Wallace: Sorry for the “flake” question

posted at 6:00 pm on June 26, 2011 by Ed Morrissey

I’d have put this into the earlier thread, but given the massive response to Chris Wallace’s question this morning to Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN), it seems fairer to give this a fresh look.  Not long after Wallace asked Bachmann if she was a “flake” for making a few gaffes over the last few years, Wallace heard an earful from his audience.  He faced the criticism head-on and apologized in a Fox News Sunday web video:


Give the man some credit. Wallace didn’t offer a “sorry if you were offended by my genius” non-apology apology. He deduced — rightly — that having the question overshadow the answer in an interview is usually a mistake, and accepted it as such. Wallace is right that Bachmann’s perceived seriousness is a legitimate topic for an interview, considering her status as a presidential candidate, but at the very least Wallace should have provided better contextual basis for his question. Had he said, “So-and-so called you a flake,” or better yet, “So-and-so questioned your seriousness in light of these gaffes,” he would have opened the same topic but in a better and more fair manner for Bachmann to respond.

As Wallace says, every day is a learning experience. More than a few people in his position would be tempted to dig in and defend a poor choice. Kudos to Wallace for learning a lesson and admitting to it.

Still, when will the national media start questioning Obama’s seriousness if rhetorical gaffes are the determining factor, as they apparently are for Republicans such as Bachmann, Sarah Palin, and George W. Bush? That’s a question I ask almost every day in the Obamateurism feature.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

Politics can be rough and if people want to get involved they need to be able to answer questions, some of which will be stupid and some of which will be unfair.

Believe it or not the problems that Bachmann or anyone else will have to face in the Oval Office make this whole socalled controversy look pretty damn silly.

Terrye on June 27, 2011 at 7:11 AM

An interview is not Politics. I am sure Bachmann knows that politics aint bean bag, but its an unserious question. If Wallace would have asked “Why are you so against government subsidies when you yourself continue to take farm subsidies for the family farm you own?” THAT is a serious, back you into a corner question.

Wallace asking that question is like Oreilly in 2008 asking Obama if he is a closet muslim. I doubt Oreilly would still have his job.

TendStl on June 27, 2011 at 7:18 AM

bill bennett is skewering chris big time this am…

cmsinaz on June 27, 2011 at 7:22 AM

Chris Wallace is a progressive. Not as far left and kooky as Bathtub Boy, but still in the same progressive camp. He wants people to think he’s independent, but sometimes the mask just slips. You will never see him belittle the left as he does the right, so don’t hold your breath waiting.

SKYFOX on June 27, 2011 at 7:29 AM

I have always respected Wallace, but I must say I’m not particularly impressed with either his question or his “apology”. The question was handled stupidly and the apology was not even half-hearted, it seems to me.

Jaibones on June 27, 2011 at 7:36 AM

Will you all be satisfied with his apology when the ratbags use Wallace’s Flake question in their advertising.

davod on June 27, 2011 at 7:52 AM

It was obvious that Wallace was giving Bachmann a chance to respond to people who called her a flake…not that he thought she was a flake himself.

Terrye on June 27, 2011 at 6:30 AM

Obvious? The only obvious thing here is that you are either in the tank for the left, or you’re a complete imbecile.

fossten on June 27, 2011 at 7:59 AM

Chris Wallace interviews Sarah Palin all the time, and he likes her it’s obvious. So Rollins stated that Sarah Palin wasn’t a serious person on MSNBC…..Bachmann makes him apologize to Palin but not publicly…..later when Bachmann is being interviewed by Wallace he ask her “Are You A Flake” then after this get’s enough attention in the news cycle and internet….Wallace apologizes. Michelle Bachmann understands that Governor Sarah Palin, is a Fox News Contributor. Some of her co workers might not like Rollins taking cheap shots at her on the rival network MSNBC, who’s brand could be described as taking cheap shots at Palin 24/7.

Good on you Chris Wallace. Chris Wallace is a guest on Imus every week. If people listened to when Chris Wallace get’s interviewed himself, they would know the back story. Imus is always accusing Wallace of going easy on Sarah Palin, when she’s on Wallace’s program. Imus : It’s looks like you did that interview with Palin sitting in your lap :)

Bachmann got b*tched slapped on FNC, for Rollins comment about Palin on MSNBC. Priceless.

Dr Evil on June 27, 2011 at 8:02 AM

I think I’ll be taking a pass on Wallace’s Sunday show. I think the question was childish.

