Skip to comments.Chris Wallace Lies On National TV -- "Grandiose" and Newt Gingrich
Posted on 01/20/2012 6:03:02 AM PST by xzins
Chris Wallace just claimed on national TV that he looked up the word "grandiose" in the dictionary and that it is a negative word and that Gingrich misused and misapplied it to himself. In the segment, Wallace was obviously spinning against Gingrich, and in that piece he was saying the "grandiose" exchange with Santorum was Santorum's shining moment.
However, he claimed he looked the word up in a dictionary and that the word is negative in meaning.
If he actually looked it up in any dictionary, it would have had multiple meanings. In honesty, he would have had to report that. He did not, so by his own word he looked it up, saw multiple meanings and chose that which he could spin.
gran·di·ose (grnd-s, grnd-s adj.
1. Characterized by greatness of scope or intent; grand. See Synonyms at grand.
2. Characterized by feigned or affected grandeur; pompous.
[French, from Italian grandioso, from grande, great, from Latin grandis.]
As an English major I can tell you the word “grandiose” does have a negative connotation. As in ambitiously reaching in a way not indicated by the circumstances, or acting like it’s a bigger deal than it actually is.
Whether Wallace looked it up, who knows, but Wallace’s statements and premise is silly.
Says a lot about Wallace’s intellectual acumen that he had to look up the word “grandiose.” I don’t think I personally know anyone above the age of five who doesn’t know (or, can’t quickly figure out) the meaning of grandiose.
Lucky for Chris that daddy got him a job.
In his defense, Chris Wallace ain’t the sharpest knife in the drawer.
In a battle of wits with Newt, Chris Wallace is severely undergunned.
this thread is begging for a wftd ping so the real experts can weigh in. :)
It's about time the GOP had a really smart guy on its side. He is gonna murder the libs.
Why would you expect Chris Wallace to tell the truth about anything when Republicans/Conservatives are involved? He wants Obama to have a 2nd term.
Chris Wallace is an ass with his daddy’s name attached.
It does also have a negative connotation, but as you can see, it also has a positive one. An honest reporter would have said there was both a positive and a negative connotation and that Newt was using it appropriately in its positve sense.
Now, THAT would have been honest.
Not reporting that it also has a positive connotation, when you’ve just claimed to have looked the word up, is dishonest.
Some idiot dictionaries may claim it has a positive connotation, but it really doesn’t. Same with “notorious” there is no positive connotation to this word, but some ignoramuses use it that way. “Notorious” means well known for bad stuff not famous.
And this... is news?
FNC overall may be slanted our way... but Chris Wallace isn't--
Wallace is a Romney butt sniffer - nuff said!
Haha! Just watched that video. PWNED!!!
Help me with this one. Is there such a concept?
“As an English major I can tell you the word grandiose does have a negative connotation.”
Of course it does which is why Santorum used that word to describe Newt.
When is the last time a Democrat’s word choices have undergone such scrutiny? This is an example of a personal vendetta that Wallace has for Gingrich—trying to hit ‘em while he’s (allegedly) against the ropes.
And that's the point. Newt was simply turning the charge from Santorum around on Rick. Like Wallace, Santorum had a charisma by pass operation and it was a success. Neither has a sense of humor and neither can go off script. Newt has a sense of humor, which he can mix in with a sense of righteous anger, in a way that leaves both Wallace and Santorum in the dust.
Chris Wallace wasn’t anything compared to the drivel of gerald rivers this AM on Fox and Friends.
“None of my ex-wives has a bad word to say about me.”
The fact is that Fox news is attempting to paint Gingrich as a crybaby, crazy, a whiner, someone with road rage, a racist, etc.. Gretchen said this morning that Santorum’s use of that word came close to calling him “crazy.” Then Chris Wallace came on and tried to drive it home. They just talked about an attack ad Romney has out which has his campaign mgr. Talent and a moderate Molinari who talk of Newt being chaotic and erratic and so forth. They say on this ad that Gingrich had to be removed for this. Mark Levin says this is false and those two people were COWARDS BACK THEN AND DID NOT SUPPORT NEWT AGAINST THE DEMOCRATS. I heard Santorum repeat what this Romney ad said last night.
Here is some B.S. repellent. Feel free to use it:
25:50 mins into the audio Mark Levin Reveals Romney ad with Talent and Molinari is FALSE
Mark Levin sites Molinari and Talent as having been COWARDS not standing up for Newt Gingrich when the Democrats filed eithics charges against him.
Mark Levin calls out Ann Coulter for unfairly trashing Newt Gingrich
Posted by The Right Scoop on Dec 16, 2011
Mark Levin accuses Ann Coulter (and BillO) of using what is a perfect opportunity to discuss Newts comments last night on changing the judiciary to instead trash him in favor of her candidate, calling him bombastic and minimizing him by saying that he never achieves anything anyway:
She wont even give the man credit for what he has achieved! Taking back the House from 44 years of Democrat monopoly was never thought possible and in doing so he had to defeat the Republican establishment! You cant even give him that?
No they cant, because they have a hate-on. They have a hate-on.
Do you know why I resent this? Because now we have a bunch of bullies running around. And Giuliani was 100% right. Theyre trying to turn this guy into a crazy man.
And I resent it and I resist it! Hes not even my guy and I resent it and I resist it!
Rove is a Romney Supporter - Mark Levin
1. Characterized by greatness of scope or intent; grand: a grandiose plan to develop the city's waterfront.
2. Characterized by excessive self-importance or affected grandeur; pompous: "It's important ... for judges not to be rattled by political attacks into grandiose assertions of judicial supremacy" (Jeffrey Rosen).
