Barack Obama On Fox News Sunday: Watch Video

The Huffington Post   |   April 27, 2008 11:49 AM


Show your support.
Buzz this article up.

Fox News Sunday waited (by their own count) 772 days to interview Sen. Barack Obama -- and surprised no one by spending almost the entire first segment on questions about Rev. Jeremiah Wright, flag pins, and 60s-era radical Bill Ayers. Here's a sampling of the questioning:

That said, as TPM's Greg Sargent noted, Obama "didn't take on Fox at all in any meaningful sense" despite claims to the contrary:

On Friday, a senior Obama adviser responded to criticism of his decision to go on Fox with a bunch of tough talk, saying that Obama knew full well that Fox has been at the forefront of spreading "the most specious of rumors" (i.e., lies) about Obama and vowing that he would "take Fox on."


Well, it didn't happen. Obama definitely pushed back hard on some of Chris Wallace's questions, but at no point did he draw attention to Fox's spreading of lies about him or critique the network in a general sense.

Obama had a perfect opening to do this, too. Wallace pressed him repeatedly about Jeremiah Wright and the bogus "flag pin" nonsense -- a perfect set-up for Obama to point out that Fox had obsessed about both these issues to an obscene degree and that Fox had been at the forefront of spreading the Obama-is-a-Muslim lies.

Sargent has more here.

More complete video of the interview is below. First, Obama on losing in Pennsylvania and issues of race in the election:

On issues where he has "bucked the Democratic Party line":

On foreign policy and how the Democratic race will end:

HuffPost's Jason Linkins wrote up play-by-play of the full interview as part of his Sunday morning liveblog.

Well, the Obama Watch is over. Would have been a lot more effective, Fox, if 24 was actually on the air, and not scuttled for reasons pertaining to the writer's strike. Not that I mind: all the various rumors of this year's series - featuring the return of long-dead characters and a storyline where Kiefer Sutherland and Janeane Garofalo waterboarded global warming - made it sound like the show needed a deep rethink.

Wallace apparently trooped up to Indiana to meet with Obama. The two do, in fact, seem perfectly friendly over the whole Obama Watch thing. But they get right to it, with Wallace asking Obama why it is that white people in Pennsylvania hate him so damn much. Obama notes that Clinton was well-regarded in Pennsylvania, and staked out a twenty point lead. He closed the gap, and post-PA polls indicate he'd do just fine in the general, with "only a couple of points" whwre HRC outperforms him. Obama won the same voters in Wisconsin, Virginia, and Iowa. So chill, Chris.

Chris says, "Barry, yer too professorial!" What about Joe Lunchpail? What about Clinton's toughness. Obama says that's the chit-chat of the "anguished columns" that sprout up after a primary is over. Shrewdly, he includes his own post-Iowa success among the hyperbole, modestly downplaying his own post-Iowa hype while reminding viewers of it.

"It's not like I've only been winning in states that have black voters or Chablis drinkin' limousine liberals." People still drink Chablis? Cause you can bet Shiraz that I don't touch the stuff. Also: Colorado. Obama won those meat-packing snow bunnies. But, Obama says, he has to work harder, knock on more doors, meet more people.

What about the existence of racism? Won't that make it hard to get elected? Obama won't touch that directly - he says polls show that he can beat McCain. He believes the race isn't a factor. "If I lose it won't be because of race, it will be because of mistakes I made on the campaign trail..."

What about Bill Clinton? Is he making a deliberate effort to play the race card? Obama says he takes the President at his word. To which Wallace retorts, "Which one?" Reminder: the tone and tenor of this interview could all hinge completely on Wallace's antipathy for President Clinton. But Obama says that Clinton is just being a spouse, the Democratic party will come together in August yadda yadda blah dee blah.