BuckeyeSam on June 27, 2011 at 8:02 AM

Obvious? The only obvious thing here is that you are either in the tank for the left, or you’re a complete imbecile.

fossten on June 27, 2011 at 7:59 AM

Why either/or?

SKYFOX on June 27, 2011 at 8:22 AM

fossten on June 27, 2011 at 7:59 AM

I don’t know. I think it was a dumb question but it seems like he has done something similar in the past.

Cindy Munford on June 27, 2011 at 8:45 AM

I’d accept the apology if CW asked the Won, Biden and a host of other Ds the same thing.

Kissmygrits on June 27, 2011 at 9:04 AM

An interview is not Politics.

TendStl on June 27, 2011 at 7:18 AM

Faulty Premise == Faulty Conclusion

aka GIGO

MJBrutus on June 27, 2011 at 9:26 AM

This is why Chris Wallace asked Michelle Bachmann “Are you a Flake”

Sarah Palin’s chief of staff blasted Michele Bachmann strategist Ed Rollins today after Rollins criticized the former Alaska governor and suggested to POLITICO that his candidate would benefit by comparison to her

“Beltway political strategist Ed Rollins has a long, long track record of taking high profile jobs and promptly sticking his foot in his mouth,” said Sarah PAC chief of staff Michael Glassner in an emailed statement. “To no one’s surprise he has done it again, while also fueling a contrived narrative about the presidential race by the mainstream media. One would expect that his woodshed moment is coming and that a retraction will be issued soon.”

Rollins, who had long been a public skeptic of Palin, told a radio host that the former governor was “not serious.”

Bachmann will “be so much more substantive,” Rollins said. “People are going to say, ‘I gotta make a choice and go with the intelligent woman.” http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0611/Palin_chief_blasts_Rollins_expects_retraction.htmlwho’s every bit as attractive.’”

Dr Evil on June 27, 2011 at 9:47 AM

Oh My Chris Wallace, is awake, and keeping score. According to Ed Rollins if Palin is compared to Bachmann, the voters will chose the intelligent woman….It’s as if MSNBC thought that FNC was going to let that slight to their FNC contributor Sarah Palin, go unchallenged, not likely.

Michelle Bachmann is making herself the darling of CNN, and MSNBC – that’s not where the eyeballs are turned to, and she needs to be able to appear on FNC. They are not going to appreciate “Bachmann” taking shots through Ed Rollins, at their co worker(Gov Sarah Palin a Fox News Contributor) on rival networks. I don’t believe that Rollins had to this date apologized publicly to Sarah Palin, for his disparaging comment. (Sarah Palin isn’t a serious person) Which parroted an earlier sound bite of an unnamed Romney aid.

Chris Wallace to Michelle Bachmann “Are you a Flake” he swings and he scores LMAO.

Google Chris Wallace Interviews on Imus in the Morning, they discuss Chris Wallace interviewing Sarah Palin all the time. Imus thinks Wallace is smitten….he’s at least a loyal co worker.

Dr Evil on June 27, 2011 at 9:52 AM

Palin chief blasts Rollins, expects ‘retraction’

Pay back is a b*tch Mr Rollins/Ms Bachmann, better watch your six.

Dr Evil on June 27, 2011 at 9:55 AM

Bachmann doesn’t accept apology for ‘flake’ question.

This would be a good time to ask her, why she hasn’t apologized to Sarah Palin, for what her campaign manager said about FNC contributor Governor Sarah Palin. Ed Rollins frequent commenter on MSNBC “Sarah Palin is not a serious person”

Bachmann is in over her head. If she doesn’t want face time on the highest rated Cable News Network (FNC) let her linger and fade on CNN and MSNBC, she can play victim to all 12-14 of their viewers. Bachmann’s optics sux, and she responding to Wallace ,that means she took the bait, and she’s going to keep the “Are You A Flake” question in the news cycle longer. NEXT.

Dr Evil on June 27, 2011 at 10:28 AM

Wallace asking a question of a presidential candidate, asking her to defend caricatures from her enemies is pathetic. It is not a serious question for a serious conversation.

TendStl on June 27, 2011 at 7:05 AM

Bachmann is hardly a paragon of “seriousness”. She pushed Birtherism.

BocaJuniors on June 27, 2011 at 10:30 AM

Bachmann doesn’t accept apology for ‘flake’ question.

This would be a good time to ask her, why she hasn’t apologized to Sarah Palin, for what her campaign manager said about FNC contributor Governor Sarah Palin. Ed Rollins frequent commenter on MSNBC “Sarah Palin is not a serious person”

Dr Evil on June 27, 2011 at 10:28 AM

Bachmann and Palin so richly deserve each other. A self-pity-party, 24/7.

