Chris Wallace: Dems Are "Damn Fools" To Boycott Fox

[CatWoman]

When Chris Wallace replaced Tony Snow as the host of “Fox News Sunday” in December 2003, the network appeared to take a more moderate approach to Sunday talk.

Unlike Snow, a former Republican speechwriter, Wallace’s broadcasting résumé included nearly three decades at mainstream media staples ABC and NBC.

And Wallace even snagged Howard Dean — who hadn’t been on the Fox network in five years — as his first guest; fellow presidential hopefuls John F. Kerry, Dick Gephardt and John Edwards rounded out the month.

But this election cycle, said Wallace, some Democrats aren’t “playing ball” with him — or with Fox News.

On a recent Sunday morning, shortly after refereeing a debate between Karl Rove and Democratic Rep. Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, Wallace talked to Politico about the Democrats’ lack of appearances on Fox News, the “liberal bias” at competing networks and how November’s television ratings prove that while his show remains in fourth place nationwide, it’s on the upswing in Washington.

For Sunday talk shows, thriving in the D.C. ratings — although clearly trumped in size by New York — provides bragging rights over which show reaches more political insiders.

But more importantly, since the Sunday shows’ objective is not only to reflect on the past week’s events but to get political leaders to break news and move the conversation forward in the newspapers and the blogosphere on Monday morning, it’s essential for both leading Republicans and leading Democrats to reach members of D.C.’s chattering class.

“I think the Democrats are damn fools not coming on Fox News,” Wallace said. “And my guess is that once you get a nominee, they probably will come on, because they know that we get a lot of voters they are going to need if they are going to win the election.”

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1207/7296.html

[annabanana]

1. I think Chris Wallace is a damn fool, and a bad son too.. . . . .n/t

[YOY]

2. Bitch bitch bitch

Go cry to Rupert. Wipe your nose on his ass.

[hisownpetard]

3. I think Chris Wallace is a damn fool for

being Chris Wallace.

[yardwork]

4. Like I care what Chris Wallace has to say.

Chris, weren't you raised better than this?

[brooklynite]

5. Personally, I agree

We all recognize that Fox is a biased media entity, but so what? If our candidates can't handle hostile questions, and come up with reasonable responses, that suggests a flaw in their camnpaign skills, because they'll certainly have to deal with hostile questioners and hecklers on the campaign trail. Additionally, this election will be won in part by appealing to independents and disaffected Republicans who don't all support Bush today, but may in fact watch Fox News on occasion.

[tsuki]

9. Hostile quesions and attitudes are not the problem. Edit room

politics are.

[brooklynite]

12. Except that Fox will do that anyway...

They have the ability to edit post-survey stories from any network any way they want. The key is the live Fox audience seing Democrats without horns growing out of their heads (okay, maybe Fox could matte some in), offering sensible solutions to problems some of them care about.

[Writer]

14. But the problem here is that Fox is not a legitimate journalistic organization.

So that issue predicates any Democrat having to deal with the editorializing they do for the sake of their Republican/conservative audiences. It's not cowardice at all. It's simply putting this "journalistic" organization in its place. One of the modicums of journalism standards (according to the SPJ) is maintaining political independence, and Fox fails to do that; therefore, to treat Fox as a legitimate player in political coverage would be granting it a status it no where near deserves.

~Writer~

[brooklynite]

17. Too late for that...

Most of the Democratic field have shown up on Fox News Sunday at one point or another. Arguing that they're now "illegitimate" wouldn't be accepted by anyone in the audience, particulary those who are not already in the Democratic camp. The point is not what we think of Fox, but what Fox's audience thinks of us.

[RiverStone]

20. tough call

Yes, Fox does not meet the standard of objective journalism (or reporting) - no doubts there. And yet, I have a couple of rethug (ex) in laws I'm still close to that refuse to watch anything but Faux.

Their exposure to Dems is so warped that they remain in the dark ages. Admittedly, they have the power to pull their head out if they so choosed - but at least if we had Dems doing live shows with slimy Chris Wallace, my ex rethug in-laws would see something from Dems not scripted to look bad.

Who knows, maybe even they would shift perception?

I think its worth taking calculated risks on Faux - at least get our foot in the door every now and then. We may even remind a few regular Faux viewers that the Dems are not what they fear.

[tsuki]

18. Do you think that would happen? Live TV? Murdock and Ailes

cannot help being trying to be the manipulative little king makers they dream they are. Vulgar little twits.

