Obama Next Destination: Fox News
Barack Obama is going where his campaign has never gone before: Fox News, where he'll be interviewed by Chris Wallace this weekend on Fox News Sunday.
The Obama camp has more or less shut out Fox ever since they ran with the fake story about him supposedly being educated in a madrassah, so this is a big break from the standard practice. Even before that, Obama didn't have much time for Fox -- by the channel's count, the time between his last sit-down interview with them and this upcoming one will have been 772 days.
Late Update: Another fun thing here is that the Fox gang seem to be practically trashing Obama in their celebration of his decision to come. From their statement:
Wallace said if Obama had won Pennsylvania, he may not have accepted the invitation."If he had won he'd probably on a Caribbean island this weekend. The fact that he's going to be on Sunday television and on FOX News may be an indication he figures he has to reach out to working-class Democrats, moderates and conservative Democrats and FOX News is a good place to do it," he said.
Say it ain't so, Sen O. Neither candidate should deign to acknowledge FOX's existence. I am disappointed.
April 24, 2008 3:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree - bad idea, Obama. I wouldn't legitimize them for one minute. Well, at least it's a remote interview, not one in the studio. God, I can't stomach Chris Wallace - he's an utter moron. I was so happy when Bill Clinton cleaned his clock (should have cleaned the Obama Countdown Clock while he was at it!)
And, Greg, it's way too late for the Clintons (it's been too late since she got into bed with Rupert Murdock). Fox has even made a promo using the asinine comments from Terry McAuliffe about being "fair and balanced". Asshat!
April 24, 2008 3:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
but chris wallace is a registered democrat!
April 24, 2008 3:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
He does that so he can vote in the local primaries in DC, the one true election for municipal government.
Bob Novak does it, too, and I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of other Republican journalists do the same thing under DC's closed primary.
April 24, 2008 3:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
yeah, he's what we call a "Hillary Clinton Democrat" or a "Democrat in name only".
April 24, 2008 3:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
FLIP THAT WANKER OFF!
You GO BO! Prove to that softboy you got the maturity to be anything you want to be! Then stick it in his face! (insert middle finger here)
Hey can you get me an O'Reilly coffee mug?
thanks!
Rev Meeks
April 25, 2008 11:30 AM | Reply | Permalink
Now let's not be too idealistic. It doesn't change who he is to reach out to voters with whom he still cannot connect by meeting them in their own space, and his previous refusal to appear on fox has been framed as both limpwristed and high-falutin'. So all I hope is that is isn't an ambush.
April 24, 2008 3:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree. Barack Obama's return appearance will lead to the conversion of at least some Fox viewers. It's just statistically bound to happen. And yes, not being afraid to go back shows cajones.
Ambush? Fox?? Of course it's am ambush! He knows it and he knows he can handle himself (which takes us back to "cajones").
I also feel compelled to say... I think that's some pretty sloppy reporting up there at the top of the page.
April 24, 2008 7:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
DEAR REGAN DEMOCRATS : STOP SNICKERING
I hope you lunchbucket goobers are happy now. Michelle thought she was booking us tickets for "Weathermen, The Musical" and Ticketmaster goofed. Don't worry Howard Dean will text me the answers so there won't be any repeats of my ear wiggling whinefest at ABC.
I'll filibuster that ratface with Hope and Change until he barks like an aardvark!
Sincerely
B. Hussein Obama
April 24, 2008 6:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
I guess Obama figured that if he could deal with ABC, then Fox couldn't be any worse?
April 24, 2008 3:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
I was thinking the same thing. As an Obama supporter he needs to do this. I don't see why his supporters should shy away from this, setting aside the fact that I detest faux news.
April 24, 2008 3:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
I actually came on here to snark about ABC myself.
But, seriously, I'm wondering if their follow up polling in Pennsylvania and Ohio aren't showing that most of the Muslim/no flag pin/doesn't salute during the pledge resistance to him among blue collar whites is coming from Fox.
And, really, while he's breaking his informal "dead to me" thing he imposed after the madrassa smear, its not like they're going to be any more toxic than ABC and Politico, the other two members of the Axis of Imbecility.
April 24, 2008 3:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
But I think Jake ("I think Obama has had a cigarette") Tapper is just devine!!
April 24, 2008 3:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
BAD idea. NO Democrat should be legitimizing this Rethug propaganda outlet (that goes for you too, Terry McAuliffe.)
April 24, 2008 3:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
did you see terry on msnbc after hillary won PA? He was completely shameless putting on a show for the camera's.
"I'm sorry, i'm having trouble hearing you. It's complete bedlam here!"
And all i was thinking was, It's loud, but its not THAT loud, Terry. I know you're a cheerleader and all, but c'mon, you're embarrassing yourself.
