About us Login Get email updates
Quick Clip
Print

Chris Wallace: Obama not appearing on Fox News because of "pettiness" and "childishness"

September 19, 2009 10:13 am ET

From the September 19 edition of Fox & Friends Saturday:

Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.

EMBED
Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by Victor Colorado (September 19, 2009 10:39 am ET)
      24 2
      Again, Wallace confuses the Obama Administration's lack of respect for Fox News with being childish. Wallace and Garrett and others at Fox News really and truly believe they're a legitimate news outfit. Hilarious.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by Bad News (September 19, 2009 12:51 pm ET)
        8 1
        Univision, I don't mean to denigrate Univision?
        Chris Wallace, Univision has a better News Organization than Fox, excuse the Imposition.
        Mr. Wallace try doing a "Expose'" on Fox News, it would be like a light bulb went off in your Big Head.
        Oh Chris, I'm so sorry you're the last one to find out that at Fox News Jounalistic Integrity is Dead.

        Speak truth to power.


        Mr. News
        Report Abuse
      • Author by fawltylogic (September 19, 2009 1:31 pm ET)
        9 1
        He has to keep telling himself that Fox News is a news channel, in order to keep pretending he's a journalist.

        Pathetic.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by Bad News (September 19, 2009 2:14 pm ET)
        4 1
        They're Petty because I ask the Hard Questions? You Lackey.
        Chris Wallace, You all but got down on your Hands & Knees & Licked Dick Cheney's Boots, Was it Tacky?
        Chris, You and Dick Cheney looked more like a love affair than an Interview.
        What did your Father say after that interview Chris? Good Job or "Son, You and I are Through"

        Speak truth to power.


        Mr. News
        Report Abuse
      • Author by rugger69 (September 19, 2009 3:52 pm ET)
        1 26
        Th facts are the president will not go any where and answer questions that he is not prepare to answer HONESTLY. He has NEVER been asked tough questions about his policies, administration, people he has associated with in the last 25 years - nothing.

        The whole country was infatuated with this guy just as people were with Arnold in California. He has a track record of being very liberal on voting. No one seems to care what he is or stands for all they care is he is a good speaker and seems to hypnotize the public.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by christopher howard (September 19, 2009 4:10 pm ET)
          10 1
          Really? "NEVER"? "Nothing"? He wasn't interviewed by Fox hero Bill O'Reilly who asked him all those questions? Oh, wait, he was.

          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3i6cOT9BIDk&feature=related

          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7gUNUh6cCKU&feature=related

          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X5jMatAmLlg&feature=related

          Report Abuse
        • Author by pete592 (September 19, 2009 4:40 pm ET)
          9 1

          "He has NEVER been asked tough questions about his policies"


          Major Garret had his chance as recently as July 7th.

          The facts are Fock Snooze continues to employ the same person that called Obama a racist who hates white people. Fock Snooze has willfully provided a platform for numerous people who do nothing other than call Obama a Nazi, a fascist, a thug, a despot, a dictator, a communist, a socialist, a Muslim, a Kenyan, and the reincarnation of Hitler, Chavez, Mussolini and Zedong.

          If Fock Snooze is unwilling to offer professional courtesy or respect toward our president when they are not asking the tough questions, why should Obama waste any time with the lowest-rated Sunday morning show?


          Report Abuse
          • Author by jcrawford (September 19, 2009 9:53 pm ET)
               
            NO...No...No...
            It was San Fran Nan who called the protesters un-american & started all of this name calling...get you facts straight...
            Report Abuse
        • Author by XXNoGodXX (September 19, 2009 6:35 pm ET)
             
          Have you been in a coma?
          Report Abuse
        • Author by Victor Colorado (September 19, 2009 7:48 pm ET)
          5 1
          He has NEVER been asked tough questions about his policies


          Please, rugger69, ask a "tough" question here.... I want to here what you thing he's ducking....
          Report Abuse
          • Author by christopher howard (September 19, 2009 8:19 pm ET)
            7  
            Aw, c'mon, you know... Why do you love Hitler? What is it about communism that you find so great? Do you hate white people or just white culture? What is it like to be a secret muslim/Kenyan/hippy/atheist? What is your secret plan with Van Jones to destroy America? Why do you hate Christmas? You know, important things that the American public has a right to know.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by Col. Harlan Sanders (September 19, 2009 9:18 pm ET)
              3 1
              Yeah, I've seen enough Fok Snooze to know what their idea of a "tough" question is. "Tough" for anybody not in a vegetative state to listen to without busting up in laughter.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by rugger69 (September 20, 2009 10:35 am ET)
                1 5
                When you said illegal aliens would not be covered in the health bill you were not being completely honest. There is language in the to deny them but no mechanism to verify that.

