« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »
Chris Wallace Goes Off-Message, Tries Journalism
On Fox News Sunday, host Chris Wallace had a one-on-one interview with McCain campaign manager Rick Davis.
Apparently, Wallace must have spent his prep time watching some of his father's greatest hits from "60 Minutes". Sufficiently inspired, he decided to actually ask Davis some tough questions. Davis, expecting a soft-toss interview, found himself getting repeated chin music from a most unexpected place.
First, Wallace puts the lie to one of McCain's recent ads.
WALLACE: All right. Let's take a look at one of your campaign's recent ads. Here it is.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
NARRATOR: Life in the spotlight must be grand. But for the rest of us, times are tough. Obama voted to raise taxes on people making just $42,000.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
WALLACE: Mr. Davis, especially that last sentence, isn't that misleading?
DAVIS: Nothing misleading about it. Barack Obama voted for a budget resolution that would have increased taxes on people, families, making $42,000. What's misleading about that?
WALLACE: Well, in fact, it only would be single people making $42,000. It would be families making over $60,000. But Obama — as you say, he voted for a non-binding budget resolution that overall talked about doing away with the Bush tax cuts.
In fact, he says, that's not his tax plan, that he supports a middle-class tax cut. And I want to put something up on the screen. The non-partisan Tax Policy Center says someone making $37,000 a year under Obama's plan would get a tax cut of $892. Under McCain's plan, they get a tax cut of $113.
Ooooooooops. It's not good when Chris Wallace exposes the lies you're telling on national TV.
Wallace must have enjoyed watching Davis squirm through that exchange, for he promptly produced another haymaker.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
NARRATOR: Washington's broken. John McCain knows it. We're worse off than we were four years ago.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
WALLACE: Does Senator McCain really believe that, that this country is worse off than we were four years ago?
DAVIS: Sure. All along the trail, John McCain campaigns around real people. He goes to town halls and he hears what they have to say to him.
You don't have to be in very many town halls, Chris, to understand that people are pinched by the increase in gas prices. They're losing jobs because of some downturn in manufacturing. And the economy as a whole has been very hard on the American family.
That's what John McCain's referring to. He doesn't have to go very far every day to find those kinds of examples.
WALLACE: Given that, I want you to respond to this clip from an Obama ad. Take a look.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MCCAIN: The president and I agree on most issues. There was a recent study that showed that I voted with the president over 90 percent of the time.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
WALLACE: In fact, Mr. Davis, Senator McCain is understating it. Last year, he voted to support Bush legislation 95 percent of the time.
Given that, if the country's worse off, isn't both the president and John McCain — aren't they both responsible?
DAVIS: Well, look. If you want to talk about history, then you can make all the cases you want to make...
WALLACE: But you're talking about history. You talk about the last four years.
At this point, I had just about fallen off my easy chair. I wasn't sure if I was watching "Fox News Sunday" or a "Meet the Press" re-run. Either way, Wallace was doing one hell of a Tim Russert impersonation. No spin, no lies, just the candidate's and campaign's own words juxtaposed with facts.
Emboldened by the addictive power of the First Amendment, Wallace decided to try a third act of blatant journalism.
WALLACE: Finally, the Obama camp, I don't have to tell you, is pounding you for your work as a lobbyist. In 2003, you lobbied Congress, and Senator McCain in his job as chairman of the Commerce Committee helped you to allow the German-owned DHL buy Airborne Express.
You made from this German-owned company about $600,000 in lobbying fees. The Democrats are making a big deal of the fact that DHL is now talking about taking 8,000 jobs out of the state of Ohio.
Are you and Senator McCain going to do anything to try to prevent that?
DAVIS: Well, first of all, let me correct you. Senator McCain did not help me do anything. I represented Airborne, which was the incumbent in that location in Ohio, and they wanted to be bought by DHL. And there were people in Congress who didn't want to have that happen.
John McCain has always believed that foreign investment in this sector is fine, and unless there was something that was inappropriate about the deal it should go forward.
WALLACE: Well, that's how he helped you, is to agree that...
DAVIS: Well, but he didn't help me. He helped the people in Ohio, because those jobs were probably going to be lost if they didn't get taken over because of the competitive nature of this business.
WALLACE: But now DHL is talking about taking...
DAVIS: I haven't represented DHL or any of their entities since 2005 when I completely got out of the lobbying business.
Davis then spends a few moments attempting to spin the discussion into Obama being afraid to hold a town hall because of a radio ad running in that area.
Wallace, however, refuses to let go of the DHL topic.
WALLACE: Directly, can you, will you, or Senator McCain, try to do anything to get DHL not to take those 8,000 jobs away?
DAVIS: Oh, sure. Senator McCain in the town hall with the people affected most by this told them that he would do what he could do, look into the transaction.
By the way, this is a different transaction than had occurred almost four years ago. So it has nothing to do with any of the things he'd ever done before. And he didn't really have the level of detail he need and he's going to look into it.