April 24, 2008 3:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Listen, do you want Obama to improve his vote count among the white working class or stand on some kind of principle that's a little thin to begin with anyway? I mean, I don't want to be totally relativist, but do you think MSNBC isn't a crock of s--- too? So I say it's good that Obama is realizing he has to bend a little to blue collar voters. Wish he'd done it before Tuesday, just like I wish he'd paid the street money in Philadelphia, another refusal on principle that was bit too highminded. An extra 1 or 2% in Philly and the suburbs would've been right fine, would've put the contest that much closer to closure. And I wouldn't have called it capitulation. Slinging mud back and forth across the state of PA, that was capitulation. But, talking to bluecollar voters in their own space, forking out for get out the vote workers, these things would have been appropriate, exigent...and smart.
April 24, 2008 4:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
if blue collar workers consider fox news to be "their own space" then I don't think any democrat can hope to win them over. but thats not to say they shouldn't try but...
fox news is freakin' propaganda for crying out loud. these blue collar workers are poor enough to vote democratic, but dumb enough to vote republican because fox news convinces them a flag pin is more important than an economic policy that will get them out of the crunch they've been feeling.
if they're stupid enough to let a non-issue like that decide their vote, then i'm not sure any democrat would be able to win them anyway. Because it mightbe a flag pin for obama, but it will be something else for hillary too. soo...
April 24, 2008 4:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
freaktown, you have a point that it may be near impossible to win them over, and I really do agree, or at least I do when it comes to the hard-core bitter (and yes I do mean bitter) white guys, but I seriously doubt that absolutely everybody who tunes in to Fox is totally hidebound. There are going to be more than just a few curious types tuning in, some of whom don't hate the way Weaver and Otto getalife here do, and some of them might just find themselves thinking this guy's not so bad afterall. Obama can be really fine in front of a camera.
April 24, 2008 4:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
I read this after my response further up the page. We're really on the same wavelength here.
Not everyone who watches Fox is a mindless ideologue. Some watch it for it's absurd entertainment value. I know this, because that's one reason *I* watch it.
It's somewhat like the National Enquirer or the Weekly World News. I dare say that most people who read those rags don't actually *believe* what's written in them.
April 24, 2008 7:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
I would have said he she tell them to F off, but then CNN, and to a lessor degree even MSNBC, have not shown themselves to be much more fair.
April 24, 2008 3:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
I have mixed feelings about this. On one hand, I'm not desperately thrilled about any Democrat giving Fox News the time of day, but on the other hand, there's a really big upside for Obama if he goes into an interview that everybody assumes will be hostile and does well.
I don't think I've seen much of Sen. Clinton's good side in the last couple months, but during her interview with Olbermann I remembered a lot of the reasons I like her. It's not quite the same, because Olbermann's interview was superb in addition to being tough and confrontational, and I doubt Wallace has the ability or inclination to do nearly as well.
There's a lot to be said for going into the lion's den.
April 24, 2008 3:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
He'll do just fine. They are going to continue to be asses anyway. He'll at least be able to get his side out to the Fox ditto-heads, thereby making it a tad trickier for them to straight up lie about what he thinks in the future.
April 24, 2008 3:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, he'll do fine.
Barack Obama doesn't do as well in interviews as Hillary Clinton does, but not interviewing as well as Hillary is like not giving speeches as well as Obama.
Besides, Chris Wallace is a lame jackass.
April 24, 2008 3:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'M A LITTLE CONCERNED!
What if he can't control his ears? Or his middle finger!! OMG what if he starts flippin off Hanity and can't stop!!
I just can't watch...
Sincerely
D. Axelrod
April 24, 2008 6:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Eric,
He interviewed with them during the whole Rev. Wright fiasco. You 722 days measure is from the time time Chris Wallace says that Obama promised him an interview and today.
Man, you really really need to start sourcing your material. It's embarrassing.
April 24, 2008 3:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree. It is indeed bad reporting by Eric here.
April 24, 2008 3:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
You beat me to it.
Hey TPM: OBAMA HAS ALREADY DONE FOX!!
Nothing to see here, folks... keep moving.
April 24, 2008 3:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
In a Post-Bush world, does Fox News cease to be relevant?
April 24, 2008 3:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Anything but. If a Democrat wins, count on them to be what Olbermann is to Bush. Just on every show, all day.
April 24, 2008 3:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, like Olbermann but really dumb. Olbermann makes partisan hackdom into a semi-respectable art form.
April 24, 2008 3:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, bullshit. What Olbermann does is what used to be called commentary and analysis, not "hackdom." It's just like the wingnut attempt to produce a conservative version of the Daily Show because they convinced themselves that TDS took on Republicans because the show was "liberal," rather than because Republicans are corrupt and eminently mockable. In both cases, the difference will become obvious once a Democrat is in the White House -- Fox are partisan hacks because they do nothing but criticize the Democrats no matter who's in charge. TDS and Olbermann point out the screwups and bad actions of whoever's in charge.
(No, it won't be at the same level as with the Bush Administration, but that's because no other administration in our lifetime is likely to be as evil and mendacious as the Bush Administration. That's reality, not "hackdom.")
April 24, 2008 5:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
We can only hope so.
April 24, 2008 4:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
I thought Sen. Obama was much too prinicipled to go pandering on Fox News. At least thats what the Obamaistas were screaming recently when Clinton was on Fox.