BocaJuniors on June 27, 2011 at 10:32 AM

Wallace asked the question directly and succinctly, as he often does. I found nothing offensive about it at all.

hawksruleva on June 27, 2011 at 10:39 AM

Its always the perception of fair people are left with.

Stewart lied straight to his face and insulted the intelligence of every viewer and Chris came back at him with little more than soft pedal.

Typically the left gets off noticeably easier.

Tough on Republicans? Get some tougher on Democrats.

Speakup on June 27, 2011 at 10:39 AM

Wallace asking a question of a presidential candidate, asking her to defend caricatures from her enemies is pathetic. It is not a serious question for a serious conversation.

TendStl on June 27, 2011 at 7:05 AM

Why not? Wallace gave her an opportunity to respond to those negative caricatures. At the end of the day, voters will choose between different portrayals of the candidates. If one of those portrayals is of a gaffe-prone reactionary, it’s likely to be a major factor in the candidate’s defeat.

hawksruleva on June 27, 2011 at 10:41 AM

Why not? Wallace gave her an opportunity to respond to those negative caricatures. At the end of the day, voters will choose between different portrayals of the candidates. If one of those portrayals is of a gaffe-prone reactionary, it’s likely to be a major factor in the candidate’s defeat.

hawksruleva on June 27, 2011 at 10:41 AM

She took Wallace’s bait she accordingly is making the headlines at the blogs DODGING Whether she will accept Wallace’s apology. So we get to listen to Bachmann pose as a victim of a valid question, and try and explain ad-nauseoum why she isn’t a flake, and REALLY A SERIOUS PERSON. Well played Mr Wallace, Well played.

Now she can count on her name Bachmann & Flake to be top Twitter and Google hits count. The folks in the House just can’t figure out how this internet thingy works LOL!

Dr Evil on June 27, 2011 at 10:50 AM

While I don’t blame Bachmann for demanding an apology I DO blame her for the way she has REFUSED to accept that apology.

After meeting her I was left with the clear impression that she was a bit arrogant. Now I can clearly see that she has no class.

Strike two! ;o)

DannoJyd on June 27, 2011 at 10:57 AM

Michelle Bachmann: I am not a Flake, I am a serious person LMAO.

One wonders’ if Son consulted Dad about how to blow up Michelle Bachmann or if it’s just in his DNA.

Dr Evil on June 27, 2011 at 11:00 AM

Wallace stepped on his you know what and the halfhearted apology was further denigrated by the OBAMA-LIKE chuckle at the end of the clip! He did not take this seriously and that is very telling.

Ed was a bit too generous with the Wallace apology, by saying he met the criticism head on. The tone of the Wallace response was not genuine!

tomshup on June 27, 2011 at 11:01 AM

This may do more to bolster Michele than first realized.

Black Adam on June 27, 2011 at 11:02 AM

After meeting her I was left with the clear impression that she was a bit arrogant. Now I can clearly see that she has no class.

I thought that she showed a lot of class responding to that unfair question during the interview, saying with lots of poise that she was a “serious person”.

I don’t believe that Michele Bachmann is the strongest GOP candidate for President, not because she’s “flaky”, but because it is extremely difficult for a three-term House member (one of 435) who doesn’t have much influence or seniority even in the House, to leap to the Presidency without an intermediate job in the Senate, as a Governor, or as a Cabinet secretary.

But having to endure name-calling even from Fox News (this could be expected from MSNBC or the alphabet soup) will probably make Bachmann even stronger later on, and she might end up as strong VP material if someone else wins the GOP nomination.

Next question: Ms. Bachmann, when did you stop beating your foster children?

Steve Z on June 27, 2011 at 11:23 AM

Think that’s a joke, Steve Z. This is just beginning folks; count on the press digging into everything they can about her foster kids. And they’ll do everything they can to get just one of them to pull a ‘Levi’ on her.

michaelo on June 27, 2011 at 11:33 AM

But having to endure name-calling even from Fox News (this could be expected from MSNBC or the alphabet soup) will probably make Bachmann even stronger later on, and she might end up as strong VP material if someone else wins the GOP nomination.Steve Z on June 27, 2011 at 11:23 AM

Bachmann has become the Liberal Media’s darling on both CNN and MSNBC. So that’ doesn’t wash. Why would they promote Bachmann over others? The Liberal Media always likes to promote who they think is the weakest candidate to run against their candidate “Obama”.