Wallace brings up Reverend Wright, who went on Bill Moyers show over the weekend to make some public comments about the whole kerfuffle. "Do you think Wright is just a victim here," Walllace asks Obama. "No...people were legitimately offended. The fact that he is my former pastor makes it a legitimate political issue," Obama says. He adds that "I think it's also true" that he was "simplified and caricatured." Obama denounces the specific comments again, but adds, "I go to church not to worship a pastor but to worship God" and the church does nice things for poor people, and Wright isn't all bad.

Did Obama talk to Wright about his recent public appearances? He says that they've talked about how Obama regrets so many churchgoers getting caught in the middle of things. He doesn't mind Wright defending himself.

What about other controversial statements, like the ones Obama eluded to in the speech? Ahh! Now the games afoot! Obama first says that Wright can speak about the black community in very blunt terms. Wallace is all: "You think I care about the black community? What mean things did he say about America and the white people what founded it?" Obama says that Wright often catalogued the bad of America without "lifting up the good." Did Obama ever confront Wright? Smack him in the mouth? Say, "Well, I declare, Mr Preacherman, your sermon gave me the vapuhs!" Obama says he was not up on some pollitical soapbox, and anyway, it's a generational thing. Then Obama throws MLK under the bus, reminding everyone that his sermon at Riverside Church is filled with jarring comments.

Wallace says that all these flag pin questions are only trying to help America get to know you. So Obama rattles off a bunch of really nice things he's done. He says that the Reverend Wright issue is "legitimate" but that the reporting wasn't always so. He says he'll wear flag pins sometimes and other times not but he'll always love the country, and his speech at the Democratic Convention was totes patriotic.

But what about William Ayers and Tom Coburn? Was he drawing a moral equivalency? No, Obama says, he was just trying to suggest this crazy idea...so radical really...I'm not sure that I with my high-toned degree in English can do it justice, but here's an attempt:

IT IS POSSIBLE TO 'KNOW' SOMEONE - AND EVEN BE 'FRIENDLY' WITH SOMEONE - WITHOUT AGREEING WITH THAT PERSON ON EVERYTHING.

ZOMG, what a deep thought THAT WAS. My brain hurts so much! Better calm it down with some Chablis or something!

Wallace returns to ask Obama about how he plans to unite America by planting post-racial arugula. Are there areas where Republicans may have better ideas? Obama says that the Republican party's view on corporate regulation isn't bad and that teacher merit pay is vital. But Wallace aint having it. Why wasn't he part of the Gang of 14? What about partial birth abortion. Do you want GOP support or surrender? Obama says he's been attacked by the left and is seen as too accomodating to Republicans by many observers. And anway, he's friends with Tom Coburn!

"I do not think the Democrats have a monopoly on wisdom," Obama says, offending roughly two-thirds of the liberal blogosphere.

A question about how Obama will fund his own programs leads Obama to issue a paragraph or two attacking McCain. This is the first part of the interview where Obama's seemed actually sure of himself, unbound. I think he's recognizing that he's out of the Wright/Ayers/flag lapel pin zone.

On to foreign policy questions. Obama will vote to confirm Petraeus - a mistake, in my mind, if Petraeus will not agree to abide by the mission set by a future Commander-in-Chief. Obama says as much - going far enough to say that he'd listen to Petraeus, but either doesn't know that Petraeus has hedged on the issue or he doesn't care. I think it's the central question to Petraeus' confirmation.

Why is he ducking a debate in North Carolina? He's had a ton of debates! And he could say something dumb during one. Obama will not name a VP. What happens if the superdelegates overturn the pledged delegate count, will the young people freak out? Obama says the frustration will not be felt just by the young.

What has Obama learned? He says he has the right temperament to be President, that he errs when he talks too much, and that he misses his family.

And that's that. I think we can all agree that Wallace went really, really, easy on Obama. So much so that Obama will likely regret that the interview wasn't seen by anybody who might vote for him. Maybe Wallace is reserving his bite for a second interview.