April 24, 2008 3:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
its one thing to give an interview to fox. its completely another when you're campaign surrogates go out of their way to legitimize them as the most "fair and balanced" network on tv.
I mean, these were the people still floating the theory that Hillary had Vince Foster killed. And terry mccaullife and ed rendell actually say they're the fairest and most balanced?
C'mon...
April 24, 2008 3:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
They are, the Obama media bias has backfired.
April 24, 2008 3:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think that the ABC debate showed that all the major media has it in for Obama, FOX is simply a more extreme case. Given that, it doesn't make much difference going on CNN or FOX and he wants to promote his big tent argument for conservative independents. After the ABC debacle he might as well go on FOX to reach some of them.
April 24, 2008 3:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
They are running a piece on the obvious Obama media bias too to shame MSNBC, KO, CNN and Jack Cafferty.
April 24, 2008 3:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wallace also probably bought himself a little slack by calling into the Douchebag morning show to tell them they were going over the top on Wright.
April 24, 2008 3:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
True. Forgot about that bit. it was quite wonderful.
April 24, 2008 4:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Look for Drudge (or Politico, or both) to post a "gotcha" smear item just in time for Wallace to interrogate Obama about it during his interview.
April 24, 2008 3:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Already happened but it was Bill Moyers.
Wright admitted Obama was a lying politician.
Try to keep up.
April 24, 2008 3:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
When did he do that? He called him a politician, which he is, just like everyone else in this campaign. Or is that your own freudian slip that they're all liars?
April 24, 2008 3:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Of course, they are silly.
April 24, 2008 3:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
You really ought to learn where commas go in a sentence, getalife. You just destroyed the sense of what I think you were trying to say.
April 24, 2008 4:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Try to keep up"! Beautifully ironic.
April 24, 2008 3:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
What are you, the guy from "Trading Places" who says "YEAH!" after every gotalife post?
April 24, 2008 4:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
You can't just interview with outlets perceived as fair to you, people. That's what Bush does.
April 24, 2008 3:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Fox will ask the questions his media will not.
Put down the kool aid and watch it.
You will see the obvious difference and the true Obama.
Should be fun.
April 24, 2008 3:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
I never said I wouldn't watch it, and if this is "his" media, how in the hell did the Wright story and "bitter"-gate get blown up like they did? Great job by "his" media protecting him, eh?
Fuck off, troll.
April 24, 2008 3:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Now,now temper,temper.
April 24, 2008 3:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Way to take the bait. I knew you were a troll - only interested in getting under people's skin. "gotalife", indeed.
April 24, 2008 4:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
They just don't get you here Gotalife! Classic snark. I'm on to you, though, and I'm diggin' it.
April 24, 2008 3:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
No, we get him just fine, thanks. Classic internet troll. Not agreeing with him isn't really his problem; he likes to rabble-rouse, and as you say, snark. Nice to see he has one fan, at least.
April 24, 2008 3:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's not snark. And once you go diggin in it, you'll want to scrub hard to get it off. Stinky, too.
April 24, 2008 3:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hey! No more predictions. You lost the PA primary.
Wait, I guess 9.4whatever rounds up to 20+ HRC win.
April 24, 2008 3:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
9.2
April 24, 2008 4:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
I know you're a believer in the true Obama - you're just hiding behind your Clinton persona.
April 24, 2008 3:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Huh?
April 24, 2008 4:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thank you.
April 24, 2008 4:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Guess again. Bush only talks to people who he knows will be friendly to him, and won't ask any tough questions. Big difference. Fair has nothing to do with it.
April 24, 2008 5:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Scientific - My advice is don't feed the troll. They might get paid by the number of responses they generate... don't wanna encourage that, do we?
April 24, 2008 6:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
The timing of this is perfect. Bill Moyers is doing the rev. Wright interview on Friday, so all of the networks will be busy clipping and spinning on Saturday, then Obama shows up on Sunday to assert control over the story.
April 24, 2008 3:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wallace is a tool. The one thing he's done right in recent memory(reprimand morning show for wright nonsense), he immediately said he regretted.
Fox's ratings are tanking and they're pleading with people to watch them. Advertising their pitiful election coverage on MSNBC! And now, they get what they've been begging for, and Wallace feels the sudden urge to reassert his missing superiority.
Screw him. I hate the Obama has to capitulate with these meatheads, but it does seem inevitable. And it works, apparently, which proves how much of their "vitriol" is jealousy and generally feeling left out of the cool club. Hell, Hillary's got the head of the vast right wing conspiracy escorting her to the dance.
April 24, 2008 3:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
He was undoubtedly forced to say he regretted it.
April 24, 2008 4:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
"I think that the ABC debate showed that all the major media has it in for Obama..."
That assertion is so laughable. The only reason Obama is winning is because of the media. You might want to start thanking the media before trashing them.
April 24, 2008 3:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree. The media is responsible for Obama's success to date. They generally refuse to ask tough questions and even when they do they quickly move on without drilling down to detail or challenging the answers. The rush of the 24/7 news cycle doesn't help.
