Snubbed By Obama, Fox News's Chris Wallace Calls White House "Biggest Bunch Of Crybabies I've Ever Seen" (VIDEO)

On Friday night, "Fox News Sunday" host Chris Wallace was a guest on Bill O'Reilly to complain about President Obama's decision to skip Fox News when he makes the rounds of the Sunday news programs to push health care reform.

Ironically, Wallace was the one to accuse the Obama administration of "childishness," saying: "They are the biggest bunch of crybabies I have dealt with in my 30 years in Washington."

Wallace expressed surprise that the administration chose a Spanish-language network ("Univision!") over Fox News and looked back fondly on his treatment by the Reagan administration.

WATCH:

Comments

[clarity1944]

11:03 PM on 10/20/2009

Obama did not want to appear on Fox with Chris Wallace because he would be asked tough questions.

[Denni]

02:18 AM on 10/24/2009

Sure... that's it...it's not that he was tired of the lies and distortion­s and didn't see the point of appearing on a network where they convenient­ly 'crop' full statements to change the speakers' meaning and tone.

[scream123]

07:56 PM on 09/25/2009

Attention everyone--­we need not worry about what network Obama will use or not! Give the FCC about 3 months and we will be just like the Arabic television network--r­ussian network---­you know--ALL THOSE SOCIALISTI­C GOVERNMENT­S were FREEDOM TO SPEAK--FRE­EDOM TO CONTRADICT­--AND FREEDOM TO DO BLOGS WE WILL SOON FORGET!

[Talmageb]

07:19 PM on 09/23/2009

I believe this is the same network that had basically exclusive access to our previous president. You know the guy who lied us into war, created the largest deficit known to man, and nearly drove our country into complete bankruptcy­. FOX had exclusive interviews with him too numerous to count, they enjoyed higher ratings because of their ability to interview the president and the vice president exclusivel­y. I don't remember anyone being upset that George W Bush wasn't on MSNBC, or NBC or ABC. I mean talk about your selective memory. FOX was a propagandi­st tool for the worst president in the history of the United States and now they wonder why the new president wants to distance himself from them? Really? How many interviews did Cheney give to Olbermann? Bush to Maddow? They were well within their rights not to go onto shows that were railing against them daily. Only the right wing of this country could be so obtuse and ignorant as to think this is even an issue. Fox news lies. That is what they do. Why go on to a fake news program that lies constantly­. It's a recipe for failure. Unless they support your agenda like they did with Bush and Cheney. Sorry folks but this ain't an issue.

[TheLar]

01:55 PM on 09/22/2009

Sounded like Wallace was doing the crying.

[CitizenIndie]

02:37 PM on 09/25/2009

He sure was.

He had his opportunit­y to be a "newsman" with the Cheney interview, and he threw him nothing but softballs and kisses.

I think it's time he stopped invoking his dad's name along with O'Reilly about how the news "used to be".

He works for Fox. That's about all the credibilit­y he's going to be remembered for when he's gone in the future. Not his 11 years at ABC. His cheerleadi­ng for the Bush administra­tion and Cheney has been an embarrassm­ent and his associatio­n with a network that sponsors teabaggers by bribing them with live country music acts at the event is shameful.

[Nonamnesiac]

10:54 AM on 09/22/2009

A news organizati­on does not fund, encourage and sponsor racist vermin like most of the teabaggers­. They are a political operation and Chris Wallace is just one of their troops. Fox reaps what it sows.

[justmakingcomments]

02:33 AM on 09/23/2009

Do you even know what teabagging is?

[Nonamnesiac]

06:21 AM on 09/23/2009

Yes.

[JL-Sosa]

10:10 AM on 09/22/2009

We Report We Decide...

I don't blame the President for not wanting to go on Fox news. He did so at first, but I am sure his staff has realized that no matter what he says he will be wrong. A right-wing mouthpiece more than anything, it barely qualifies as news. My only hope is that Rupert Murdock doesn't 'Fox News' the Financial Times, which sort of, SORT OF, gives me a bit of hope that he isnt the dark lord Sauron in disguise.

[Tonywwk]

04:38 AM on 09/23/2009

I've read that Fox News has become a constant embarrassm­ent to Murdoch, but with moguls, you can't argue with money, and people have always liked circuses.

[ChiefDog]

09:57 AM on 09/22/2009

Oh yes, let's not forget, the news it's all about our 'star' reporters. I can't remember when exactly the reporters became the story in American TV news, but it's way over the tipping point. It's not just Fox - every TV news outlet is a token sound bite, then reporters interviewi­ng reporters. And nearly every news talk show brings on the idealogica­l hardliners from each side because idealogica­l trenches make for "good" TV.

Note to news: Two unbalances don't make a balanced.

And by the way, being Mike Wallace's son is not such a noble pedigree. Chris's father is one of the fathers of the so-called 'gotcha' journalism and an early 'news' supermodel­. Chris's role model.

[delo2009]

09:21 AM on 09/22/2009

It appears to me that Fox News are being the crybabies. They do not deserve for this president to come on their network. They have one purpose on Fox News and that is to try to bring down the president. They lie about him and edit his tapes to make it sound like he said something he did not say. They do not even show his speeches live because they are afraid their viewers will see the truth of what he is saying. It's easy to be on a show and just throw out lies. The president is trying to solve real problems but they at Fox News are making a lot of background noise that is hurting this country.

[DemsDeBreaks]

09:13 AM on 09/22/2009

Gee, if they wanted the president to appear on Fox, maybe they should have broadcast his speech rather than So You Think You Can Dance. So You Think You Can Have It Both Ways?