"...didn't really have the level of detail he needed?"
One would think that such an experienced and knowledgeable candidate would be aware of the impending loss of thousands of jobs...from a deal made by your lobbyist campaign manager...before scheduling a town hall...in the town most affected by said job loss.
But hey, that's the Maverick. John McCain: Country First!*
* - Slogan applies only to that part of said country that owns at least three homes, thinks there's no foreclosure crisis, holds that we're a nation of whiners, and has donated $28,500 per family member and household staff member to McCain Victory 08. Other terms and conditions may apply.







Comments (42)
I caught clips of these exchanges over at Kos yesterday. Davis tried the spin that Obama is exploiting workers by making them a campaign issue, and that the women in their ad is actually a McCain supporter and she has asked for them to stop with the radio ad and they have refused and that makes Obama a bad person.
August 11, 2008 12:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
The full story on Davis' spin is that Obama supposedly won't hold a town hall there because he's afraid of the backlash over the radio ad. I was looking for a quick way to summarize that.
I couldn't find clips anywhere, but the link at the top of the post is to the Fox transcript.
August 11, 2008 12:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, forgot to mention...I don't participate at dKos anymore. The Lee Stranahan thing left a bad taste in my mouth, and the fact that they won't even apologize to him - after he was proven 100% correct - soured me on the site entirely.
August 11, 2008 12:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Here's a couple:
Clip #1 (Washington's Broken - Goes with second block quote)) - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OthxP4MVLHQ&e
Clip #2 (lobbyist ties - goes with third block quote)- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rYp0FB6HvN4&e
August 11, 2008 12:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Chris Wallace is a registered democrat, so clearly, he's just biased against john mccain and will adopt the democrats talking points any chance he can get.
August 11, 2008 1:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Please tell me that was sarcasm....
August 11, 2008 2:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
yeah...it was.
August 11, 2008 2:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thank you...I'm relatively new around here and am still not quite sure who all the players are and where you're coming from!
August 11, 2008 4:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
I had the same problem - still do, sometimes.
When your snarkometer goes on the blink, I recommend checking the commenter's profile for blog/comment history. 99% of the time, that'll clear up any confusion. :-)
August 11, 2008 4:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
GREAT idea...thank you!
August 11, 2008 8:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's funny how Democratic talking points are THE TRUTH.
The truth has a liberal slant.
Get over yourself. Learn something. I know it's tough, but give it a try.
August 11, 2008 2:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
(presses reset button on snark detector) :-)
August 11, 2008 3:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Forget it, it is broken. Just ignore me...many others already do.
August 11, 2008 5:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
There are only a couple of people on here I ignore. You don't make that list, so I'll have to keep reading your stuff. :-)
August 11, 2008 5:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
You're too kind.
Know where I can get a slightly used snark detector? Mine needs some serious work - resetting does not work any longer (or perhaps it's my reading too many idiotic McCain supporters on varying sites throughout the net - it looks just like a comment one might see on some gooper site (hell, I read through Marketwatch today and some of the comments there were just like this. If nothing else, the Rove's of the world have succeeded in making everything in America politicized).
Thanks for the pass. I am sure you will see it more than broken time and time again. :-)
August 11, 2008 5:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Funny post, Boyd. I had the same feeling. It was one of the few times I switched on Fox and didn't continue channel surfing.
August 11, 2008 2:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Do you suppose Wallace is trying to get fired from FOX .... which would give him a good shot at a job with a "real" network? (I realize he was with one before ... but sometimes you have to travel to the heathen land to become a convert..)
Months back I saw another brief interview (he was on location in some primary state and speaking to two people back in the studio) when they said something outlandishly mischaracterizing a situation involving Obama and he corrected them -- clearly a couple of times before they got it. What amazed me was the very evident anger and upset of the guys in the studio that anyone on their network would dare question their view on something!
August 11, 2008 2:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Interesting theory. I doubt Wallace is trying to get fired, though. Faux may not be a real network, but the checks they write to Wallace clear just fine.
I think he just has trouble repressing his "fair and balanced" side from time to time. He's gone off the reservation on his colleagues and the GOP more than once, though he typically carries the water without spillage.
August 11, 2008 3:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't think he's trying to get fired. I think he's trying to do just enough to break through the freeze-out imposed by the Obama camp. Simple as that. Fat chance.
August 11, 2008 4:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Interesting angle. The hole in it, though, is that Obama's already done an interview with Chris Wallace this election season. To riff off your idea a bit, maybe Wallace is looking to score another sit-down with Obama.
I think the truth, though, is that Wallace saw an opportunity for a provocative interview and took it.
August 11, 2008 4:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Great post...rec'd
I'm away from my DVR for awhile...am hoping this segment is still on it when I get back, although I might faint seeing something like this on faux news...
August 11, 2008 2:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
I have actually seen a couple of things approaching real news on Fox.
Being a smart and successful media mogul, I wonder if Murdock doesn't sense the shifting winds and is starting to trim his business model a bit? I wonder if the original slant to the network was always more about bottom-line and market-share.