                Then Friday they installed a measure to verify that - so you were wrong and needed to correct it

                The facts are the democrats have constantly voted against the E-Verify system to determine if a person is here legally or illegally.
                The illegal population may pay into the system as a temporary worker but that is the price they pay to work in this country. Then they take far more out of it them they pay into.
                Report Abuse
                • Author by DellDolly (September 20, 2009 1:49 pm ET)
                  4 1
                  There's language in our laws to say that people can't murder other people. We don't have a Minority Report world, so we don't perfectly enforce those laws - omigod!

                  And there was language in the proposed bill to handle that. There's a Commissioner, and he would have decided how to do it. In fact, he still will.

                  On Friday, to shut up no-nothings, they did add a provision to codify that enforcement. It's not because they HAD to - it's because no-nothings like you thought that without it, the enforcement wouldn't be done. They did it to make you and your ilk happy.

                  And illegal immigrants don't take out far more than they put in. That's been disproven. Now, local communities get less than they put out, but when you look at the full spectrum of taxes and fees they pay, the Feds are in the positive column (and therefore, we all are) because of significant Social Security taxes paid by immigrants who will never get Disability or retirement benefits.
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by rugger69 (September 20, 2009 4:56 pm ET)
                    1 2
                    Then tell me why border states hospitals are bankrupt from all the illegal aliens running in and out of the hospitals. No this has not been disproved, they have no health care so when they come here they go to the hospital and we have to take care of them.

                    Californian voted to cut off all funding to illegal aliens yet the ACLU and other fought it and now we are in this mess. There is nothing in the constitution saying we have to but the lawyers and judges who want to corrupt this country fell we have to.

                    I sure don't see people getting into home made rafts and floating to Cuba, Vietnam, China or any of these other third world countries every one wnats to come here.

                    Like my grandfather who had to have a skill this country needed in order to be allowed through Ellis Island. Unfortunately I don't feel picking fruit or vegetables is a skill, sounds to me like the college kids could use some intern work for the summer.

                    I though kids in areas with farms received time off to help with the harvest season, use that in college make these kids know hard work and maybe they will appreciate their lives more and not material things.
                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by DellDolly (September 20, 2009 8:09 pm ET)
                      3 1
                      Gosh, another righty parading his inability to read and comprehend what he just read in front of all of us.

                      I said that local communities are worse off! Illegal immigrants pay more in that they get back. That's indisputable. The Feds have a net positive and state and local govts have a net negative. How come I'm having to repeat this for you?

                      Our nation has had a steady stream of immigrants throughout our history to do the dirty jobs that no one else wants to do, jobs that don't require a good working knowledge of English. We don't have that same stream without illegal immigrants. Immigrants didn't have to have a skill to get into our nation, for the most part - they simply had to prove they weren't diseased. You can pretend that we don't need those workers, but I doubt our nation can afford to pay college kids to do that work (and what do we do when they go back to school but the work needs to be done?). That is an unworkable solution.

                      Report Abuse
                • Author by miles2go (September 21, 2009 12:44 pm ET)
                     
                  "When you said illegal aliens would not be covered in the health bill you were not being completely honest. There is language in the to deny them but no mechanism to verify that."

                  So you're answer is yet another government program? Or mandated national citizen ID cards? Do you really want a government takeover of ID cards? Big gov't is ok when it does your bidding. Just like activist judges.

                  ;)
                  Report Abuse
            • Author by Sharpe3884 (September 19, 2009 9:20 pm ET)
                 
              This is exactly the reason Obama should avoid FOX like the black plague. Those are not tough questions. Those are fear tactics and preaching hate for the president with no basis and there is no room for that type of crap in American politics. When has obama ever done anything to imply that he hates white people or likes hitler. Pretty much, the entire administration is white. Hitler was actually racist so I dont think anyone of color would respect hitler in any way. These questions are absolutely retarded as is glen beck. Time to come back to the rest of us in reality.
              Report Abuse
          • Author by rugger69 (September 20, 2009 10:28 am ET)
              5
            Why did he call the cops stupid then defend a ivy league professor who can't control himself professionally while the police are trying to conduct a investigation.

            Why would you have a self proclaimed communist on you advisory board?

            Why would some one who believes animals should have a right to legal consul have a place on you advisory board?

            Why nominate a person to the supreme court who has been overturned so many times?

            The same person calls for the legal system to write laws instead of interpreting them?

            Report Abuse
            • Author by Victor Colorado (September 20, 2009 11:29 am ET)
              3  
              THESE are your tough questions about his policies? You're 0 for 5.
              Report Abuse
            • Author by DellDolly (September 20, 2009 1:55 pm ET)
              2  
              Why did he call the cops stupid then defend a ivy league professor who can't control himself professionally while the police are trying to conduct a investigation.