Wallace says though, that the interview proved that Obama really "wanted to reach out to people who watch Fox." Hume says he was engaging and genial and nice, and possible to be loved by white people. Hume says he skated by on some things - so suck it, Wallace!

I guess that the panel is basically going to do a mixed bag of defending Obama because they hate Clinton and pretending that Obama's never won the votes of white working-class voters.

Did Wallace just call Karl Rove a "noted Obama supporter?" Rove is an ADVISOR TO THE MCCAIN CAMPAIGN!

Kristol criticizes Obama for not being substantive enough. Let's pause to note the irony.

What about Hillary, after Pennsylvania. Hume says she's behind and no one expects her to win. She gets points "on sheer doggedness," though.

Juan Williams goes out there, suggesting that Reverend Wright might be trying to sabotage Obama's chances to prove that America is as bad as he's said it was. He and Bill Clinton are the saboteurs of the paranoid media! Hume actually defends Wright.

Kristol is criticizing sexism now. Take a day or two, and note the irony.


Comments
1180
Pending Comments
0

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

Hint sample
View Comments:
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next › Last » (10 pages total)

BARACK OBAMA ONLY NEEDS 295 DELEGATES TO WIN THE NOMINATION!

The voters in North Carolina and Indiana, with a win for Obama in their primary's, can put this marathon Democratic primary to an end by voting for Barack Obama.

Barack has 1,730 delegates as of today. He needs 2,025 to win the nomination. I want every Democrat and Independant in Indiana and North Carolina to get to the polls and vote for Barack Obama. Don't let the media spin and the right wing conservative media conglomorates win this election.

Barack Obama is by far the strongest candidate against McCain. Go to www.pollster.com (type it in if the link does not work) and check out the state by state polls. Barack Obama is leading McCain in Michigan, Wisconsin, Iowa, Oregon, Minnesota, and even Colorado. Hillary is losing to McCain in Michigan, Oregon, Wisconsin, Iowa, and Colorado and she is tied with McCain in Minnesota. If Hillary can't win Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota and Oregon in the general election, then she can't beat McCain.

VOTE FOR BARACK OBAMA IN NORTH CAROLINA AND INDIANA, AND LETS GET A DEMOCRAT WIN IN NOVEMBER!

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 05:52 PM on 04/30/2008

You better check your figures again, because the last poll I saw for the national election had Hillary leading McCain by 9%'s points while Obama was only 2%'s points ahead, I don't care if you go state by state your wrong that was at 1am this morning the last poll I saw.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 11:28 PM on 04/30/2008

Has anyone not clued in to the fact that Obama doesn't pledge alliegence to the flag? Also are you all clueless to the fact that he doesn't wear a flag pin like the other 2 candidates. Call me crazy but why would someone want to be the leader of a country and not pledge alliegence to its flag?? Hypocritical perhaps? It's also a known fact that he signed on with a very radical black group. Not to mention the extremely racists comments from his pastor. As an African American I am appalled!!

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 08:58 PM on 04/30/2008

Have you ever done anything for your country, boy?

Or do you just go around wearing your flag pin, (made in china ), confuse shopping with patriotism, and get your ideas from right wing radio instead of books?

You see, I can't help but wonder about people like you. The face in the crowd in old photos, screaming with delight during the lynchings, the little sniv in the band of thugs who gang up on the kid in the playground.

I wonder whether you folks are all really internal enemies of this nation and should be subject to some sort of official monitoring?

What do you think, boy?

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 09:07 PM on 04/30/2008

The right wing conservative fear mongering media corporate loving morons are not going to win this election. People have finally realized what a bunch of corrupt MORONS the Republican's are. 'War good" said the racist, fear mongering, idiot Republican, "peace bad." Republicans are like cavemen in their thinking. The Republicans are uneducated idiots. Our conservative right wing media propaganda machine on the major news channels proves that every day. The Republicans are the party of fascism. They deprive people of their individual freedoms with their conservative agenda of hate and greed.