The media also have very little objective reporters or contributors. Mostly they push Obama's candidacy and offer nearly non-stop anti-Clinton reports and commentary. How CNN can retain and treat as unbiased Donna Brazille and Roland Martin, is beyond comprehension.
Matthew
http://www.TheIndependentView.com
April 24, 2008 3:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
How MSNBC can retain and treat as unbiased Joe "Hillary's my girlfriend" Scarborough, Tucker Carlson, and Pat Buchanan is beyond comprehension.
How CNN can retain and treat as unbiased Lou Dobbs, Paul Begala and James Carville is beyond my comprehension.
How Fox News can exist and be treated as unbiased is beyond my comprehension.
April 24, 2008 3:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is going to be fun. Up until recently the only place to find anything negative about Obama was on Fox News. All my favorite liberal blogs were concentrating their venom on Hillary.
Speaking of which, on my car radio a half hour after the polls closed last Tuesday I engaged in my usual liberal media channel flipping.
National Public Radio: "...and if we dissect the data from central Pennsylvania relative to similar constituencies..."
CBS Radio: "is prepared to project that Hillary Clinton has carried Pennsylvania..."
AirAmerica: "has the nerve to show her face after all the..."
I did note, though, that the president of Air America was a host of the election coverage, and he did his best to take the dialog into the station's new "post-partisan" era. But every time he allowed the show usual hosts to speak it reverted to Clintonbash Central. Particularly funny was when the president asked Rachel Maddows to say something nice about Hillary. It sounded like she swallowed her tongue. Needless to say Randi Rhodes and Ed Schultz were not working that night.
April 24, 2008 3:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
The owner of Air America radio is a huge Clinton supporter and friend. It's the reason why he suspended Randi Rhodes over her SF stand-up routine. It's also the reason why Rhodes quit and joined Nova M Radio about two weeks ago. Know your info, Otto!
April 24, 2008 3:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Low information voter, that Otto.
April 24, 2008 4:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Maybe Chris Wallace can pick up from where ABC left off...
I'll suggest a few questions:
1. What did you do in Pakistan for three weeks as a college student? Why did you only recently disclose this? Why does this help give you more foreign policy experience than McCain or Clinton?
2. When is the last time you possessed or used pot or any form of cocaine?
3. Who helped you buy your condo? Rezko and friends?
4. Can you please explain the discrepancies in your real estate taxes listed in your federal tax returns?
5. Testimony at your friend Rezko's trial suggest you often met daily with Rezko whil in the state senate. What did you do for him or he for you?
I'm sure we can all come up with a many other questions that FOX might ask. Then again, they may wimp out and pander with softball, feel good questions. I suspect this is more likely as they really want to be more inviting and want to avoid being labeled racist by asking the Dear Leader challenging questions. Anyway, Wallace is kind of a lightweight amongst the folks at FOX that he could have stepped up to talk with.
Matthew
http://www.TheProblemWithObama.com
April 24, 2008 3:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hey Matt,
I finally went to your Hate, Racism and Lies website. I love your disclaimer:
"I support Hillary Clinton for President and, as alternative, John McCain. While there are numerous things about them that I do not agree with, overall I find both to be credible, respectful, and ready to be President from day one. They both represent change and, most importantly, offer experience, character, and stature to deliver."
I can't wait until Hillary drops out and we get to see you start defending John McCain's message of change.
Ha!
April 24, 2008 3:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for visiting my Web site!
I still have confidence that Clinton will win or that the Democratic party will recognize that Obama is a loser for the fall and opt for Clinton. If neither occur, I'll have no problem supporting McCain as the candidate of change. If you look at his record, why he has a maverick reputation, and his often moderate views and compromising style in the Senate, you'll see that he is a candidate of change that can deliver. I am confident that either he or Clinton will deliver change whereas Obama will only be words and no action.
Matthew
http://www.TheProblemWithObama.com
April 24, 2008 4:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
I just hope that you don't get mad and go away once Hillary concedes.
April 24, 2008 4:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, I won't go away if Clinton loses the nomination. I'll have the whole general election to then support McCain and help expose Obama for his inexperience, lies, hate, and racism.
Matthew
http://www.TheIndependentView.com
April 24, 2008 4:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Matthew Weaver-
My advice: get out from behind that computer. See the world. Talk with a black person. Make love to a woman (or man - your choice). Most importantly, find a decent therapist.
April 24, 2008 5:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
That Matthew Weaver guy doesn't even have a job--we are all useing our tax dollars to support this guy. His tactics appears to be cut from the page of his leader, Rush Lambaugh and that he is apart of his campaign to get McCain elected. He is not too smart, as we all can see, his real motives have been discovered. I would suggest that we all ignore his post from now own. What real man would hide behind two babies. What he should be doing is trying to get his Republican friends to refrain from the criminal acts of fraud, sexual misbehavior and other scandals including sexual assault on children.
April 25, 2008 1:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
My goodness, what did Obama do to you? It's rather perverted for you to use your vote purely against someone rather than for a candidate you prefer.