              The facts show that your version here is not reflective of what actually happened. Yeah, the prof likely got too irate, but he was being harassed in his own home. The cop had the responsibility to recognize that and back off. Instead, he demanded that the prof go outside his door solely so he could arrest him for disturbing the peace - he could have gone out, left the professor in the house, and continued to communicate with him. It's clear from the evidence that the cop behaved stupidly.

              Why would you have a self proclaimed communist on you advisory board?

              Why would you be so ignorant of the facts to accuse someone who is not a communist now of being a communist now?

              Why would some one who believes animals should have a right to legal consul have a place on you advisory board?

              Animals are defended all the time.

              Why nominate a person to the supreme court who has been overturned so many times?

              Justice Sotomayor has not been overturned any more than many other judges, and much less than many. That is no reason to reject her. Racist much?

              The same person calls for the legal system to write laws instead of interpreting them?

              That isn't what she did, but I see you really like the Koolaid. And how are any of those things related to Obama's policies which you say are so offensive?
              Report Abuse
              • Author by rugger69 (September 20, 2009 5:06 pm ET)
                  3
                He was not being harassed the police officer was conducting investigation into a possible break in and a break in had occurred in the past. He was making sure this person was who he said he was yet he refused to properly ID himself and berated the officer.
                If the police didn't show up they would have been a story but the cop showed up and still a story. It must be hard to have a job when no matter what you do your wrong.

                Van Jones ADMITTED he was a SELF DEVOUT COMMUNIST in more then of his interviews.

                So you feel if your dog wants to sue you he should be able to obtain a lawyer??

                Fact she has been overturned and her briefs have been barely a page long on most of her cases. a fact you can not deny, and many have said they are bordering on social justice instead of the law.

                that is what she has said in interviews

                Again you think America is a bad place and we need to change well I don't think so the majority of the country thinks were good and rest of the world need to come around to a more civilized way
                Report Abuse
                • Author by DellDolly (September 20, 2009 8:17 pm ET)
                  2  
                  Actually he was being harassed in his own house. The cop should have understood that this man lived in the house, and was upset, and left. He didn't. The cop acted stupidly. Anyone not too biased understands this. The prof HAD identified himself well before the cop insisted that the prof leave his house - solely so the cop could get him outside of his house so he could 'legally' charge him with disturbing the peace. While the prof was yelling in his house, the cop couldn't arrest him for that, but once he got out onto the porch, he could. There was no reason for him to have to be on the porch besides to arrest the prof. That's acting stupidly. Yeah, the prof got too upset over it, but the cop, the professional here, should have de-escalated it, and he didn't, because he acted stupidly!

                  Van Jones has said that he is no longer a communist, and this has been in newspapers and in other stories for weeks. How is it possible that you don't know this? You should not assert that someone who flirted with communism years ago, but has since disowned that political philosophy still holds on to that political bent. However, when I told you that you were wrong, you blindly continued to make the same wrong assertion! Gosh you are dumb.

                  And to assert that the number of times that Justice Sotomayor has been overturned is too many simply shows that you don't know what you are talking about. When you fairly compare her to other judges in her same positions, she has not been overturned an above average number of times. Facts don't change because you screech your faulty opinions multiple times. Facts are facts.
                  Report Abuse
            • Author by LKL (September 21, 2009 9:18 am ET)
              1  
              Thank you for clarifying that by "tough" questions, you mean silly, misleading, and trivial.

              Here are some of the actual "tough" questions Obama faces -
              - Is his Afghanistan plan working, or should it be changed?
              - Have we done enough yet to regulate the financial sector to ensure we don't have another meltdown soon? Shouldn't we be working on ensuring that no institution is too big to fail?
              Report Abuse
        • Author by Sharpe3884 (September 19, 2009 9:15 pm ET)
             
          You are totally disconnected from reality. Fact is FOX is NEVER held accountable for its atrocious reporting. They report biases and opinions as fact, never back up any of what they say with evidence and lack any sort of investigative journalism in almost everything they do. Why in the world would the president reward this kind of irresponsible behavior? CNN and ABC and CBS actually do criticize the president when he deserves it and they praise him when he deserves it. When was the last time FOX said anything positive about Obama or anyone related to him? And there harping on obama's connections with ACORN and his connections to groups or people that consider socialist should be embarrassing for any real journalist to report. Beck specifically should be in jail for his disgraceful techniques. How about FOX declares that 90 percent of its reporting is really opinions rather than actual news?
          Report Abuse
      • Author by Bad News (September 19, 2009 4:19 pm ET)
        7  
        Hey! Chris Wallace, Why don't you show a ReRun of "Dancing with the Stars" on Sunday?

        You could even Bring in Tom Delay to do Color Commentary.