VOTE FOR BARACK OBAMA AND LETS GET A DEMOCRAT WIN IN NOVEMBER!

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 09:37 PM on 04/30/2008

In the National poll I saw yesterday Hillary is 7% points ahead of McCain, and Obama is only 2%points ahead better be careful who you back.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 10:36 AM on 05/01/2008

I hope the Republicans don't win this election but clearly Barack Obama should not. He is hypocritical and should not be president if he doesn't pledge alliegiance to our flag. Shame, shame, shame. There are many democratic African Americans who are appalled. I'm very liberal and I believe that if a candidate doesn't believe in a country's flag then they need to step aside and let a candidate that does believe in it become president. There are many people that are perpetuating the race issue.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 07:14 AM on 05/01/2008

First slick, wasn't born in Africa - it was Ft. Drum(2 siblings @ Ft. Dix - 1 Ravenna OH), so most definitely American. I don't wear flag pins of the US flag - because they were made in CHINA. Being a former Marine, don't feel the need to put my hand to my heart for a country I volunteered to die for. And right now, don't have enough respect for it to deserve anything but the middle finger. I've yet to hear any brothers/sisters say they are appalled by anything except the relooping of Obamas "associations" - with very little comment on the relationships of the other two candidates. If you are very liberal in anything, it is the shame you bring on yourself by your own perpetuation of meaningless bullshit. Shame, shame slugno!

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 12:18 PM on 05/01/2008

"Hood Rat"...cute...name says it all

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 07:52 PM on 05/01/2008

I think Chris wallace was fair, and I think Obama answered every question very truthfully. I don't think that that is this countries problem though. I think we need to limit the terms of Congress, and Senate to 2 6 year terms, not as many as they want. No matter how who we elect as President, they are only as good as the congressperson or senator. some of them have been in for 30 or 40 years, we need new blood by limiting how long they can serve. Take for example Robert Byrd he's 90 been in the senate since he was 38 years old. He has done a lot of good for our state of west Virginia, but he is the biggest pork barrel spender in the senate. We are now grooming our present Govenor to take his place at the end of this term in 2012, and he will be just as big a spender as Byrd. Then you've got Senator Kennedy who need to go. Until we revamp these people and some of the others in these houses of government it want be changed in washington. I'm sorry I only mention two which happen to be dems, but their are republicans that need to be replaced also. So I don't think it will make any difference who we vote for as President, because we need other changes first.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 01:57 PM on 04/30/2008

I know the efforts to 'de-legitimatize' Fox News by not having any DNC debates, or the candidates going on the air with interviews by the anchors of the news channel.

Can Huffington Post readers please PLEASE remember that the democratic candidates, need to speak to all people, because if they don't implode in Denver at the convention and one goes on to be President, they are President of the United States of America and that means ALL 300 million of us.

I think this is why President Bush has approval ratings in the mid-30s. The left (49%) of the country hated him from before he took the oath of office, the right (49%) feel that he talks too much to Senator Edward Kennedy (passing major portions of Kennedy's education bill that was given the title by Bush as No Child Left Behind), does not confront the democrats with fiery rhetoric and demonization as much as they'd like, and then there's the 1% independents who are tired of watching the tennis match and just want the man to retire.

I sincerely hope that if Obama or Clinton get elected, that they have the foundations of democratic ideals but can educate on why these need to become law. The only way to do that is to talk to everyone and not ram something down the other 49%'s throat. Otherwise their name will be Bush2.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 03:31 AM on 04/30/2008

It's not Foxes fault. The dems wouldn't debate on Fox, because they felt they wouldn't get a fair shake, but I asure you they would have gotten as fair treatment as they would have on any of the other networks.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 02:54 PM on 04/30/2008

Well said. Trying to delegitimize FOX simply serves to self censor the candidate. Like it or not, FOX many evenings has a viewership three times or more, than the other networks (sometimes, combined).