The highlighted above in your comment, is already the rumor that she is Romney’s stalking horse, and that’s hardly a compliment to Bachmann. It means that her campaign is transparent to those who are watching the moves she is making. Those folks are not impressed.

Dr Evil on June 27, 2011 at 11:34 AM

Breaking: “Anonymous sources report that Wallace choked Bachmann with his hands around her neck at the conclusion of the interview.”

Roy Rogers on June 27, 2011 at 11:38 AM

Breaking: “Anonymous sources report that Wallace choked Bachmann with his hands around her neck at the conclusion of the interview.”

Roy Rogers on June 27, 2011 at 11:38 AM

GRIN

Dr Evil on June 27, 2011 at 11:41 AM

Ed was a bit too generous with the Wallace apology, by saying he met the criticism head on. The tone of the Wallace response was not genuine!

tomshup on June 27, 2011 at 11:01 AM

So the heck what? This is politics. A candidate is going to be attacked by everybody, particularly if the candidate appears to have a chance in hell of knocking off Teh Won. She seems petulant for not accepting the apology regardless of the “tone”. Plus she hired Ed Rollins, so…yeah.

alwaysfiredup on June 27, 2011 at 11:49 AM

No liberal can ever say that journalists aren’t biased with questions like this and Joe Biden coming up with some new comic relief on a weekly basis….

jeffn21 on June 27, 2011 at 11:50 AM

Oh, please. Noticing that a male television interviewer asked a female candidate a question he has never, ever asked a male politician, a question that used a pejorative aimed primarily at women — “flake” — is hardly jumping headlong into the lefty lexicon.

No, you aren’t jumping headlong anymore, “Rational Thought” — you’re standing and grinning in a wading pool of lefty drive-by smear tactics. You are thumping that GENDER CARD hard because a journalist — a fair and good journalist — came out and asked whether or not Bachmann was goofy for saying some rather goofy and very, very unpresidential things in the past. She is goofy — and there is nothing “sexist” calling Bachmann goofy. Because she is… she’s goofy.

And the Wallace flap aside, I happen to enjoy the Alinskyite sport of asking the left to live up to its own rules. Throwing the race card, the gender card, and every other grievance card right back at them every time the mask slips and they accidentally show who they really are is quite effective in neutering the card the next time they play it.

No, you enjoy thinking and acting like a lefty because it’s cheap and easy. Wallace did nothing wrong and you shamed him like a lefty and turned the innoccous word “flake” into a “sexist” epithet against women. Good job.

Using their tactic to silence/shame someone does not “neuter” its power — it increases its power because you, the conservative, lend legitimacy to using it. You acknowledge the existence of sexism by calling a fair-minded journalist a sexist because he used the word “flake” to describe a goofy know-nothing like Michelle Bachmann who happens to be a woman.

You are saying that to question a woman’s intelligence and ability to lead the nation — based on past goofy statements — is a question that can not be asked and will be met with swift punishment. Hey, that’s what the left does! Congratulations — you’re a lefty. Oh, and Bachmann does not have a snowball’s chance in Hell.

Punchenko on June 26, 2011 at 11:46 PM

Hmmm. Lots of anger here. Lots of psychological projection. A largely incoherent tantrum. I don’t want to be guilty of profiling and all, but are you a liberal…from Wisconsin?

Rational Thought on June 27, 2011 at 11:57 AM

The thing is, Michelle Bachmann comes across as a genuinely nice person. Thus, sarcasm and other sniping at her — the original insult, “are you a flake” — just comes across to most people as meanness by whoever says it (Wallace, anyone else).

Whatever the arguments may be about Bachmann as to the issues, the reason she’s not someone to be insulted by media is that she will always appear rightfully above that sort of sliming.

Comparing her with, say, Obama, really puts a shine on what I’m saying here. Obama with his sarcastic jiving to demean and laughingly insult people and issues, then there’s Michelle Bachmann, a serious, poised and credible woman…and Obama and those like him just look like the creeps they are when they try this with or on her.

Lourdes on June 27, 2011 at 12:14 PM

God forbid journalists ask good questions.

mythicknight on June 26, 2011 at 6:05 PM

The sole reason I really miss Tim Russert. He raised the bar for interviews and sadly since his death it has been lowered forever.

sherry on June 26, 2011 at 6:06 PM

I agree, Tim Russert despite his Liberal politics, always came across as a reasonable person, someone with an active conscience, a good sense of decency about himself and others. I, too, think after his passing on that the general field of interview journalism has really slid.