        Mr. News
        Report Abuse
      • Author by wolf kotenberg (September 20, 2009 3:41 am ET)
        2  
        I see pres Obama all the time on FOX.Perhaps never in a good light,but he is mentioned often.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by pam95650 (September 19, 2009 10:42 am ET)
      14 1
      I'm wondering how daddy feels about his son being such an ass? FOX news is nothing but childish and petty. Where's the reporting? Where's the real journalism? Sure FOX might be the most watched news source on cable BECAUSE IT'S ON ALL BASIC CABLE.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by christopher howard (September 19, 2009 10:47 am ET)
      16 1
      Wallace: "Come on my show, Obama, you petty child! I'm fair and balanced, just like the rest of my network!"
      Report Abuse
      • Author by mk3872 (September 19, 2009 12:35 pm ET)
        12  
        yeah, so i can waste your time and the country's with petty questions of my mine like:

        Why do you like teleprompters?
        Why do you want to servicemen to kill themselves?
        You really run ACORN, don't you?
        Report Abuse
      • Author by dmhack (September 19, 2009 1:10 pm ET)
        9  
        Just to prove he's serious about getting Obama on Fox, Wallace is threatening to hold his breath until the president agrees.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by blk-in-alabam (September 19, 2009 10:50 am ET)
      8 1
      President Obama is not appearing on fox news because of their pettiness,childishness,lying,and hateful ways.Fox is on the ropes and slipping.It is going to be hard for them to be creditable with a booming economy and a sucessful president not aknowledging them as a creditable news source.The USA is operating on the Bush budget of 2008.The Obama bodget starts October 1,a new ball game
      Report Abuse
    • Author by mjh (September 19, 2009 10:50 am ET)
      15  
      Chris Wallace: Obama not appearing on Fox News because of "pettiness" and "childishness"


      Oh, I dunno, Chrissy . . . I'm thinking Glenn Beck's characterization of Obama as "a racist" and Sean Hannity's frequent editing of Obama video clips may have a little something to do with it . . .

      Report Abuse
    • Author by ReasonAndResolve (September 19, 2009 11:00 am ET)
      18  
      Or else it is the result of a calculation that Fox does not reach any viewers that a) have any likelihood of changing their minds or b) matter.

      Let's be really honest here, Chris. Fox's 2.6 to 3 million viewers represent less than 1% of the voting public - and your number is consistent. In all honesty, do you really believe that any of your loyal viewers even voted for Obama?

      And what is the likelihood that Hannity, Beck and others will take Obama's words, edit them, and try to use them in a dishonest way against this president?

      It seems to me that your assertion is both petty and childish.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by Lioness68819 (September 19, 2009 12:40 pm ET)
           
        According to FACT:
        http://www.usatoday.com/life/television/news/nielsens-charts.htm

        Cable top 15
        Rank Show name Network Day, time Viewers in millions

        1. Video Music Awards MTV Sun., 9 9.0

        2. Miami at FSU ESPN Mon., 8 8.4

        3. iCarly Nick Sat., 8 7.6

        4. Scooby-Doo Cartoon Sun., 7 6.1

        5. WWE Raw USA Mon., 9 5.6


        6. WWE Raw USA Mon., 10 5.4

        7. The O'Reilly Factor Fox News Wed., 9:15 5.1

        * True Blood HBO Sun., 9 5.1

        9. Monk USA Fri., 9 4.8

        10. NCIS USA Mon, 8 4.7

        11. Presidential Address Fox News Wed., 8:11 4.4

        12. Sons of Anarchy FX Tues., 10 4.3

        13. NCIS USA Sun., 8 4.1

        * iCarly Nick Sun., 7 4.1

        * VMA Preshow MTV Sun., 8 4.1

        ....you were saying??????
        Report Abuse
      • Author by noneyabidnis (September 19, 2009 10:01 pm ET)
        3  
        I watch Fox... but only to see how insane their "news" is. Waiting to see a trainwreck. I wonder how many of their viewers watch for the same reasons?
        Report Abuse
        • Author by Barry Bonds (September 19, 2009 10:35 pm ET)
          1  
          I'm one of those people. But I find my friends simply can't stomach watching Fox.

          So we might be the lonely few willing to endure Fox.
          Report Abuse
        • Author by Dmacalypse (September 20, 2009 8:50 am ET)
          3  
          I used to but I refuse to continue to contribute to their "ratings".
          Report Abuse
      • Author by blk-in-alabam (September 19, 2009 10:16 pm ET)
        2  
        IF Fox has a 24 hour tv network,How can every conservative(republican) radio talking head have a larger audience than Fox's own claim of less than 5 million???? How can Hannity claim to have an audience larger than the entire Fox network.The truth is coming out.Fox really needs a President Obama interview to make these fake numbers look real.Then they can count people watching President Obama as part of there regular audience.Money is tight verification technology is exponentially better.Advertisers are demanding undisputable proof of the listeners,and viewers they claim to have.And the people who falsify ratings reports in their favor are demanding more money
        Report Abuse
        • Author by Barry Bonds (September 19, 2009 10:36 pm ET)
          1  
          I've always doubted Fox's numbers but how do you know they are fake?