April 24, 2008 4:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am very positive in my outlook with either Clinton or McCain as our next president. They both serve a moderate agenda quite well. I do not agree with many of their positions and I'm sure they will take on future ones that I will disagree with. But, they offer honest, credible, and can-do government. Neither are wanna bes with a trumped up record like the Dear Leader has. Further, I trust that what we see is what we get with either Clinton or McCain. That definitely cannot be said of Obama. Finally, I do not like the fake post-partisan and post-racial banner Obama and his supporters claim. His associations, words, and actions prove these to be lies.
Matthew
http://www.TheIndependentView.com
April 24, 2008 4:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Matthew, better still just vote for McCain so he can send those two babies you are hiding behind to finish the war in Iraq and cut you Social Security so you will have to go find a third job to pay for food and gas. Anyone who would vote for a Republican after what they have done to this country is un-American and should be listed on the terroist watch list as a potential trader. Go back to the country you love.
April 25, 2008 1:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Name some of these moderate stances of his please. Other than his views on the climate and immigration. (Which he's now backtracking on.) And ethics reform, which should not be a conservative or a liberal view.
April 24, 2008 4:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
McCain is a "choice for change?" Mr. Weaver, remember your a father now, so for the sake of your kids, stop smoking whatever led you to such a conclusion. Anything that leads to such "vision" can't be good for you.Please, put the pipe down, and move away from the voting booth.
April 24, 2008 4:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obviously YOU haven't looked at McCain's record, dumbass, because he votes with his party 99 percent of the time. Apparently you too have swallowed the media's "maverick" fairy tale hook, line and sinker. Another low information voter.
April 24, 2008 5:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Condo?
April 24, 2008 3:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
You need to read more. For starters, check out Did Rezko Help Obama Buy His House?. As some of the postings on this site are a bit difficult to read and the biases evident are sometimes troubling, check out the links for more details. I've read numerous articles around the Internet that raise lots of questions about Obama's financial past, his benefactors, and several real estate deals he's done. I do think there are questions to be asked about this.
Matthew
http://www.TheProblemWithObama.com
April 24, 2008 4:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Matt, your rants are nothing but bias!
That's what I love about your posts, comedic hypocrisy!
Ha!
April 24, 2008 4:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Condo = House?
April 24, 2008 5:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Do the same research on McCain since you are a McCain supporter and compare notes. Weaver you are not too smart. We all know by now that you are a McCain supporter not a Hillery Clinton supporter--what is your game? Maybe you are doing what your leader Rush Lambaugh ask you to do--we all know now that you are part of him campaign. I think you have been busted.
April 25, 2008 1:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Low information voter again, this Weaver. Note he also claims testimony shows "daily meetings," not occasional breakfasts.
Well, what are you going to do? He's clearly a guy who doesn't get out much beyond the volunteer candystriping at the hospital. Or did he become a grandfather?
April 24, 2008 4:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
He could not cower any longer and has to face tougher questions like ABC.
I emailed your questions to Chris and added yours to mine.
I think he will have another melt down like in the last debate.
Heads will explode on these "progressive" blogs.
Messy.
April 24, 2008 4:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
He had a meltdown in the last debate in the same way that Hillary Clinton won PA by 30%. In your dreams, in other words.
April 24, 2008 4:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Right on, Chris Wallace! All those black people voting for Barack Obama are just sitting around on their money piles, lighting cigars with $100 bills and drinking Dom Perignon from gold chalices.
Crown Royal Hillary, though, now there's a hero of the proletariat!
April 24, 2008 3:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
I've had Dom Perignon (granted, it was 1956 vintage, and my great-grandmother hadn't touched it since she stowed it behind the couch) on New Year's Eve. It's really fantastic champagne. Too bad it's overpriced.
April 24, 2008 3:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Did you drink it from a gold chalice?
I have a 1970 bottle behind my bar, but I'm not sure that I'm ever going to open it. It's kind of a cool thing to have sitting around.
I suppose I could pop it when Obama gets the nomination, but I think I'm going to shred my signed Bill Clinton photo instead.
April 24, 2008 3:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
No, Kenny, sell the Clinton photo on ebay. And do it now before she loses and their fifteen minutes of fame is totally over.
April 24, 2008 4:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hillary Royal Crownton!
April 24, 2008 3:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Barack took the bait. Hillary has been questioning his toughness since the debate, and more so because he wouldn't debate - so he runs to Fox? I guess he doesn't feel that he has the nominee locked up. However the way they are clowning him now, he should call and cancel.
April 24, 2008 3:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
There's a little thing coming up in November called a "general election".
Barack Obama would like to win it.
April 24, 2008 3:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama will do fine. Howard Wolfson will watch naked from his Lay-Z-Boy with a tub of Vaseline. The next day Hillary will attack lamely. Then Obama will win North Carolina by 14 points and a great silence will decend over the pundit class.
April 24, 2008 3:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ugh...images...
April 24, 2008 4:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
My Erik is having quite the day.
The last person I worry about speaking to the public is Barack Obama.
'nuff said.
April 24, 2008 3:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think TPM has arrived at it's scheduled Obama in Bad week.