Gotta’ put this in, though and that is that I blame the ever sarcastic Jon Stewart and David Letterman: the favorites of many a younger viewer who watch that and take that as information. It’s as if no one has any worth any longer, everything’s sarcasm, ridicule posing as humor (which it isn’t).

Lourdes on June 27, 2011 at 12:18 PM

Lourdes on June 27, 2011 at 12:14 PM

Or Bachmann is in over her head, and got her a$$ handed to her by an experienced interviewer…who knows all the media tricks.

Dr Evil on June 27, 2011 at 12:23 PM

There was a time when punk azz biotches like Wallace would get called out and shot for being less than gentlemanly.

That half a man is a rhymes with runt.

esnap on June 27, 2011 at 12:25 PM

If Wallace would have asked “Why are you so against government subsidies when you yourself continue to take farm subsidies for the family farm you own?” THAT is a serious, back you into a corner question.

TendStl on June 27, 2011 at 7:18 AM

Bob Sheiffer asked her that on Face the Nation. She said “everything needs to be on the table”, then immediately deflected to talking about government limo service. I was disappointed.

odat on June 27, 2011 at 12:26 PM

esnap on June 27, 2011 at 12:25 PM

The last was uncalledfor.

alwaysfiredup on June 27, 2011 at 12:27 PM

Its always the perception of fair people are left with.

Stewart lied straight to his face and insulted the intelligence of every viewer and Chris came back at him with little more than soft pedal.

Typically the left gets off noticeably easier.

Tough on Republicans? Get some tougher on Democrats.

Speakup on June 27, 2011 at 10:39 AM

*ANYone* who has a predominantly “youth” audience will ALWAYS get the soft pedal from others in media/entertainment.

Jon Stewart’s viewers are predominantly “youth” — most people past a certain age of responsibility and awareness can’t tolerate the guy but his sarcasm and snarking is what many a youth today is drawn in by.

The rest of media/entertainment goes light on the youth appeal and youth audiences. In reality, I think most of us do.

But in media, no one wants to rock the youth market or turn off “youth viewers” because — particularly in entertainment — the youth market spends the most time and money in and on media.

Ask why there are so many fey-vampire-slaughter-bloodbath-explosion-laden films…it’s because that’s consumed eagerly by the youth market.

People grow up, that stuff stops being appealing but for, especially, the MALE youth, that gory stuff sells.

So media people go soft on people like Stewart whose audience is predominantly if not expressly the youth market, it’s because they don’t want retaliation from that market.

Lourdes on June 27, 2011 at 12:27 PM

“What do you read, to stay informed up there in Alaska?” Fair question.

“Are you a flake?” Completely unfair and he should (and did) publicly apologize.

alwaysfiredup on June 27, 2011 at 12:29 PM

Lourdes on June 27, 2011 at 12:14 PM

Or Bachmann is in over her head, and got her a$$ handed to her by an experienced interviewer…who knows all the media tricks.

Dr Evil on June 27, 2011 at 12:23 PM

Anything’s possible but on the other hand, I think Bachmann is generally genuine in her “I’m a serious person” personna.

Not all of us are interested in, nor schooled in, slugging it out in the mud, so to speak. All that pugalism stuff, not everyone cares to learn about it, as to use of words.

Wallace’s remark was completely uncalled for, weird and gratuitous. Obviously, he now understands that.

Lourdes on June 27, 2011 at 12:31 PM

Wallace’s questions are written by Ed Shultz.

crash72 on June 27, 2011 at 12:32 PM

She pushed Birtherism.
BocaJuniors on June 27, 2011 at 10:30 AM

…and God bless her for that.

FireBlogger on June 27, 2011 at 12:34 PM

TendStl on June 27, 2011 at 7:05 AM

Bachmann is hardly a paragon of “seriousness”. She pushed Birtherism.

BocaJuniors on June 27, 2011 at 10:30 AM

And the “anti-Birthers” pushed the ridiculous excuse that what Obama “published” WAS his “birth certificate,” since shot all to blazes as yet another bizarre and fraudulent thing.

We still haven’t heard one tad more about who “Barack Obama” is, and while I recognize that the questions about that are not politically expedient to the GOP (if anything, a liability as to subject in the political range of things), the questions are valid and remain unaddressed, unanswered.

More people than Bachmann raised the issue, by the way. I seem to remember Palin saying it was an understandable or reasonable thing to question, err, somethin’ like that.