          And aren't their numbers tabulated by Neilsen? I am sure they are still reputable right?
          Report Abuse
          • Author by snoopy (September 20, 2009 12:38 am ET)
            2  
            I do know for a fact that Rush's show is provided for free to several rural locations. The rural providers love it because they don't have to pay for a broadcaster those 3 hours. The only catch is they have to accept the sponsor package, so again a win for them - no money spent hunting up sponsors. That artificially inflates Limbaughs' numbers. I wonder if Fox does the same?
            Report Abuse
            • Author by blk-in-alabam (September 20, 2009 9:27 am ET)
              2  
              All of the conservative(republican) talking heads run rerun shows over,an over.This is a method to artifically inflate the audience plum size.A lot of fake numbers are produced by this method.
              Report Abuse
          • Author by blk-in-alabam (September 20, 2009 8:13 am ET)
            1  
            Technology is available to drive a vehicle through a area and tell what tv station every tv in every house or building is on.They know the real numbers
            Report Abuse
      • Author by Dmacalypse (September 20, 2009 8:47 am ET)
        2  
        Exactly the point that I was going to make, it would be the very definition of counter-productive
        Report Abuse
    • Author by big2xrube6146 (September 19, 2009 11:19 am ET)
      6  
      Chris needs to wake up. When Fox get rid of all the BS and LIES the President might invite you in. Other than that you just need to give it up.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by New Frontier (September 19, 2009 11:28 am ET)
      15  
      Fox to Obama: We won't cover your press conferences, we'll stand behind Glenn Beck when he calls you a "racist" and we'll back Sean Hannity when he calls you a "radical".

      Now why won't you come on our shows?
      Report Abuse
    • Author by eb (September 19, 2009 11:33 am ET)
      8  
      Making the network part of the news is not good journalism. Making their slight the story and calling it petty shows how much Fox is becoming the story rather than reporting the story.

      Fox must be treated with respect!!! somehow respecting Fox has become a critically important aspect of American politics. Its a new litmus test like abortion or gun rights.

      Question: Did Obama say he would never appear on Fox ever again?

      Oh and I laughed when Wallace talked about his "tough questions". I am sure those tough questions also go to the teabaggers.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by jwcoop715110 (September 19, 2009 11:36 am ET)
        7  
        Personally, he should limit it to MTP. Gregory spouts enough gop-slime talking points as it is, but at least Obama's limiting it to legitimate news shows.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by rkallen09 (September 19, 2009 11:36 am ET)
      15  
      Actions have consequences, Mr Wallace. The rhetoric of your news network that is being called out on an ever increasing scale, your blatant promotions of anti-President protests, the lies and distortions that come so frequently that there are entire websites devoted to debunking you, your very public attacks on private citizens, and the disgusting displays of your network's total lack of journalistic integrity, I am sure gives the President some pause when considering networks that he should give his time to.

      You have become the bullies in the park, pushing EVERYONE around who you don't like, and now your on the side pouting because no one wanted to pick you to play kickball. The "pettiness" ad "childishness" is your own pathetic projection on those who have chosen not to give you anymore legitimacy.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by raine315 (September 19, 2009 11:41 am ET)
      11  
      I though Obama was going on Sunday NEWS talk shows. So what the heck is Wallace complaining about- maybe if his network actually carried NEWS instead of Jerry Springer like fairy tales President Obama would appear on the network
      Report Abuse
    • Author by HistoricallyCorrect (September 19, 2009 11:51 am ET)
      8  
      "The president isn't coming on blah blah blah, but we are fine with that".
      Methinks you are lying.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by draftedin68 (September 19, 2009 11:59 am ET)
      7  
      Taking FOX NEWS' advice...

      I think President Obama has answered FOX NEWS' constant question of "Is the President becoming too over-exposed?"

      Since FOX NEWS constantly touts themselves as "The most powerful name in news", it's no wonder that President Obama doesn't want to expose his radical agenda to all those clear-thinking, fair-and-balanced viewers.

      And, since the president probably knows he'll get "tough questions" like those during Chris' grilling of President Cheney, Chris can probably add "scaredy cat" to his list of insults.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by SLRTX (September 19, 2009 11:59 am ET)
      8 1
      No one with any sense of credibility should appear on any Fox News program. Especially the Prez.

      We should not enable their lack of ethics or morals by having decent people appear on their broadcasts.

      Fighting to eliminate advertisers would be harder.

      Just embargo them.

