 9:04pm.
You mean this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tjO8Qc5s1fY
Some more
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p9hZpJp7U3Y
I could go PT with so many of his gaffes.I really like the Iran one.
I don't see a big difference between Ed Shultz calling Laura
Submitted by Rush Fan on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 8:13pm.
Ingraham a "slut", and Chris Wallace asking a presidential candidate and member of Congress whether she is a "flake."
Chris Wallace made it a point to disrespect Michelle Bachmann in order to show Jon Stewart and his friends on the left that Chris Wallace is not in the tank for Republicans, conservatives, and others on the right. In that, he was definitely successful. The LEFT loves Chris Wallace.
I think you're reading way
Submitted by balboa on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 8:34pm.
I think you're reading way too much into this. Those two things are not nearly the same.
Wallace was asking, IMO, to give Bachmann the opportunity to dispel any "flake" talk.
And she took it that way
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 8:42pm.
Wallace prefaced the question with what liberals were saying about her and gave her the opportunity to respond.
She didn't say "You're insulting me" She said it would be an insult.
That puts it in a different light...
Submitted by Jer on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 8:53pm.
I haven't been able to view the video yet because of problems with my Flash Player.
Jer
Ugh... Flash is the reason
Submitted by balboa on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 9:02pm.
Ugh... Flash is the reason for 95% of my freezes / crashes / restarts. Bring on HTML5.
That's how I took it, Jer
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 11:33pm.
It was a strange misplaced emphasis that seemed to take Bachmann aback. The same question can extract different reactions.
In light of. . . Are you a FLAKE?
In light of . . . ARE you a flake?
I don't think Wallace meant for it to come across as the first example, but it did.
balboa......I see your point. I'm looking forward to the day
Submitted by Rush Fan on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 9:06pm.
that Chris Wallace or any journalist/reporter gives Barack Obama the opportunity to dispel widespread rumors that he is anti-American and racist like his mentor and former long-time minister Jeremiah Wright, or that he is a far left socialist who wants to turn this great nation into another socialist Greece, or that he is so inexperienced that he borders on incompetence, or that he's not very smart or intelligent and his numerous gaffes are proof of it, or ...... I guess I'll wait to Obama dispels these rumors before I add more rumors to the list for him to attempt to dispel.
Right, RushFan
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 11:32pm.
President Obama, in light of the rumors of homosexual acquaintances who died abruptly around the time of your election . . . ARE YOU A ...... ? (NTTAWWT)
balboa
Submitted by well99 on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 9:05pm.
You are correct IMABHO.He was giving her a chance to answer to some critics.
Chris Wallace drops Mike Wallaces Ball
Submitted by Avitar on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 5:17pm.
Chis Wallace his son needs to keep in mind that his legacy is one of the greatest war crimes ever committed by Journalists. For those who don't know Pol Pot was the communist who took over Cambodia in 1975 after the Democrats and MSM including promently Mike Wallace removed Richard Nixon from office and began undercutting the 1973 Peace treaty. He killed around of a third of the population for not being communist enough. Mike Wallace and the CBS News crew just quit talking about Indochina for the next five years after they got the Governments that they wanted into office. The Killing Fields which is what the Cambodian communist massacre came to be called. It came as a great surprise when Reagan began talking about the three million killed after he was elected and had a position that Mike Wallace could not censor. .
Chris Wallace needs to fight his instincts and bring his journalistic standards up.
TIME
Submitted by amyshulk on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 7:58pm.
FLAKE
Ronald Reagan
"Bravo, Chris! Bravo!" All
Submitted by classicliberal2 on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 11:19pm.
"Bravo, Chris! Bravo!"
All Wallace has done is--yet again--cite the same discredited PolitiFact article, the one that was torn to shreds virtually as soon as it was published. Stewart asserted that surveys show Fox News viewers are misinformed, not uninformed. PolitiFact's conclusion that Stewart's comment was "false" was based on surveys that looked at the latter. In other words, ones that had absolutely nothing to do with the issue Stewart raised (no one has ever claimed Fox News lies to its viewers about things like who the Vice President is). Stewart was entirely correct--we have multiple surveys going back nearly a decade demonstrating that Fox viewers are the most misinformed news consumers. Wallace is simply parroting that original discredited PolitiFact article, complete with PolitiFact's misrepresentations of the data. His comments, in other words, are a perfect example of what Stewart was talking about (and your "bravo"s are cheering on misinformation and ignorance).
Your headline is also a lie, as it as based on those same irrelevant surveys.
Torn to shreds by who?
Submitted by deerjerkydave on Mon, 06/27/2011 - 1:04am.
Torn to shreds by who? dailykos? No wonder Jon Stewart issued an apology.
------------------------
"The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the Federal Government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State Governments are numerous and indefinite. -James MadisonIf you thought what Stewart
Submitted by classicliberal2 on Mon, 06/27/2011 - 12:13pm.
If you thought what Stewart did was an "apology," you weren't paying any attention at all.
I'm just surprised that
Submitted by deerjerkydave on Mon, 06/27/2011 - 1:05am.
I'm just surprised that Wallace didn't have this information on the tip of his tongue during his interview with Stewart. Stewart was insulting Wallace's viewers and Wallace just grinned and swallowed it. Doesn't Wallace know who his viewers are? I'm just a viewer and I've seen plenty of polls and studies showing Fox News coverage as being fair and balanced and its viewers as being very informed. I'm sorry but Wallace seems off his game lately.
------------------------
"The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the Federal Government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State Governments are numerous and indefinite. -James MadisonI imagine Jon's rebuttal will
Submitted by Rusty Shackleford on Mon, 06/27/2011 - 1:15am.
I imagine Jon's rebuttal will be a smile and a raised eyebrow. Oh he's so brilliantly brilliant!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chris Matthews: The Joy Behar of MSNBC.
Bill Maher: The Joy Behar of HBO.
Paul Krugman: The Joy Behar of The New York Times.
Wallace off his game
Submitted by alvin on Mon, 06/27/2011 - 1:19am.
Stewart: " Because they receive marching orders. AND IF YOU WANT ME TO GO THROUGH BILL SAMMON'S EMAILS AND "
Chris didn't refute this. Who is Bill Sammon and why is he givng marching orders? Could be though. A morning topic is an afternoon topic is an evening topic.
And alvin the chipmunk is off---
Submitted by matthewdean on Mon, 06/27/2011 - 3:09am.
his nut.
MD
So much energy wasted on
Submitted by wiwf on Mon, 06/27/2011 - 9:18am.
So much energy wasted on trying to combat the wrong people in media. Great idea!