Calling FOX names and boycotting them only makes the candidates look petty to the millions of Americans that trust the news and perspective presented by that network. Since candidates are in the business of getting votes, that seems sort of counterproductive.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 08:37 AM on 04/30/2008

Fox news does not do journalism. It does smear campaigns and phony attacks. It is a day round, year long commercial for the GOP. It is time Democrats recognized how harmful to democracy is the so-called "journalism" that Fox does. Let them call themselves the Fox Propaganda Network and then Democrats would appear because at least there is some honesty.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 05:04 AM on 04/30/2008

Fox is where you go to catch the latest propaganda, fluff and theater. If you want real journalism and truth, head over to Bill Moyers or Amy Goodman.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 02:17 AM on 04/30/2008

obama 08

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 08:42 PM on 04/29/2008

I wouldn't count on it

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 10:01 PM on 04/29/2008

BARACK OBAMA IS BY FAR THE MOST ELECTABLE CANDIDATE FOR THE DEMOCRATS!

In recent state by state polls Barack Obama is leading McCain in Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Oregon, and Iowa. Hillary is losing to McCain in Michigan, Wisconsin, Oregon, Iowa and she is tied with McCain in Minnesota. If Hillary can't win our traditionally Democrat states of Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota and Oregon there is no way that she can win in November.

Check out the state by state polls here: WWW.POLLSTER.COM if the link does not work then type it in.


VOTE FOR BARACK OBAMA AND LETS GET A DEMOCRAT WIN IN NOVEMBER!

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 06:20 PM on 04/29/2008

Why is "Liberal" an ugly word? We have been promised "Conservative" Leadership and have not gotten it. Less government, tax cuts, and reduced spending is the mantra every presidential election. Instead we get Huge government, tax cuts for the few, and trillions of dollars of debt. If Liberal means tax and spend, maybe Conservative means Borrow and Waste.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 06:10 PM on 04/29/2008

Watching Obama suck up to the right wing makes me nauseous. The problem is not appearing on FAUX, it's what he had to say once he got on there. This just points out his phoniness and naivete. He didn't have the skills to avoid being cornered and letting Wallace frame the questions with pre-made spin. He should stay in the Senate and watch a pro like Hillary show him how it's done.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 04:19 PM on 04/29/2008

Don"t forget to watch Hillary on Bill O'reilly Wednesday night at 8:00 PM

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 02:48 PM on 04/30/2008

NON-ELECTABLE CANDIDATE!!!! Somebody better see it for what it is. Of course Fox is going easy on him - the conservative republicans want him as the democratic candidate - because HE IS NOT ELECTABLE. We don't elect LIBERALS. Senator Obama is a liberal, he not a moderate - he is a liberal. He is where he can only be - in the Senate. We need him in the Senate. This nation will NOT elect him president!!

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 03:20 PM on 04/29/2008

Barack Obama is by far the most electable candidate. You must be one of those weak minded people who let the media influence their opinion very easily.

In recent state by state polls Barack Obama is leading McCain in Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Oregon, and Iowa. Hillary is losing to McCain in Michigan, Wisconsin, Oregon, Iowa and she is tied with McCain in Minnesota. If Hillary can't win our traditionally Democrat states of Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota and Oregon there is no way that she can win in November.

Check out the state by state polls here: www.pollster.com The polls are on the left hand side of the page as you scroll down at the top. Compare and contrast each state, and you will see that Barack Obama is by far the most electable candidate for the Democrats. Barack Obama is even tied with McCain in North Carolina, and he will win states that the Democrats don't normally win such as Colorado and Virginia. If Barack Obama wins Nevada, New Mexico, and Colorado, he could lose both Ohio and Florida and still win the Presidency with 271 electoral votes to 267 electoral votes.

VOTE FOR BARACK OBAMA AND LETS GET A DEMOCRAT WIN IN NOVEMBER!

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 06:08 PM on 04/29/2008

Wallace asking Obama why it is that white people in Pennsylvania hate him so damn much.