      They just interrupt you and keep you from presenting the real "fair and balanced" viewpoint anyway.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by canaanxing9025 (September 19, 2009 12:15 pm ET)
      9  
      Obama not appearing on Fox News Sunday is"petty" and "childish"
      Gee Mr. Wallace, and who is whinning like a baby?
      Report Abuse
    • Author by Dem02020 (September 19, 2009 12:16 pm ET)
      14 1
      As several comments above already point out, calling the President "petty and childish" in a Fox News Channel broadcast, is itself pettiness and childishness.

      It is also the very evidence of a lack of respect and of a political bias, that would naturally disqualify anybody from hosting any supposedly "fair and balanced" forum.

      The hypocrisy and the anger and the disrespect and the hatred at Fox News Channel is so obvious and so strong, that you can actually smell it right through your television...

      And when I say disrespect, I'm not so much thinking of a disrespect for the President, but of a disrespect for our Democracy and for the majority of the American People who made Mr. Obama their President in a democratic process... that's what Fox News Channel seems to disrespect and hate the most, our Democracy.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by miles2go (September 21, 2009 12:57 pm ET)
           
        Where is the nativist outrage from the right? We have an aussie owned media conglomerate spewing hate and filth all over American airwaves?
        Report Abuse
    • Author by mk3872 (September 19, 2009 12:35 pm ET)
      11 1
      I am embarrased for the Wallace family
      Report Abuse
    • Author by eniobob2631 (September 19, 2009 12:36 pm ET)
      6 1
      Chris,you must be kidding.The president dosen't want any part of your Sunday morning gab fest?
      ROFLMAO!!
      Report Abuse
    • Author by richrdh (September 19, 2009 12:40 pm ET)
         
      "Fox is going to do what they do." Drive the news? He means distort, confuse, enhance, etc. To call the WH staff and POTUS childish and petty maybe the reason why they did not come by to see you. If you have integrity you could not work for this organization. It is the tabloids on digital live feed. In the media if you keep saying the same thing and hearing the same thing you will believe it.

      Chris is it fair to call the White House childish? Or were you projecting your emotions to us about your personal rejection? And please the tough questions. The Cheney interview was so loaded with toughness I thought it was a version of torture. They need to move to Mongolia.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by rwmacdonald2091 (September 19, 2009 12:42 pm ET)
      11 1
      Wallace is really going off the deep end again , or should I say still.

      Didn't he say just yesterday, that he didn't think the country needed Obama on another news show ?

      When Wallace calls out the Becks, Hannity's, and Limbaugh's for being what they really are, maybe Obama should consider going on your show.

      Oh wait a minute, if you did that, you wouldn't have a show on Fox Noise, would you?
      Report Abuse
    • Author by antihannity2009 (September 19, 2009 12:59 pm ET)
      11  
      Fox is the one being childish because they lost their exclusive access to the White House that they had with Bush. They sucked up to McCain enough so that they would have gotten the same deal.

      I wonder if Fox thought that it is was childish that Beck went after Van Jones for two weeks just because his company was making Beck loose his sponsors.

      Here is Wallace's question to a Republican - "What is your favorite color? Is it blue?" Here is Wallace's question to the President - "Why are you such a marxist, socialist, communist, radical, racist, and death panel promoter?"
      Report Abuse
    • Author by Snowbank (September 19, 2009 12:59 pm ET)
         
      Good on Obama cutting off FOX. President Obama should continue to cut off FOX NEWS in every instance he can. Gibbs should no longer take questions from any FOX "reporters".

      The other networks, ABC, CNN, NBC, CBS... they'll put Obama's feet to the fire when needed. They'll ask tough questions. Like Sanchez said, they REPORT the news.

      FOX NEWS a) isn't a News organization and b) they're pushing an anti-Obama agenda. OF COURSE THE PRESIDENT ISN'T GOING TO GO ON YOUR BLOODY CHANNEL. BABIES.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by bear139 (September 19, 2009 1:04 pm ET)
         
      Chis Wallace is one of the few at Fox that could actually work in journalism - outside of Fox. That's why the anquish on his face is real. He may not agree with the reason, but he fully understands why.

      Not so much for most the other anchors on the air at Fox. They really buy into that "Fair and Balanced" thing, entranced and hypnotized by Murdoch, as the planet's most famous media giant. (Therefore, he must be right). But these other Fox players are not journalists, nor are they asked to be by their employer.

      Of course, with Murdoch, it's never been about "news', nor even about conservatism. It's about growing his audience, in which he is a true visionary... tapping in to the just-below-the-surface hate/fear of a substantial portion of the American public. Who was it that said, "Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public."?

      Murdoch's background is in tabloids, a medium that he grew and matured. Fox Channel, and Fox News clearly have the tabloid element, which is precicely why it's not "news".

