[scooby321]

Chris Wallace in the last year has gone over the edge to see whose is nuttier his againg Dad or Chris.

[Ann Archy]

Chris is an UNMANNERLY TWIT who needs to be brought down a few pegs!!

[snoringbear]

“You embarrassed yourself, Chris.”

Yeah, recent interviews haven’t gone well for little Chris. He stepped in some poo poo when he interviewed Saraha Palin awhile back and he did the same with Michelle Bachman last night. Interesting that he only asks these provocative questions of women, and conservative women at that, isn’t it? Personally, I think Chrisy is outing his inner dislike of conservative women, especially intelligent and attractive conservative women. Time to quit sitting around eating all that soup Chris and go get some help....

[Cincinatus]

Chris Wallace is a typical Beltway media guy and full of Conventional Wisdom BS, but Newt went for the cheap laugh -- no Republican will ever get booed for bashing the media and Newt knows it. Newt looked foolish.

Moreover, in this particular case, Wallace's question was completely valid -- if Newt cannot keep a campaign organization together, what is the evidence that he can build a team to run the Executive Branch?

[SumProVita]

I disagree. I thought he asked good, hard questions.

[tsowellfan]

Yup, the majority of the questions to the candidates went like this:

FoxNews: “You once said_____ but in 2005 you________.

Gotcha questions!

Very few if any: “How would you deal with this situation___?

[conservativesister]

It was apparent he is a Ron Paul fan.

[NavyCanDo]

As much as most of us are not fans of Newt and know he is unelectable - we were all cheering his reply back to Wallace. It was a night of gotcha questions, and questions designed to have the candidates turn on each other, just as Newt said.

[n230099]

You could see Chris desperately scrambling mentally to recover after Newt smacked him.

But Newt was correct, we wanted to hear their ideas for America not to watch them squirm trying to answer childish questions more suited to "The View" than a serious venue.

Not sure how long he can keep his Sunday prime spot acting like this. Brit Hume must be concerned.

[McGruff]

I've never been a fan of Chris Wallace. He couldn’t shine Brit Hume's or Tony Snow's shoes. Our best hope is that some other network steals him away from FOX. He'd fit in better there anyways.

[Joann37]

In case anyone wants to see what the event in question:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2011/08/11/gingrich_defends_campaign_tells_fox_host_to_put_aside_talking_points.html

[Conservativegreatgrandma]

Totally agree. It was a delight to see Newt eviscerate him.

[Jim Scott]

I didn't see all of the Republican debate on Fox News but I did see clips and watched the Sean Hannity post-debate show where he interviewed some of the candidates about the debate. Apparently, questions were asked that were provocative and designed to put the candidates on the spot, also known as 'gotcha!' questions. From the clips, I gathered that Chris Wallace was chided by Newt Gingrich for his question about Newt losing his senior staff and what that says about Gingrich as an executive. In the post-debate interview with Hannity, Newt made the point that he felt the media spends too much time on 'inside baseball' stuff and not enough on substantive issues. He believes that few Americans really care about the kind of 'gotcha! questions Wallace was asking. Of course, it's obvious that Newt was a bit embarrassed by the question and had an ulterior motive for his rebuke to Wallace but, even so, Newt does have a point.

In a televised political debate with liberal moderators, these kinds of 'gotcha!' questions are almost de rigueur so the candidates should be prepared for them but in this instance, I think Chris Wallace deserved Newt's rebuke. Of course, Newt Gingrich is known for his short fuse and aversion to criticism, another aspect of his personality that often obviates his intelligent approach to weighty matters of state. Newt might be a good candidate for a advisory position in a conservative Republican administration but as a presidential candidate, he is far back in the pack and likely to stay there. As for Chris Wallace, I'm sure he was asking what he thought were relevant questions and, in the process, grooming himself to be chosen to moderate a presidential debate after the GOP convention, when the Republican candidate has been chosen. That probably won't happen but for the candidates in Iowa last night, thanks to Chris Wallace, they got a taste of what to expect if any one of them should capture the Republican presidential nomination: hardball politics.

[WaterBoard]

I don’t know why you people are surprised by this?

Wallace is limousine liberal and the son of the leftist Mike Wallace from 60 Minutes.

Do you really think he is Conservative or will treat Obama the same way?

[jbp1]

Chris Wallace deserves that treatment from ALL the candidates. He’s a turd. Belongs on TMZ

[GBA]

I listened to most of it on the radio and enjoyed the answers and the audience responses quite a bit.

Wallace, on the other hand, is a known quantity. He only surprises me when he acts like a journalist.

Needless to say, I'm not surprised very often.

[y6162]

I sent in a nasty gram to F&F. I asked if Media Matters was blackmailing him.

[Texas Eagle]

The whole evening was a farce if you aks me.

Bunch of self-aggrandizing stiffs with no command of the English language and no real vision for the future. I did this and I did that and I did the other thing. None of which has made a hill of beans of difference. Except for Herman Cain. At least he can point to some actual accomplishments.

But, still, I'd take any one of them over Urkel.

Even Ron Paul. Oh, crap. Did I really say that? The world is over.

[Lazamataz]

Why isn’t this in Breaking News?????

[ConservativeStatement]

IIRC, he had a spat with Howie Carr (radio host in Boston) and never returned as a guest. That was a few years back. Maybe RaccoonRadio can confirm.