. Many current Pennsyvanian voters are boomers who were iliving in their parents homes in Philadelphia, when their families fled Phili in waves in the late 1960's as middle-class row-house neighborhoods went from white to black overnight Most of the Philli exodus were Catholics very attached to their city parishes . They saw what had happened in Catholic North East D.C.and they were terrified. Deep resentment was added to prejudice that was not so much malicious, as parochial. These attitudes are perpetuated in the generation parented by the boomer.

Interpreting the preferences of half the Pennsyvania voters as "hating you so damn much" is a good indicator of Wallace's intent. We all knew the demographics were loaded in Clinton's favor.

I wish Senator Obama had answered Wallace "Chisie, about white Pennsylvanians hating me, if I knew the only answer you want to hear, we both know I couldn"t say it out loud. . Are you suggesting that unlike my maternal grandmother, white Pennsylvanians are atypical?"

The rudeness of Wallace addressing Senator Obama as "Barry" was the next best thing to getting away with calling him "boy".

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 01:21 PM on 04/29/2008

The media is a bunch of dirtbag whores and we need to bring back the "FAIRNESS DOCTRINE"!

SaVE OUR COUNTRY FROM THESE PIGS!

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 11:26 AM on 04/29/2008

I know this has nothing to do with the post, but has anyone ever been to prisonplanet.com? We (the people) need to inform & educate ourselves to prepare whats to come......C'mon...food shortages, gas prices, ect....all of this is exactly what Bush wants.......so he can enact.......

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 10:28 AM on 04/29/2008

This was a dumb move by Obama. If he intended to take fox on then he should have as it is he looked weak and unprepared, considering that most democrats don't watch fox there was no point in Obama taking the risk. I can see why Obama doesn't want to debate Hillary again, he sucks at off the cuff speaking. Obama goes on fox and yet he's afraid to debate a middle aged woman.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 10:10 AM on 04/29/2008

I don't know about you but I don't want to vote for anyone who appears on Fox News. Seeing clips of Obama selling out to the right wing and appearing on one of their Sunday broadcasts offended me. Why can't we have a liberal candidate that doesn't pander to the right? Change? Yeah right, same old..

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 12:20 AM on 04/29/2008

FALSE FLAG! Check this joker's Profile for some good Laughs!!!

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 07:07 PM on 04/30/2008

Who are you going to vote for then?

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 08:35 AM on 04/29/2008

Please.. this is the audience he needs to reach.

I guess it's better he should lose and stay pure for you losers.

Personally I am tired of losing, I think it's time to win, for the sake of our country and the Planet.

So sorry you have your knickers in a twist about your little boycott.

I dont like Fox any better than you do, but I can see what the man needs to do to win.

You all are ridiculous, and doctrinaire. Be flexible, learn to move in the martial arts fashion of Obama, the Zen Candidate.

This interview served his purposes perfectly. Too bad his critics are too Dense to see it.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 03:48 AM on 04/29/2008

Exactly. What is it with these whiners about Obama going on FOX? He can't just let them define who he is to millions of Americans. He does say he's willing to meet with the enemy doesn't he?

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 12:40 PM on 04/29/2008

What a coincidence that Hillary attracts that type of people....it says alot about her tactics strategy and mindset. Bottom line: she cares no more about THOSE people than Bill. If she did, she would not have flip-flopped 3 times on NAFTA.

She stood by her man so she stands behind Nafta and any lobbyyist special interest groups maintaining the status quo furthering crippling the voices that need to be heard!

Her campaign is absolutely horrible so she has no choice but to focus on fluff and dirty politics. Her reasoning: If she loses, she wants to make sure Obama is toast with Mccain so she can run and possibly win in 2012. Hillary & Bill threw Kerry under the Bus so she could win in '08. And if Howard Wolfsen has something to say..it's all ca-ca. The guy is such a Panzy!