      Slowly, the real news people in America are starting to point this out about Fox, even mentioning the company by name. I hope it continues. So does Murdoch.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by pros2pros2940 (September 19, 2009 1:27 pm ET)
      8  
      Geez......the jokes write themselves.

      And, as has been stated already, Wallace doesn't understand that Fox isn't a news network. Plus, if he had a different name wouldn't be on TV at all.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by ttariku20046974 (September 19, 2009 1:52 pm ET)
         
      What difference does it make whether Obama showed on their network or not because they lie on everything. I don't believe fox people have any journalism credential or the ability to present the fact without distortions and pre-determined judgment on the news. Regardless, many Americans love that kind of story.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by phredicles (September 19, 2009 4:33 pm ET)
      6  
      On one level, I can understand the confusion in the dim brain lurking being Chris Wallace's smirking face: The other news media treat Faux as a legitimate news source, so why won't the White House?

      On the other hand, this is classic schoolyard bully behavior: They slime the president at every turn, and then insult him when he won't do what they want him to do. I applaud the president for telling Faux, Yes you can go play with yourselves.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by eb (September 19, 2009 4:54 pm ET)
        7  
        I think Fox news wants some kind of "interview affirmative action" so that there is a level interview playing field. That way you get an interview because of who you are, not based on any other consideration.

        It is amazing that they think they are the only network that asks tough questions or is capable of criticizing the administration. The dirty little truth is that Fox is the only network that is so obviously ideological. What other mainstream network routinely complains about the "mainstream media" so much? Clearly they are ideological driven if they think they somehow have cornered the truthyness market in the media.

        Report Abuse
        • Author by phredicles (September 19, 2009 8:02 pm ET)
          3  
          It is amazing that they think they are the only network that asks tough questions or is capable of criticizing the administration.

          They do enjoy believing their own propaganda, don't they?
          Report Abuse
          • Author by MiddleLeft (September 19, 2009 8:25 pm ET)
            3  
            They do enjoy believing their own propaganda, don't they?

            After a while they begin to believe their own propaganda. That's when thing start to go bad.
            Report Abuse
        • Author by Col. Harlan Sanders (September 19, 2009 9:28 pm ET)
          4  
          I think Fox news wants some kind of "interview affirmative action"...


          That's very well put, eb. I would nit pick a little, and say that those benefiting by AA do have to work hard and prove themselves deserving, so that wouldn't help Fox.

          Fox is more like a kid who occasionally showed up at high school stoned out of his mind, didn't complete any assignments, and is crying because he's not being given a degree from a university.

          What are cons always saying about "Equality of opportunity, not equality of outcome!"?

          Fox has had many years and a lot of money available to whip themselves into a respected news organization.

          They squandered that opportunity, and now they want to play in the same league as those who worked to be (relatively) respectable news outlets.
          Report Abuse
    • Author by loonz (September 19, 2009 4:43 pm ET)
      6  
      Why do they even care if he appears on their network?
      Report Abuse
      • Author by toombsie (September 19, 2009 5:41 pm ET)
        9  
        Cause they want to waste his time by questioning him about Van Jones and ACORN which are the two most important news stories of 2009. Forget health care, the two wars, financial reform, climate change, etc. Van Jones and ACORN - lets devote 90% of our time covering these 2 topics!!!
        Report Abuse
        • Author by phredicles (September 19, 2009 8:07 pm ET)
          8  
          Right. Remember a few years ago when C. Wallace invited Bill Clinton for an interview, ostensiblt about his new charitable foundation? Only after one question about that, Wallace claimed "readers wanted to know" why he didn't prevent Sept. 11. Clinton got p!ssed and told him off, but then for the next several days, their patented Fox Question was, "Is Bill Clinton crazy?"

          So gosh, I can't imagine why the president wouldn't have the time of day for that snot-nosed little punk.
          Report Abuse
    • Author by papa bear3 (September 19, 2009 5:20 pm ET)
      5  
      What is scarey though is when you go into a hospital emergency room,an all-night diner, a bus station, airport, bar, the most likely channel they will have on is the FOX channel.


      Report Abuse
      • Author by eb (September 19, 2009 5:25 pm ET)
        5  
        Yet Hannity and liebaugh and friends continue to harp about how the conservative viewpoint doesn't get a fair shot and is somehow underground. It doesn't take much effort to know what is on the conservative agenda these days.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by pearlene_scott1602 (September 19, 2009 11:49 pm ET)
        5  
        What is scarey though is when you go into a hospital emergency room,an all-night diner, a bus station, airport, bar, the most likely channel they will have on is the FOX channel.