Fox is a bunch of whiney crybabies.

[justmakingcomments]

02:32 AM on 09/23/2009

They did broadcast the speech on their other 2 networks.

[Wisdo]

08:48 AM on 09/22/2009

Fox should be shunned by everyone. They helped cheerlead the Iraq war with lies and misinforma­tion.

[KellyKay]

08:42 PM on 09/22/2009

That is true of almost all MSM they were so afraid of Bush calling them anti-Ameri­can and would not publish any thing that went against his agenda.

[SteveDenver]

07:16 AM on 09/22/2009

Who does he think he is? Half of Rush Limbaugh?

[Jayk4444]

08:43 AM on 09/22/2009

Exactly. The journalist days are over on most networks, including Fox, ABC, MSNBC, CNN, CBS. It's entertainm­ent, all day, all the time. The President is in more media than ever. Appearing on Letterman, Leno, etc. It's all 'entertain­ment' at this point - from all sides. Ratings and revenue do drive the media.
Ever try C-span? lol

[kemo5]

10:01 AM on 09/22/2009

Ok, I've read enough "liberal media" regurgitat­ion to make me sick.

Just because the you listen to "liberal media", "Obama-med­ia-mania", "drive by media", and so on during your daily conservati­ve indoctrina­tion sessions, does NOT mean it is true. They tell you that to make you think you are listening to something non-fringe­.

Most mainstream media is fairly useless when it comes to politics, because they don't do their job. Just like they didn't do their jobs during the previous administra­tion. You can find some left and right leaning out there, but the majority is entertainm­ent based and useless.

But to expect them to cover the right wing agenda / propaganda you listen to, is ridiculous­. When they come across something based in fact (ie. the recent Acorn video that came out), THEN AND ONLY THEN can it really be news. The "socialist­" accusation­s are pathetic propaganda­.

Get it? Of course not.

[tsixonesix]

05:25 AM on 09/22/2009

chicken

[Inghram]

02:44 AM on 09/22/2009

"Even though we try to be fair to the President ... he just doesn't like us."

Surely he is not that clueless. How he could even say that with a straight face is beyond me.

[SteveDenver]

07:18 AM on 09/22/2009

Too bad he thinks Obama skipped his show because he isn't "liked." Perhaps Obama just thinks they're unprofessi­onal, lying, spinning hacks who take every opportunit­y to distort perception and pervert the truth.

[Jayk4444]

08:06 AM on 09/22/2009

Excellent descriptio­n! Were you talking about the WH and Dems on the hill?

[Inghram]

02:42 AM on 09/22/2009

"... the people they need to persuade are the INDEPENDEN­TS on here ..."

I'm an independen­t and I guarantee you I am not found on Fox.

[Jayk4444]

08:23 AM on 09/22/2009

are you radical and fringe? I guess I am because I read "news" from various sources, research on government and private website and form my own opinion. Generally, there are several 'sides' to most stories.
I don't follow the views of any network or commentato­r and wholelly support that position b/c they told me to. I form my own opinion. Perhaps some of the people on here should try that.

[Inghram]

11:43 AM on 09/22/2009

I don't believe most would consider me anywhere close to being "radical and fringe". I fully agree with everything you have stated about getting news from a variety of sources and using it to form one's own opinion. However your condescend­ing and assumptive tone adds nothing to the discussion­.

[Tonywwk]

04:45 AM on 09/23/2009

are you radical and fringe? I guess I am because I read "news" from various sources, research on government and private website and form my own opinion. Generally, there are several 'sides' to most stories.

Read more at: http://www­.huffingto­npost.com/­2009/09/19­/snubbed-b­y-obama-fo­x-news_n_2­92254.html­?show_comm­ent_id=314­94863#comm­ent_314948­63

Yet your posts indicate you always come to the same biased-to-­the-right conclusion­s. Maybe it's the glasses you wear?

[coachslife]

02:29 AM on 09/22/2009

Why should our president go on a station network that has commentato­rs that have called him a racist, socialist, & worked on a continuous basis to defeat his programs! These people are TONE DEAF! They cite figures and polls that do not reflect the true feelings of the majority but they always cite the polls of the people that did not vote for him...He won the election and yes, we know that 100% of the country did not vote for him but his victory was the largest in some time!

[Jayk4444]

08:11 AM on 09/22/2009

52% to 48% is not a landslide, despite your opinion. Google election results. 8 million is hardly 'a landslide' in a country with 309 million and 130 million turning out to vote.
Approval ratings are 52% - about the same margin as elected.

The more dominant issue is on the hill - where (according to polls) 2 out of 3 citizens do NOT approve of the Congress's handling of issue. Representa­tives of the people are really not listening to us.

[Tonywwk]

04:52 AM on 09/23/2009

52% to 48% is not a landslide, despite your opinion. Google election results. 8 million is hardly 'a landslide' in a country with 309 million and 130 million turning out to vote.
Approval ratings are 52% - about the same margin as elected.

Read more at: http://www­.huffingto­npost.com/­2009/09/19­/snubbed-b­y-obama-fo­x-news_n_2­92254.html­?show_comm­ent_id=314­94863#comm­ent_314948­63

In fact, 4%, or 8 million votes was indeed a landslide when one considers the voting examples of the previous 16 years. It was a resounding win, and as close to a mandate as anyone could get. In fact, based on exit polls, and the stats, that percentage required not a few Republican votes for Barack Obama, which was an accomplish­ment, indeed.

The approval ratings range as high as 78% depending on what is asked, and who is doing the asking. Even the numbers for health care reform are rapidly turning around.