It’s just POLITICALLY preferable to elect a better President than Obama in November 2012 so we should focus on THAT — I agree with that — but it’s wrong, quite wrong, to proliferate the foolish ridicule of people who ask these questions and then to, worse, ridicule them when Obama comes up with his dopey fake documents once again.

Lourdes on June 27, 2011 at 12:37 PM

Of all the people Chris Wallace has interviewed, this is the first person that he thought was a flake?

faraway on June 27, 2011 at 12:37 PM

She pushed Birtherism.
BocaJuniors on June 27, 2011 at 10:30 AM

…and God bless her for that.

FireBlogger on June 27, 2011 at 12:34 PM

DITTO.

Lourdes on June 27, 2011 at 12:38 PM

Rut-roh…she’s/he’s back, Shaggy

odat on June 27, 2011 at 12:40 PM

The outcry regarding Wallace’s question shows that Bachmann has benefitted by following in the wake of Palin and H. Clinton.

“Once is an accident, twice is coincidence, three times is enemy action.”

Fallon on June 27, 2011 at 12:47 PM

Wallace once again shows his true colors.

FNS has gone straight down-hill since the days of Tony Snow.

This is the second straight week where FNS discredited itself:

1. Last week it had a comedian on as a guest…on a supposedly serious news show.

2. This week Wallace proved that he is just another left-wing hack: asking rude and biased questions he NEVER would have asked a Liberal.

In addition, he has an extremely annoying habit of bringing on a substantial guest, asking him a serious question, and then interrupting him constantly and trying to substitute Wallace’s narrative-of-the-day for the guest’s answer. This is NOT journalism: this is propaganda.

landlines on June 27, 2011 at 12:47 PM

Chris, whatever possessed you?

Freaking MSM can’t even apply common sense before they let their mouths run.

disa on June 27, 2011 at 12:48 PM

Not all of us are interested in, nor schooled in, slugging it out in the mud, so to speak. All that pugalism stuff, not everyone cares to learn about it, as to use of words.

Lourdes on June 27, 2011 at 12:31 PM

Bachmann better get schooled, she’s running for President of the United States, not the chairperson of her local PTA. The only politician that the media gives a free ride to is Obama. If Bachmann thinks otherwise she is naive.

Dr Evil on June 27, 2011 at 12:49 PM

What a bunch of whiny babies.

Who said you have to be a liberal to be politically correct?

If this is all it takes to shake her, she can go back home.

Moesart on June 27, 2011 at 12:49 PM

Of all the people Chris Wallace has interviewed, this is the first person that he thought was a flake?

faraway on June 27, 2011 at 12:37 PM

This is the person that’s been described as a Flake by her detractors. Wallace wanted to know how she was going to counter that description. Her answer should have been- I reject it. 3 words and she would have come out on top in that interview.

Dr Evil on June 27, 2011 at 12:52 PM

Lourdes on June 27, 2011 at 12:31 PM

Bachmann better get schooled, she’s running for President of the United States, not the chairperson of her local PTA. The only politician that the media gives a free ride to is Obama. If Bachmann thinks otherwise she is naive.

Dr Evil on June 27, 2011 at 12:49 PM

She doesn’t appear to me to be a weak or incapable person. She just doesn’t engage on the insults, which is to her credit.

I’m still learning who she is like the rest of us, though, but so far, she seems to be quite the respectable woman.

Poise isn’t synonymous with weak.

Lourdes on June 27, 2011 at 12:54 PM

Poise isn’t synonymous with weak.

Lourdes on June 27, 2011 at 12:54 PM

American Politics is a Blood Sport James Carville,

She’s not running for Miss Popularity. Bachmann is running for the highest seat in the land. She has to show she has the chops, to handle any situation or questions about her political heft. Chris Wallace isn’t interviewing Beauty Queen Contestants.

Dr Evil on June 27, 2011 at 1:01 PM

She lost the primary this weekend.

It wasn’t the truth or falsehood of the “flake” charge. It was that she demonstrated her total inability to handle the media – even so-called “friendly” media — with any grace or aplomb, and that she has additionally proved herself humorless in the aftermath. People without these skills do not wear well.

rrpjr on June 27, 2011 at 1:09 PM

Her answer should have been- I reject it. 3 words and she would have come out on top in that interview.

Dr Evil on June 27, 2011 at 12:52 PM

Actually, this isn’t about Bachmann for me. She handled the question well.

