It Begins – FNC (Chris Wallace) Begins The “Tear Down This Walker Campaign”

Posted on March 1, 2015 by sundance

Predictable does not begin to explain what began today. Write down the date, it’s almost as significant as May 11th 2014 .

Chris Wallace had the last two weeks off. He returns today, March 1st, carrying a remarkable reinvigoration for the progressive ideology. Governor Scott Walker has become the primary roadblock to Rupert Murdoch’s chosen candidate, Jeb Bush. And Walker just finished 2nd to Rand Paul in the CPAC straw poll….

Jeb Bush, Rupert Murdoch, and ValJar enjoy a light moment at an establishment dinner.

They can try and ding Walker all they want. It will fail. Unlike the other GOP losers, Walker has his shit together.

Everything is a conspiracy. This is what six years of Obama has given us.

Thanks for posting the video (I quit watching Sunday shows about two election cycles ago)

Here are my thoughts (in no particular order):

1. I don't have a problem with the tone or even necessarily the questions that Chris Wallace asked the governor. They were tough questions and even some "gotchas" thrown in, but for the most part I thought Walker handled himself well.
2. What I DO have a problem with - the fact that OTHER candidates won't get asked these questions. First off, it's unlikely Hil-liar-y (or any democrap) will ever come on Fox airways, so she of course won't get asked anything tougher than what's her favorite color. Other republicans WILL probably come on, and (depending on where they are in the polls in relation to the Jebster) they will be asked tough questions.
3. When the Jebster comes on Wallace's show, you can bet HE won't be asked anything like what Walker was asked. And (donning my tinfoil hat) I suspect that any "tough" questions that might be thrown at the Jebster have been reviewed by him beforehand.

Just to be clear - I'm not for interviewers handling ANY candidate with kid gloves. This is the big leagues, and any candidate at this level should be able to handle what a Chris Wallace can dish out.

Now - having said that, I agree that the Jebster IS the choice of Fox News (run by Murdoch) and they WILL try to derail any other possible contender. That is the sad state of 21st Century US politics. They want to see another Bush in the WH - period. Only time will tell if they are successful or not

But let not forget 1980 and Reagan. Reagan was hated by the establishment gop as much (in some cases more) than he was by the dems. But here is where the establishment NEVER is defeated, never throws in the towel, and never gives up (they just change tactics - kind of like statists and communists or Obama)

Once the establishment saw that Reagan was NOT going to be stopped, they changed tactics and (somehow?) got him to put the senior Bush on the ticket as VP candidate.

So -- the price for a "Reagan" was one term of senior Bush, and two terms of junior Bush.

I liked Reagan - but even I have to ask myself. Was the price too high?

"First off, it's unlikely Hil-liar-y (or any democrap) will ever come on Fox airways, so she of course won't get asked anything tougher than what's her favorite color."

Oh, I don't know, Rufus. I think it might be interesting to know if Shrillary prefers boxers, briefs, or even...

http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/372931e...tainchristopher

Quote: Rufus T Firefly wrote in post #4

---

Thanks for posting the video (I quit watching Sunday shows about two election cycles ago)

Here are my thoughts (in no particular order):

1. I don't have a problem with the tone or even necessarily the questions that Chris Wallace asked the governor. They were tough questions and even some "gotchas" thrown in, but for the most part I thought Walker handled himself well.
2. What I DO have a problem with - the fact that OTHER candidates won't get asked these questions. First off, it's unlikely Hil-liar-y (or any democrap) will ever come on Fox airways, so she of course won't get asked anything tougher than what's her favorite color. Other republicans WILL probably come on, and (depending on where they are in the polls in relation to the Jebster) they will be asked tough questions.
3. When the Jebster comes on Wallace's show, you can bet HE won't be asked anything like what Walker was asked. And (donning my tinfoil hat) I suspect that any "tough" questions that might be thrown at the Jebster have been reviewed by him beforehand.

Just to be clear - I'm not for interviewers handling ANY candidate with kid gloves. This is the big leagues, and any candidate at this level should be able to handle what a Chris Wallace can dish out.

Now - having said that, I agree that the Jebster IS the choice of Fox News (run by Murdoch) and they WILL try to derail any other possible contender. That is the sad state of 21st Century US politics. They want to see another Bush in the WH - period. Only time will tell if they are successful or not

But let not forget 1980 and Reagan. Reagan was hated by the establishment gop as much (in some cases more) than he was by the dems. But here is where the establishment NEVER is defeated, never throws in the towel, and never gives up (they just change tactics - kind of like statists and communists or Obama)

Once the establishment saw that Reagan was NOT going to be stopped, they changed tactics and (somehow?) got him to put the senior Bush on the ticket as VP candidate.