Going on Fox is a lose-lose situation. Cut your loses, use your time effectively.

[terisan]

16. Why encourage Fox "News" watching? Wallace needs Democratic guests.

Democrats have great debate skills and they get to exhibit them elsewhere.

[stanwyck]

24. They're not afraid of Fox. It's about not

wanting to appear on a "news" network which declared Obama a terrorist ("this is HUGE!")while blaming Clinton's campaign for the story. All false. Then there's O'Reilly. Every night is a feast of fact errors. He blamed American soldiers, twice, for slaughtering German POWs in Belgium during WWII. (O'Reilly's ingenious "Haditha" defense.."See, everybody does it.) Only it was the Germans who slaughtered Allied forces POWs. The same network who adoringly referred to GWB as "a fighter pilot in 'Nam" during the "Mission Accomplished" debacle.
It's not fear of questions. It's about not wanting to give any stature to a network which is a joke. Any network with Sean Hannity spewing hatred doesn't deserve one minute of any decent person's time.

[rocktivity]

6. Fox watchers who are geniunely that interested in what the Dems have to say

will make the effort to watch something other than Fox. Their TV channel selectors welded into one position?

But there's a bright side--If Fox is this upset, whatever the Dems are doing is working! Anyway, cue the DU "Cry Me A River" String Quartet!

:nopity::nopity::nopity::nopity:
rocknation

[symbolman]

7. I've been Screaming for Dems to AVOID

FOX and other stations like the Plague for years.. they do you NO favors, just sound bytes to attack you with.. by boycotting these assholes, they just look like ASSHOLES as they argue with EACH OTHER, and it doesn't ring true to the Public.. so DOWN they GO, looking STUPID..

WAY TO GO DEMS! Keep it up :)

[tsuki]

8. Oh, does one of the sons of priviledge have his olfactory system out of position.

Waaaahhhhhh.

BTW, where is the waaahhhbulance these days?

[NewJeffCT]

10. The most reliable demographic in the 2004 elections

was regular Fox News viewers voting Republican.

Moreso than gun-owners or evangelicals voting Republican, and moreso than African-Americans voting Democratic.

[in_cog_ni_to]

11. Think again, asshole. The Dems don't NEED you or your useless propaganda

network to win elections.

NO Dem should EVER appear on that network.

[Zorra]

13. Pox host: "Your response, Rep. Kucinich?" Rep Kucinich: "Well,..I

think universal health care is.."

Pox host: "And now a word from our sponsor."

Propaganda comes in many forms. Dems know that the script and program schedule would come straight out of the American Enterprise Institute. Going on a Pox News program would be like going in front of a fascist firing squad. It would not be a fairly constructed debate - the entire debate would be framed and controlled so as to deny Democrats any chance to present their platform and opinions.

[terisan]

15. The Dems don't need Chris Wallace, Chris Wallace needs the Dems. If he did not need them

he would not care if they didn't appear.

People for whom Fox News is an addiction, are not voting for Dems and their appearance on Fox just gives it cover to claim that they are "fair and balanced so that Joe-FoxNews Addict can claim he decided to vote Republican after seeing both sides of an issue.

[gratuitous]

19. Got it in one

I'm not sure if I care a fig about what Chris Wallace has to say about Democrats and their prospects. The next time he's actually concerned about the Democrats and the good name of our country will be the first time.

[Skidmore]

21. Dems need Fox like I need my abusive first husband back.

[Bitwit1234]

22. Well I have never watched Fox...I have caught something in a surf

by, but never ever watched for any length of time. They make me sick. Because I know they are all liars. Just like I can't watch Chuck Roberts on CNN when he comes on I change channels. And that's the way it is.

[Cha]

23. fauxnoise is a propoganda

machine of the bushites and the Dems who don't go on there are making a statement. I wish we had our own station!

And who does chris wallace think he is, calling anyone a "damn fool"?

The punditshites on faux have to be some of the biggest damn fools in the Uni.

[Rob H.]

25. "...some Democrats aren’t “playing ball” with him..."

That's because they've got your number, dumbass.

[Dukkha]

26. be careful what you wish for Wallace

or do you want another humiliation like the one you received from the Big Dog Clinton?

a Dem nominee going on Fox to get votes is like a gay going to Fred Phelps' church to get donations for AIDS relief.

[CatWoman]

27. Clinton cleaned his fucking clock, didn't he?

:rofl:

[Supersedeas]

28. Chris the Damned Fool Wallace should look in the mirror