April 24, 2008 4:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
YOU GUYS ARE BEGGING FOR TROUBLE !
What if he get's up there and his ears start wigglin and he can't control his middle finger and Hannity starts with the fart sounds in the audience!
I'll be at the gym.
Sincerely
H. Dean
April 24, 2008 6:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Major league blunder by Obama to deal with FOX.
Now they'll really screw him to the wall.
This is the sort of poor decisionmaking Democrats who lose in November are known for. No Democrat should ever talk to FOX. There's nothing to be gained in any scenario.
April 24, 2008 4:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
How will Obama connect with the all of the dumb people if he doesn't go on Faux News?
April 24, 2008 4:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
If the Clinton camp can do it, why not Obama? Hell, she talked to Scaife...which is something no self-respecting Democrat should ever do.
April 24, 2008 4:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
No, Obama would rather blindly promise discussions with the leaders of Iran instead of talking with American media that might ask him inconvenient questions.
Matthew
http://www.TheProblemWithObama.com
April 24, 2008 4:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
He AGREED TO THE INTERVIEW! With Fox News! Goodness! What do you want?
April 24, 2008 4:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Don't let your hate blind you to the truth, Matt. Since when has Obama not been talking with the American media?
April 24, 2008 4:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'd say Obama engaging in discussions with Iranians is at least slightly preferable to Hillary calling up Tehran and saying "Hey, look out your window and make a wish...I just sent you a couple shooting stars"
April 24, 2008 5:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well don't look now, but that means we have to find a new candidate cause Clinton went on Fox way before Obama did.
She gave Richard Melon Scaife a lapdance.
April 24, 2008 4:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, Tena, I just had my lunch. Please - that image is enough to make me want to throw up! ;)
April 24, 2008 4:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
I GOT A LAP DANCE TOO !
But he wasn't as hot as HRC and his breath smelled like anchovies. In fact not even Howard can coax Richardson off me now.
Thanks for the B-Day surprise Bloomberg!
B. Hussein Obama
April 24, 2008 6:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
A great move by Obama. If he's willing to sit down with Iran, North Korea and the like (and I wholeheartedly agree that he should), he should be able to handle Chris Wallace.
April 24, 2008 4:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thank you. Too many folks overreacting on here. He'll be fine. He knows the territory - it's not like this will be his first appearance on Fox.
April 24, 2008 4:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, he'll be fine.
And after the interview be prepared for the trolls to wash in on a tide, as they have today.
April 24, 2008 5:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
THE TIDE IS TURNING OUR STOMACH
I know you mean well Cricket but I'm nervous about this. I mean what if Wallace asks me a question I can't answer with a sentence that does not contain "Hope" or "Change". He's tricky!
Can I wear your panties for luck?
Sincerely
B. Hussein Obama
April 24, 2008 6:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't expect a one-on-one interview to be that risky (Wallace, after all, was the one who thought the "typical white person" comments were overblown) but it's beneficial for his image. Should help blunt attacks about him being soft.
April 24, 2008 4:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's true - he'll be fine. It's what they'll do with the judicious editing and sound bytes that they'll cull from the interview afterwards that bothers me. I hope he has some say in the editing process or else we'll be subjected to a few more "Bittergate" non-stories.
He's also giving them more legitimacy than they deserve. The only bright spot is that he's still shutting out Bill O'Reilly, who has been badgering him to come on his show for months.
April 24, 2008 4:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's a bad idea. He would get treated better by Tass than he will at Fox. The only way he can look good on this deal is he follows Bill Clinton's lead and takes Wallace headon. Otherwise, he looks like desperate -- the exact charge the Obamans level at Clinton on a daily basis.
This could cost him the nomination.
April 24, 2008 4:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
Take a chill pill, would you?
April 24, 2008 4:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
I feel your concern. But I think you are overstating the situation a bit - like by about 5million times. So you needed be so very concerned. But thanks for your thoughts.
April 24, 2008 4:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
What makes you think that beating the shit out of the Fox commentariat on their own network a la Old Bill isn't what he has planned? He wouldn't be going on now if he hadn't worked out the script.
April 24, 2008 4:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama must reckon going on Fox is a low risk strategy. It could prove to be a major triumph if it goes well, guaranteed to be on constant rotation for at least a couple of days on all the cable stations. If it goes badly, it can all be attributed to a gotcha-ABC-style interview, and it can be swept under the carpet, well at least in theory.
April 24, 2008 4:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
OBAMA '08
Obama is a helluva lot more intelligent than Chris Wallace. Chris Wallace is a biased, bitter, mean-spirited asshole. I have every confidence Obama will rise to the occasion, although, I am wondering why he agreed to play in the sewer.
April 24, 2008 4:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, but then he crawfished on what he said the very next day.
April 24, 2008 4:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think it's a good idea. Stare down the lowlifes. He'd better have done his homework, but I'm sure his handlers have already communicated that to him.
Obama doesn't have the ability to legitimize or de-legitimize Fox - their viewership (such as it is) and bottom line does that.