There was a hole in the market for "conservative" news and he made a mint off of exploiting it. If that hole is closing now and the market is looking for different fare, then why wouldn't he give it to us?
I don't think Fox cares what the message is, as long as it sells.
August 11, 2008 6:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think Murdoch is a serious partisan for the right, but he also likes the bottom line. He's obviously a very canny fellow, if unprincipled and nasty.
August 11, 2008 8:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
If he gives us the product we obviously want for cynical ends, I'll be happy with that. Also, partisan goals can change given the right environmental and demographic changes in a party.
August 11, 2008 9:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
You could be right. Didn't Murdoch contribute to Clinton? I read that he plays both sides in his media - who ever is winning. Can't remember where that was - had to have been about 6 months ago. Sorry, I don't like not being able to name sources espcially in this responsible company (not snark).
Love the post about Wallace. No TV so wouldn't ever see it. Glad it happened on Fox. Thanks
August 11, 2008 9:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
is this the same man, chris wallace, that bill clinton accused of having a 'smirk' on his face when clinton got all red-faced a few years ago during a Fox interview? sheesh, good stuff Wallace as your father would be proud.
August 11, 2008 3:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Did y'all catch this..?
"Historical averages are hard to get a third term like this in the sense of a party in power retaining power, and — but what do we see in those polls? John McCain over-performing his party, reaching out to independent and Democrat voters, which is why he's so competitive right now in this chart."
August 11, 2008 3:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
*chuckle* I saw that, but it was clear enough what Davis meant that I didn't think I should put it in my blog entry.
August 11, 2008 3:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
I remember that Chris Wallace walked off the set of one of those Fox things at the start of the primaries - in protest over what was being said about Obama.
You know, sometimes I forget that heroes come from the most unlikely places - If Wallace would actually keep this up and turn into a real journalist- maybe more would follow. Ya never know.
August 11, 2008 4:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hope springs eternal...
August 11, 2008 4:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
that wasn't Wallace, that was Guy-On-Fox-and-Friends-Who-is-Not-Steve-Doocey. later in the same episode, though, Wallace came on to tell them to calm down with the Obama bashing, which was apart from this incident the only other responsible thing i've seen him do. still, it was a good moment.
August 11, 2008 5:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wallace was trying to pressure Obama into an interview (day-counter and all) and was pissed that some of the FOX folks were hurting his chances by doing what FOX folks do. Poor Chrissy.
Maybe he is trying for the "tough-but-fair interviewer" T-shirt so Barack and the Dems won't stiff him when he gets elected.
August 11, 2008 6:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
If and when Mr. Wallace repeats this level of objective questioning during an interview with McCain, in regards to his position (oops, positions) on social security, a woman's right to choose, health care, veteran's benefits and torture, then I will give him some credit.
August 11, 2008 4:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
I understand what you're saying. But Rome wasn't built in a day, either. :-)
August 11, 2008 4:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for the reminder, point taken. Need to remember that positive Illini outlook.
August 11, 2008 4:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Good post!
August 11, 2008 5:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Chris Wallace was the pundit that came on Fox News and chastised his coworkers about repeating the Rev. Wright stuff. The other guys kept repeating it and attributing the stuff to Obama; while ignoring the fact that it was Wright who said all the stuff.
August 11, 2008 7:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
One would be tempted to think that Chris Wallace should be rewarded for his forays into real journalism by being hired away from Fox to a "real" news network. But here is the dilemma: what network would that be, exactly?
Maybe Wallace is perfectly placed, for now because, as Boyd Reed said: "his third attempt at blatant journalism" has more newsworthiness, at Fox Noise.
Thanks for bringing this to our attention, BR.
August 11, 2008 8:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wallace surprises us sometimes. Perhaps he can move on to a real network. Or perhaps he is Fox's way of trying to kiss up to the future Obama administration?
I hope Wallace starts vetting McCain more. Like hise use of the word "gook" in 2000, his betrayal of his wife Carol after her car accident, and his sex friend / lobbyist Vicki Iseman.
August 11, 2008 10:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
i dont have the stomach to watch fox or blog on certain sites, but i welcome those who do....someone with a different perspective need to put the truth out there...i do more harm than good b/c like mccain, my temper isn't so good! hehehehe
August 12, 2008 12:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
I really, really hate to say it, because I hate fox entertainment, but wallace really isn't that bad, all things considered. I mean compared to some of the bozos at abc, like halperin, who was pathetic or some of the other "journalists." He really isn't that bad. I have actually seen him be pretty hard hitting in questioning republicans, which really is surprising.
August 12, 2008 1:23 AM | Reply | Permalink
Fox and NBC use the same building in Washington. Tom Brokaw is the moderator of Meet the Press, until the election is over. After that, NBC isn't sure who they will use. Makes you think, maybe an audition here?
August 12, 2008 8:48 AM | Reply | Permalink
Post a Comment