        Comedy Central's not on basic cable, Fox is the next best thing.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by Easy to refute wingnuts (September 19, 2009 6:13 pm ET)
      7  
      Chris Wallace: Obama not appearing on Fox News because of "pettiness" and "childishness"
      For once, Wallace gets it right. As soon as Fox stops being petty and childish, Obama will probably agree to an interview, but until then, he has no reason to, and Fox continues to exhibit its pettiness and childishness in response to his perfectly valid reasons to leave them behind in the dust.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by Romario (September 19, 2009 6:25 pm ET)
      7  
      No, Chris...the President is skipping you guys because he wants to be interviewed by an actual journalist, not someone posing as one. Also...calling the leader of the free world "childish" is disrespectful...who are you....Joe Wilson?
      Report Abuse
    • Author by antihannity2009 (September 19, 2009 8:35 pm ET)
      5  
      Awwww... I think that I can see some fake "crocodile tears" from Chris there. Someone get him his teddy bear and a cookie.

      When are they going to do a story about Carl Rove the Czar??
      Report Abuse
    • Author by zappo99 (September 19, 2009 8:36 pm ET)
         
      Why would Obama appear on ANY Fox program since the sole purpose of the network is to spew spurious political jargon directed toward all democrats, particularly the President. The Fox network is not a news network, it is a machine, run by conservatives who have hired attack dogs to spew hateful, spurious jargon 24/7.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by Sharpe3884 (September 19, 2009 9:09 pm ET)
         
      Wallace cites Van Jones and ACORN as reasons that FOX news is one of the leaders in media today when in fact, there reporting of those two subjects is the perfect example of their extreme biases against the president's administration - I can't imagine that they didn't think this was going to happen. President Clinton even pointed out how bias wallace's interviews were during Clinton's own interview with him. I dont think Wallace is completely irresponsible in his reporting but the network in general is NEVER held accountable for all of its complete false reporting and obama should be purposely avoiding them to make a point that his administration and the country in general is tired of their complete lack of professionalism. Why feed this disgusting bias they deliberately portray every day and why would obama reward them for it?
      Report Abuse
    • Author by Sharpe3884 (September 19, 2009 9:34 pm ET)
         
      When beck finally admits that Bush had more czars than obama and czar is not a russian monarch from the 1800s but rather just a abbreviation for often long titles, that is the day Obama may start treating FOX with some credibility. But since Beck will never do that, Obama should never reward them for their verbal vomit.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by noneyabidnis (September 19, 2009 9:58 pm ET)
      4  
      I have a new theory about Fox News. It's like the fast food of "news". Almost like McNuggets. McDonalds would love for you to think it's real chicken... and since it's "chicken", you feel less guilty about eating food that's so bad for you.

      "Fox's Chicken McNews"

      I used to feel kind of sorry for the folks who watched Fox News. But, not anymore. It's their choice to watch it - it helps them feel better about being so ignorant.

      My new stance to those who disagree with the current administration: "If you don't like it, you're welcome to leave."

      I mean, isn't that what folks who protested Iraq were told? "It's a free country - nobody is stopping you from leaving".

      I just leave it at that. Not going to stoop to their level and get in arguments about completely ridiculous things. If Fox ever decides it wants to become a real news channel, then I'll be happy to engage in debate. Until then, good riddance.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by HOOX (September 19, 2009 10:20 pm ET)
         
      Fox news labels
      Democrats - bad
      Liberals - dangerous evil
      Republicans - good
      Conservatives - heroes

      Wallace doesn't understand or doesn't want to understand why Obama thinks they cover him unfairly.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by Mugzie69 (September 20, 2009 12:17 am ET)
         
      Faux is the National Enquirer of the airwaves; Obama stands closer to the intelligentia. Where could they possibly intersect?

      Wallace' objective would be what it always is--suppressed premises manipulated as fact, complex question fallacies, question begging, circular argumentation, etc. Any loudmouth can stage a shout-down. But why would the President agree to dialogue with that? Onlookers might not be able to tell the difference between them.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by wax (September 20, 2009 4:18 am ET)
         
      This is funny. I hope Obama refuses all interviews with Fox News.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by Chatty Kathy (September 20, 2009 6:57 am ET)
         
      Since when are journalists supposed to "drive the news" as Chris Wallace proudly claims that Fox is doing? Try to imagine Walter Cronkite doing an expose a la Glenn Beck on the fascist/commie/Nazi propagandist artwork at Rockefeller Center. Just writing that made me throw up in my mouth a little.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by themidnightreview.com (September 20, 2009 9:52 am ET)
      2  
      Fox "drives" the news?

      Does that mean manufacture?
      Report Abuse
    • Author by Boxer1979 (September 20, 2009 1:47 pm ET)
      1  
      Chris Wallace: Obama not appearing on Fox News because of "pettiness" and "childishness"

      No Chris. What you should have said was "Obama not appearing on Fox News because of Race-Baiting and Fearmongering"
      Report Abuse