So -- the price for a "Reagan" was one term of senior Bush, and two terms of junior Bush.

I liked Reagan - but even I have to ask myself. Was the price too high?

---

Zitat

---

Once the establishment saw that Reagan was NOT going to be stopped, they changed tactics and (somehow?) got him to put the senior Bush on the ticket as VP candidate.

---

Yes, I forgot how it was done, I recall Levin explaining at some point in the past; but yes, he was forced to put GHWB on the ticket in some way......


f

Quote: ThirstyMan wrote in post #8

---

Quote: FWP wrote in post #6

---

Those were my thoughts as well..... Jeb will never be asked anything like that on FNC. Also, if they don't get Jeb in as the "R" nominee, I am pretty sure they will be in HRC (assuming she is the "D" nominee) camp for 2016.

---

Say what???

Fox will be in the HRC camp???

I have no idea where you got that idea from.

---

Zitat

---

Let me get this straight, Fox decided to maximize shareholder value by presenting the conservative perspective.

>> Yes, News Corp. (Murdoch's corporation that includes the WSJ with its disgusting editorial page & Fox News) is first and foremost a business. It exists to maximize shareholder value, it is not an advocacy organization of any sort. If you can't understand that, then there is no point trying to discuss this with you.

Murdoch saw a market opportunity for a right of center network, that is why FNC was created.

And they do this right up to the election and then they don't?

>> That makes no sense at all -- they cover an election like any other news network.


So they're market opportunists ....but not really.

>> Yes, if you can't understand that, you are helplessly lost.

I do pay attention to what they say and find this opinion of yours rather conspiratorial.

>> You are clueless.

---

Quote: ThirstyMan wrote in post #10

---

Let me get this straight, Fox decided to maximize shareholder value by presenting the conservative perspective.

And they do this right up to the election and then they don't?

So they're market opportunists ....but not really.

I do pay attention to what they say and find this opinion of yours rather conspiratorial.

---

Quote: FWP wrote in post #11

---

Zitat

---

Let me get this straight, Fox decided to maximize shareholder value by presenting the conservative perspective.

>> Yes, News Corp. (Murdoch's corporation that includes the WSJ with its disgusting editorial page & Fox News) is first and foremost a business. It exists to maximize shareholder value, it is not an advocacy organization of any sort. If you can't understand that, then there is no point trying to discuss this with you.

Murdoch saw a market opportunity for a right of center network, that is why FNC was created.

And they do this right up to the election and then they don't?

>> That makes no sense at all -- they cover an election like any other news network.


So they're market opportunists ....but not really.

>> Yes, if you can't understand that, you are helplessly lost.

I do pay attention to what they say and find this opinion of yours rather conspiratorial.

>> You are clueless.

---

---

One thing TM is not is clueless. I have found him to be well-informed and thoughtful in his opinions.

Reasonable people can have differences. That's what we do here. (Well, most of us are pretty reasonable).

Quote: ThirstyMan wrote in post #13

---

Quote: Frank Cannon wrote in post #12

---

Quote: ThirstyMan wrote in post #10

---

Let me get this straight, Fox decided to maximize shareholder value by presenting the conservative perspective.

And they do this right up to the election and then they don't?

So they're market opportunists ....but not really.

I do pay attention to what they say and find this opinion of yours rather conspiratorial.

---

Just look at who owns FOX News. A guy that just narrowly escaped serious charges in Briton for illegally tapping into phone voice mails for news. A full out globalist Progressive who has said that Hitlary would make a great President. Rupert Murdoch is of a very low moral character and is just dishonest as Soros or any other globalist slime.

I will also add that other than the GOPe talking parrot Hannity, FOX isn't that Right Wing. Ted Baxter is a Populist muckracker who probably votes Rat at every turn. Most of their straight news people are closet Leftists. Their number one hard news guy is Shemp and he is very Liberal. Just because the MSM run around calling FOX Conservative don't mean its so.

---

Well, the character of Murdoch is not something that I wanted to be cast as being naïve about. It's well known that Murdoch is a liberal and that fact did not escape TM, believe it or not. So if my presentation wasn't clear, so be it.

Frank you have posted what I said in its entirety. The first part is only a recap of what I thought I was hearing from f.

What I find difficult to believe is that the FOX on-air personalities will change their slant on the news as the election nears because Murdoch says to support Hillary. Today I just watched the FOX morning news team cover Hillary's use of her personal email for the entire time she was acting SoS. I remain mystified at f's point as I saw absolutely no indication of their support for her.

If that was f's point, some evidence would make it better than him calling TM clueless.

---