April 24, 2008 4:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
My hope is that wallace makes messiah Obama come out of the interview crying for his mommy. "I want my mommy!" "No! I want my mommy now!" Make him cry Wallace. Obama hasn't had a really tough interview from the fawning MSM since Clinton was knocked out from being the front runner for being what THE MEDIA CALLED the "inevitable candidate." Sickem wallace! Fresh meat! Give the messiah Obama following MSM something to whine about for the next 3 weeks. Oh wait, republicans WANT messiah Obama to win the Democratic nomination. I forgot. Never mind. This will be a creampuff interview by wallace.
April 24, 2008 4:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Seek help.
April 24, 2008 4:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Posts like this reassure me to no end that I'm on the right side of things with my support for Obama.
April 24, 2008 5:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
I used to work as a bouncer at a rock club where skinhead dudes would drink sometimes. Just being near them made me want to quit, and eventually I did.
I can take the occasional Weaver rant or two, but when I scroll down and see his racist face all over the place. I think it's time for me to leave.
April 24, 2008 4:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree. The avatars make it pretty easy to scroll through the garbage at least, but basically these comment threads have turned into about 5 known trolls and 10 kneejerk enablers who can't seem to ignore them. They drown out the people who bother to make an insightful or humorous comment now and then.
April 24, 2008 5:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Agreed. The TPM crew really need to read this.
April 24, 2008 5:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
If they give him a fair interview (I know, big if) I think it will do him good. I bet if someone polled the people of Pennsylvania who voted for The Clintons, that 90% or more of them get their news from Fox and that it's their only news source. That certainly would explain her love affair with the outlet and it was a shrewd move if that was her plan. So if Obama wants to reach the same demographic, he would be better off appearing there if....
April 24, 2008 4:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
A. They won't. It's not what they do. Remember, they're a Republican propaganda outlet, not a news organization.
B. Despite their reputation, Fox's audience is just not that big. Sure, it's big for a cable channel, but it's tiny compared to the broadcast news shows. There is absolutely no need for any Democrat to go their to "reach" those voters.
That said, I hope Obama has a plan. Bill Clinton managed to turn his interview with the smarmy Wallace into a positive by smacking him down hard. That's not Obama's style, but he's had a number of situations where the conventional wisdom said he had to "apologize" or "respond" and he pivoted and moved the discussion onto his turf instead of fighting his attackers directly on theirs.
April 24, 2008 5:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
You gotta be kidding me! Why do you hate the Democratic Party of Pennsylvania so? I made up my mind long ago that most of the (im)posters on TPM like this page get their talking points from Newsmax FreeRepublic! The vitriolic hatred for Senator Clinton and President Bill Clinton is a putred stench.
April 24, 2008 5:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wallace cleverly set this up when he went on the Fox Morning Show and defended Obama over the "typical white person" remarks. Fox News Sunday's weekly "Obama Watch" with the "24" visuals has been surpringly amusing. Wallace is clearly angling to be Howard Cosell to Obama's Muhammad Ali, and to provide an outlet for Obama to practice his bipartisan cross-over appeal. I expect Obama to be humorous and disarming except for one or two answers where he will tactically bristle and push back. Wallace will play a worthy straight-man. If Obama is elected Prez, expect this relationship to continue.
April 24, 2008 5:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
If I remember correctly, the last time Obama went on Faux News, he was subjected to a rapid fire of 'gotcha' questions, trying to pin him down on deeply important issues - such as which days he attended Trinity. If I were him, I'd expect more of the same from that fool Wallace.
April 24, 2008 5:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
He's doing it to get Indiana votes. A lot of people in Indiana watch Faux News. We have an open primary as well. R's can vote in the D's election and vis versa. So it makes total sense as long as he does OK.
To that end, he probably promised them more near-term interviews if they don't do a hatchet job on him during the primary season.
April 24, 2008 5:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's what I think.
He completely snubbed them for quite awhile after that Madrassah smear.
I think they are thinking he might be president soon.
They will want access.
It's the name of their game.
April 24, 2008 5:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
THANKS TENA I CAN ALWAYS COUNT ON YOU!
Don't worry about me I'm just goin there to flip off Hanity and scarf the shrimp plate. Could you drop by and help me pick out a tie? Wear the push up bra.
Truly
B. Hussein Obama
April 24, 2008 6:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
You are so unfunny it's painful. Please spare yourself further embarrassment and post something of substance.
April 24, 2008 7:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, please don't go. These people are not real journalist.
April 24, 2008 5:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
I wonder if they're going to let Obama pull some comically oversized lever to turn off the Obama Watch sign.
April 24, 2008 5:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama is comical enough without adding a lever to the set.
Matthew
http://www.TheProblemWithObama.com
April 24, 2008 5:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
PAY ATTENTION MATTHEW :
I never intended to be funny. I meant to be ironic. Now you ask yourself if those creepy college kids who are stalking me do so out of "white guilt" then how am I as a "halfrican" to resolve my inner conflict? I mean other than working on my bowling score. You see, even I hate me.