I don't know the context of the remark by Gingrich, so I can't choose.
Exactly. Newt used the same word (grandiose) BECAUSE he knew it had a double meaning.
Even as a high schooler, Newt Gingrich was a National Merit Finalist....meaning that he was really, really bright.
See post #28 for context
And, uh, Chris - Newt is still the smartest man in the room - not you, you blathering tool.
More B.S. Repellent for everyone since Fox brought this up this morning too and Gretchen asked why do people like Newt?
Who Shut Down The Govt. In The 90’s?
As reported by The Washington Times in March, 1996:
President Clintons close ties with federal employee unions enabled him to weather two record government shutdowns and an unprecedented $80 billion raid on federal retirement funds while laying the blame on Republicans.
Internal documents from both the administration and unions reveal close coordination between the unions and Mr. Clinton in developing a strategy of confrontation with Republicans over the spending bills needed to keep the government open and prevent hundreds of thousands of government employees from being furloughed.
The unions not only took the administrations side in the confrontation, but the largest union the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) urged Mr. Clinton to veto the bills and shut the government down for weeks rather than compromise with Republicans.
Meanwhile, the unions provided critical political cover for the administration and Democrats on Capitol Hill by waging an extensive public relations campaign designed to blame the confrontation and shutdowns entirely on the Republicans, particularly on the Houses 73 freshmen.
Leaders of the union, which says it represents 700,000 of the governments 2 million employees, deduced that throwing employees out of work for a few weeks with no guarantee of pay would be better than the higher federal pension contributions and large agency cuts the GOP was planning, which might force extensive layoffs.
It was a pathetic attempt on Newtie’s part, not an original oh so brilliant move.
I thought Santorum skewered him.
should have said Wallace’s statement and premise is silly
And Newt's use of the word was ironic and sarcastic. Gee whiz, I hope he doesn't have to dumb down for folks to "get it"
I listened to Rove go berserk on hannity radio the other day over Gingrich. Hannity kept trying to get Rove to acknowledge than Romney had started the unfair attack ads in Iowa when Newt was without cash.
If it was possible to have a cow on the radio, Rove had a cow on the radio.
The GOP establishment is so in the tank for Romney that I’m beginning to think something else is going on.
Rove’s a smart guy. He knows Romney is just another empty suit.
I think it’s actual fear of Newt Gingrich. I think they know that Newt, when Speaker, alienated the GOP establishment that then sought to backstab him, BECAUSE he really was trying to change things, change the status quo, their comfy “one party” control of this nation.
They live in deadly fear that a president Newt Gingrich will deliver on changing this nation and this economy and this government in the ways he has indicated, BECAUSE he’s been successful at accomplishing GRANDIOSE things in the past!
What if Newt actually GETS term limits, actually SUCCEEDS at term limits for Judges, and actually succeeds at having Congress take up its authority to put the judicial system in its place?
Oh yeah he is flippin’ brilliant, just like Obama, both of them are sooooooooooooooooo dang smart it’s breathtaking/ sarc
Hmmmmm, wouldn't it be typical Romney to have bought off Santorum. Promise him the veep position as they tag team Newt.
Trouble is, Santorum looks like a child stomping his feet at these debates. He does not look stately.
I believe I know which definition Senator Santorum was expressing, and I happen to agree.
I thought Newt turned the statement around on Santorum, and anyone who lived through it knows it’s true.
Santorum says that Newt had grandiose plans to do this that and the other.
The problem is that Newt actually ACCOMPLISHED those things. He did balance the budget, reform welfare, cut taxes, and win a republican majority.
We need more GRANDIOSE ideas like that!
And Gingrich totally effectively used the alternate meaning of the same word to say that America needs big accomplishments....that GINGRICH DELIVERED!
I second that. Nowadays it is the more common usage, the default, if you will. Gingrich was practicing a little verbal jiu-jitsu there, taking Santorum's choice of word and whacking him with it, the way a martial arts practitioner would seize the energy of an attack and use it against the attacker. Takes guts and skill, normally, but if one's opponent is much weaker, as Santorum is, well...it merely takes a bit of restraint so you only school him rather than fatally injure the pup.
I had a different impression of it, I thought Santorum said the guy had a big idea every minute and didn’t get anything accomplished. I lived through it at the time, the Contract For America or whatever it was that was the big idea that never got followed through on.
I heard Santorum repeat what this Romney ad said last night.
Which makes my comment make more sense....."Hmmmmm, wouldn't it be typical Romney to have bought off Santorum. Promise him the veep position as they tag team Newt. Trouble is, Santorum looks like a child stomping his feet at these debates. He does not look stately."
..I guess I'm surprised-- that you prefer grandiose(Newt)...ideas
... over substance, high standards, moral conscience and steady, dependable leadership....
..ALL of which Senator Santorum has.
I believe a lot of people on this forum are carried away by Newt's grandiose..rhetoric and can't see past that.
Chris Wallace is a clueless, mean spirited little troll. He wold be perfect on CNN.
Not necessarily. He may have an understanding of the word, but looked it up for support, or to see in how many ways it could be used. My guess, he wanted ammunition to use against Newt, and went to the dictionary for help.
Why are you dragging Obama into a discussion of Republican candidates? Don’t hate, bro.
How quickly we forget the outcome of Contract with America...
...a great idea!!.....and how many of those contracts were broken..
..it started out strong, full of hope....and much of it fizzled..
Remember when Wallace tried to help Mitt in his efforts to take out Bachmann when he asked her, "Are you a flake?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.