Wallace carried the left’s meme to the extreme. The last election proved that we must fight these memes – or lose.

faraway on June 27, 2011 at 1:09 PM

Wallace carried the left’s meme to the extreme. The last election proved that we must fight these memes – or lose.

faraway on June 27, 2011 at 1:09 PM

Edmund Burke was right.

Roy Rogers on June 27, 2011 at 1:11 PM

Hearing a lot of ‘Bachmann tones it down’ talk this morning about recent press appearances and
the Waterloo un-event. In other words–moving to the center, rhetorically, trying to sooth the electorate. Trying not to make enemies. Very Hunstmanesque. Very Romney VPish. And very
UnPalin. We’re not fools. GO SARAH.

idesign on June 27, 2011 at 1:13 PM

WHO, specifically, called Bachmann a flake? Anyone serious or just left-wing flamethrowers? I want NAMES of serious people (by serious, I mean, worthy of quoting) that really called Bachmann a flake.

because if tehre are none, then this IS the same thing as asking “When was the last time you beat your foster kids”

JustTruth101 on June 27, 2011 at 1:14 PM

P.S. If no one serious has called Bachmann a flake, then it Chris Wallace is the only one.

JustTruth101 on June 27, 2011 at 1:15 PM

Hey Chris Wallace…..

……will SOMEONE, ANYONE in your highly righteous Media dare to ask Obama about HIS TSA feeling the 95 year old Granny?

I’m guessing no.

This is why we hold you in such low esteem.

PappyD61 on June 27, 2011 at 1:18 PM

My bet is that MB will “accept” the apology in a day or two. I suspect she was genuinely irked by his reinforcing the leftist smear, and wanted to drive her point home to Chris.

Also, it may have helped if Chris made his apology first in private to her, then to the public.

Still, I don’t think Chris intended to do the damage that was done. He made a very decent apology and I think he probably understands and regrets his mistake.

petefrt on June 27, 2011 at 1:22 PM

JustTruth101 on June 27, 2011 at 1:15 PM

Many people have called her a flake. Try Google, limiting the search to before the CW interview. No one I’d feel good about linking to, certainly, but it is out there.

alwaysfiredup on June 27, 2011 at 1:23 PM

Hearing a lot of ‘Bachmann tones it down’ talk this morning about recent press appearances and
the Waterloo un-event. In other words–moving to the center, rhetorically, trying to sooth the electorate. Trying not to make enemies.

idesign on June 27, 2011 at 1:13 PM

She’s following the Rollins playbook. She’s not a conservative hero. She just wants to be elected and will say or do whatever it takes.

alwaysfiredup on June 27, 2011 at 1:24 PM

Hey Chris Wallace…..

……will SOMEONE, ANYONE in your highly righteous Media dare to ask Obama about HIS TSA feeling the 95 year old Granny?

I’m guessing no.

This is why we hold you in such low esteem.

PappyD61 on June 27, 2011 at 1:18 PM

I’d like someone to ask Obama about the scars on his head…

Fallon on June 27, 2011 at 1:37 PM

I Liked Chris Wallace even with his dopey Soup ads inserted in every interview he ever did. Guess he needs the money and probably likes soup.

I trusted him a as a reliable objective news guy with lots of smarts. Now i see that the example of his smarts is a very quick no-nonsense apology. Kudos to him.

The problem is he is no longer trusted as an objective news guy. He like all media types have their own agenda. We see it exemplified all the time. Hanety has his, O’Reily his. Shep tries to hid his Lib Views and Chris Wallace no longer can hide his Agenda. I’m not saying Wallace is a Lib, but he has a Dog in The GOP Primary and it is not Michelle Bachman.

Fox should keep him off of Bret Bair’s show and consider a replacement for Fox News Sunday. He would land on his feet and be able to stretch his wings on CNN where the audience would be more in tuned to his slant.

SayNo2-O on June 27, 2011 at 1:41 PM

WHO, specifically, called Bachmann a flake? Anyone serious or just left-wing flamethrowers? I want NAMES of serious people (by serious, I mean, worthy of quoting) that really called Bachmann a flake.

JustTruth101 on June 27, 2011 at 1:14 PM

JustTruth101 on June 27, 2011 at 1:15 PM
Many people have called her a flake. Try Google, limiting the search to before the CW interview. No one I’d feel good about linking to, certainly, but it is out there.

alwaysfiredup on June 27, 2011 at 1:23 PM

I searched google news, which allows limiting by date. The wrd flake is used when comparing Bachmann to Palin, and accuses Palin of being a flake, but I can’t find a serious journalist, or even a libtard for that matter, calling Bachmann a flake.