Now get off the computer and go earn your minimum wage gomer.
Sincerely
B. Hussein Obama
Can you spare some "Change We Can Believe In" so we can pay off our student loan?
April 24, 2008 6:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Matthew: You are correct in your assessment of Donna B. -- on Tuesday night, she was sullen, and sulking, and practicing her art for restating the painfully obvious. She claims to be neutral but as a former Gore campaign protege (one of the worst run campaigns in American history), she has an anti-Hillary bias that is palpable. She is not alone; Olbermann, Russert, Matthews have shown their bias (and sexism) on repeated, documented occasions. As bad as all of the foregoing have been, Maureen Dowd sets the bar at a new low, further harming the NYT's already sinking reputation. Her schoolyard insults toward HRC --i.e, "attack of the 50 foot woman" -- do not belong on a blog like TPM, much less the NYT.
April 24, 2008 5:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Maureen Dowd has proven insufferable. I used to really enjoy reading her columns. But she definitely has something against Clinton. It has seriously colored her writings in a way that has dimished her overall reputation.
Matthew
http://www.TheIndependentView.com
April 24, 2008 5:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Matthew, this is news? Maureen Dowd has been anti-Clintons since Bill's presidency. What about her columns have you enjoyed? She's OK when she's going after Bush, I suppose, but she's obnoxious most of the time and comes off like a dumb bimbo when she's interviewed (did you see her on the Colbert Report - she was horrible).
April 24, 2008 7:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
DEAR GASBAG WHO COULDN'T GET A REAL JOURNALISTS JOB
People tell me my columns are insightful and mostly relevant. I'm sick of being treated like a leper at the conventions just because I gave Dick Morris herpes.
So lay off or I'll go after Michelle next. At least I didn't have to sleep with the site monitor to get an avitar.
Sincerely
M. Dowd
April 25, 2008 11:42 AM | Reply | Permalink
Richmond, your post a breath of fresh air in a sea of Clinton hatred. If they would just discuss what they don't like about Clinton I could deal with it. But its like I'm back in the election cycle of 2000 with Gore and Bush and all I read out of the republican mouth is lies and hatred about the Clintons. What can a person do but lash out. Back in 2001 I wanted SOMEONE to bitxhslap bush so his true character would be revealed. Unfortunately 9/11 happened and bill o'really was the first to blame President Bill Clinton. But bush's character has been revealed hasn't it? Maybe messiah Obama's true character will be revealed on sunday's faux news. We got a hint on ABC. Not enough.
April 24, 2008 6:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Kanne, it's odd that you're going on about lies and hatred when it comes to the Clintons, but when you get to talking about Obama, all you offer is an ad hominem attack -- calling him "messiah Obama" and implying that his "true character" is something odious that we all need to get wise about. Ever hear the expression that's the pot calling the kettle black?
April 24, 2008 7:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
The republicans treated and some STILL TREAT and talk about bush the same way those who follow Obama today! He's the best thing to EVER happen to humanity. NOT
April 24, 2008 8:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Speaking as a moderate Democrat, who never watched Fox news, I was more than a bit surprised when I did. They WERE more fair and balanced.....at least where covering the Democratic candidates was concerned. MSNBC had become nothing more that a cog in the Obama propaganda machine. I couldn't get any commentary about Clinton or Obama without total spin.....and always in favor of Obama. I wanted to know what was really going on, and Chris Matthews, Keith Olbermann and McCafferty didn't want me to. Any good news about Hillary was buried or spun as bad news, while a constant ( and sickening) stream of glowing news and praise for Obama was
on a loop. Say what you will about Fox News, I still watch Fox to find out what is happening with the Democratic candidates, and to hear a balanced panel discuss their prospects. That simply doesn't happen on MSNBC, and only occasionally on CNN.
April 24, 2008 5:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Some sobering stats. If Obama is to reach all Americans, he needs Fox. And not just in the primary, but in the general as well. So I guess one may as well get used to the idea.
April 24, 2008 11:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Maureen Dowd appears to have something against almost everyone. Bring out the pies!
April 25, 2008 12:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Fox should be happy that Obama is coming on. This will be the highest ratings they will have for the rest of the year. No one with intelligence watch FOX News anymore. Every time I mention to one of my friends that they should not watch Fox--I am always pleasantly surprised when they reply that they had stopped watching Fox news more than a year ago and that they know no one who does anymore. Hannity, O’Reily and Roger Ales(sic),Bush’s cousin--- has fully discredited FOX news and Fox will not be able to regain it as long as they are there. What a shame. I think the rest of the so call news crew could be rehabilitated to be trueful and honest. I hope Murdoch will come around to the fact that the country is truly fed up with these guy.
Obama has little to loose by appearing on the Sunday show, they have already made it their mission to smear him at every opportunity.
April 25, 2008 12:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hako, If you are looking for Obama bashing you turned to the right channel. Please be mindful that FOX news has long been well established as part of the Republican machine. Their mission is to keep the Republican party in power--why else would they hire Karl Rove, one of McCain advisers.
April 25, 2008 12:51 PM | Reply | Permalink