Does anyone have the name of anyone seriously calling Bachmann a flake? Because IF NO ONE HAS, then Chris Wallace is the first serious journalist to do so.

JustTruth101 on June 27, 2011 at 1:58 PM

Also, it may have helped if Chris made his apology first in private to her, then to the public.

Still, I don’t think Chris intended to do the damage that was done. He made a very decent apology and I think he probably understands and regrets his mistake.

petefrt on June 27, 2011 at 1:22 PM

What damage did Wallace do? Bachmann may do some damage to herself over this, but I don’t see how Wallace damaged her. If anything, she benefits by 1)claiming the mantle of victimhood at the hands of the hostile media, and 2)displaying the power of her supporters, who flooded Wallace’s phone and mailbox in outrage.

I like Bachmann, but her refusal to accept an apology seems to me a bit harsh. What happened to forgiveness? Why does she need to harbor ill will towards Wallace? If she’s keeping the story alive to score points, that’s not really what I’m looking for in a politician.

hawksruleva on June 27, 2011 at 2:16 PM

OK Chris and I’m sorry I called you a schmuck!

MCGIRV on June 27, 2011 at 2:51 PM

hawksruleva on June 27, 2011 at 2:16 PM

Yes, she would have been seen as more gracious if she had prefaced her comments by accepting his apology, and then said the same that she actually said.

By asking the question the way he did, he implied he thought calling her a “flake” was a serious charge. He carried the leftist meme, rather than investigating it. Because he’s the Sunday anchor for FNC, the left will be running this clip for the rest of her campaign.

Tim Russert could have asked the same question without supporting the meme.

But I reiterate, I have come to trust and respect Chris like I trust and respect Greta, and I imagine he’s pretty disgusted with himself about now.

petefrt on June 27, 2011 at 2:52 PM

If Michelle Bachmann can’t take a question, about criticism of her by the folks at FNC, who would be considered to be friendly to conservatives, she is way too thin skinned. She does come off as stiff and scripted.

Dr Evil on June 27, 2011 at 3:33 PM

mentioned twice on this string so it is important to clarify once again:
Oil companies do NOT, repeat do NOT receive government subsidies. Oil companies receive the very same ability to deduct depreciation, amortization and depletion expense from taxes that ALL US businesses have. That is NOT a subsidy. Why don’t the Conservatives begin to correct this mistaken concept every time the subject comes up. They just sit there. OIL doesn’t receive subsidies.

highninside on June 27, 2011 at 3:52 PM

…it’s wrong, quite wrong, to proliferate the foolish ridicule of people who ask these questions and then to, worse, ridicule them when Obama comes up with his dopey fake documents once again.

Lourdes on June 27, 2011 at 12:37 PM

Like I was saying about being serious…

BocaJuniors on June 27, 2011 at 4:42 PM

By asking the question the way he did, he implied he thought calling her a “flake” was a serious charge. He carried the leftist meme, rather than investigating it. Because he’s the Sunday anchor for FNC, the left will be running this clip for the rest of her campaign.

petefrt on June 27, 2011 at 2:52 PM

I agree he could’ve asked it better, and it’ll probably be around for a while. And I think he realized his foot was headed up to his mouth even as he was saying it.

I’m worried the lesson for Wallace and people following this hubub is – if you screw up once, the GOP will ostracize you. Is that what we want to teach folks about conservatism? He made a mistake, he apologized. Bachmann had a couple opportunities to make the whole thing disappear, but by taking offense, then by not accepting the apology, she’s keeping the story alive.

Is she working on the “any press is good press” theory?

hawksruleva on June 27, 2011 at 5:06 PM

Why would he apologize? He did what he wanted to and that was to embarrasses some one on the right. It is obvious the fox has gotten a scare from media matters and is tilting left. at first it was Vansustern and Geralda, then they added Shepard Smith. O’Rielly has always leaned left but tries to hold the middle ground but you can see the strain it causes him. I was looking for a fair and balanced channel and, of course, we now know it is fair and balanced; between Barney Frank and Stalin. I used to love it when I got home from church and watched Chris’ show that I had taped, I wont be doing that again.

pwb on June 27, 2011 at 6:18 PM

Mark Levin ripping Wallace a good one.

Sandybourne on June 27, 2011 at 6:29 PM

She accepted the apology when he made a personal call this evening. Waiting to hear whither Rollins and Palin.

AH_C on June 27, 2011 at 9:40 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3