Sorry to see this very gifted and objective, authentic journalist leaving.
He was ALWAYS fair and balanced.
I still like Geraldo Rivera a great deal though and hope he is doesn't leave as the last open minded commentator they have left..............as they morph more extreme right rather quickly.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geraldo_Rivera
Geraldo Rivera (born Gerald Riviera; July 4, 1943)[1][2] is an American journalist, attorney, author, political commentator, and former television host. He hosted the tabloid talk show Geraldo from 1987 to 1998. He gained publicity with the live TV special The Mystery of Al Capone's Vaults. Rivera hosted the news magazine program Geraldo at Large, hosts the occasional broadcast of Geraldo Rivera Reports (in lieu of hosting At Large), and appears regularly on Fox News programs such as The Five.
https://variety.com/2021/tv/news/juan-williams-fox-news-exits-the-five-1234982579/
metmike: I guess he got tired of being the punching bag as the one liberal. I thought he added a tremendous amount of credibility to any shows he was on for FOX, just because he would give the alternative view and keep it from being an echo chamber.
There were times, however when he would take the opposite view........for the sake of taking the opposite view and it got to the point (for me at least) of his job being entirely as the token liberal who had to take the opposite view that would get drowned out by everybody else............that almost never actually considered anything that he stated.
It was sort of like "hey everybody, we aren't really an echo chamber because we have this liberal that we completely ignore on our panel"
Now, unless Geraldo is on, it is truly an echo chamber.
really? number 1 how do you know who is replacing Williams? My money says another lib but would it be great if a true lib like Glen Greenwald would appear instead of the usual pretend libs of nowadays politics.
We have had our discussions of Wallace before and you need to go back and review the debate debacle he served up. If there was ever a more biased and less factual debate host recently I must of missed it. Gwynn Eiwfull maybe
mcfarm,
Since this is about an opinion related to whether we like a commentator or not..........it's purely an opinion that can never be resolved or proven so we will have to respectfully disagree on Chris Wallace.
I do agree that he was caught completely off guard in the presidential debate between Trump and Biden and should have taken more control.
He allowed Trump to constantly be rude and bully both him and Biden. We never had a person like this in a presidential debate, that didn't abide by the rules they agreed to before hand but he should have been prepared, knowing it was Trump.
On the other hand..........it allowed us to see the real Donald Trump...........who completely abuses the rules that he agrees to(based on respecting other people's rights and doing what's right/honest) and will keep doing whatever he wants to do unless somebody stops him........which should have been Chris Wallace's job in that debate.
Trump could have lost the election because of that debate.
But remember, it wasn't Chris Wallace's job to protect Donald Trump from Donald Trump.
Everything that Trump said during that debate came from Donald Trump's mouth and he bears sole responsibility for his words and rude actions.
They did learn from the first debate and changed the rules after that to keep control over Trump(for his own good)
Speaking of Trump.
https://nypost.com/2021/12/11/trump-says-he-liked-obama-during-florida-event-with-bill-oreilly/
"Speaking at the kickoff of his four-date “History Tour” with Bill O’Reilly at an arena in Sunrise, Florida, the Republican said of Obama, “I liked him,” while also calling him “smart and sharp,” according to The Sun Sentinel."
"The compliments were a drastic change for Trump, who spent five years falsely claiming that Obama wasn’t born in the US, and made bogus claims about his two terms in office. He had also labeled the former president “the most ignorant president in our history,” “a disaster” and the “founder of ISIS.”
shock of all shocks this rumor has Wallace "going home" to Fox where he can freely back the lib agenda and pretend he is just another Stepanopalos or Chuck Todd, go out to all the really cool lib parties, and get closer to the establishment. Then drift off to retirement with all the congrats coming from the left where most all former journalist go to die after fully surrendering what integrity they had decades ago.
https://thefederalist.com/2020/09/30/here-are-the-11-dumbest-most-slanted-questions-asked-by-chris-wallace/#.YbYwcrtGhfg.twitter look , Mr unfair and unbalanced himself
As mentioned previously, our opinions will be widely disparate on this mcfarm because I'm unaffiliated with a political party and am an independent, objective scientist.
For instance, your far right source listed the 11 dumbest things that Chris Wallace stated during the debate and you ate it up and liked it so much that you posted it here.
On several of them, about the election, his attempts to discredit Wallace........actually made Walllace look brilliant and the author look like he's the one with the big problem.
sorry made a mistake....should of been going home to CNN. On the debate, sorry I watched the debate. And Wallace looked every bit biased, unfair and petty as the author described. Turn this right back on you. You hate Trump so much you will not admit Wallace's bias and child like petty questions. Don't bother with the typical "I don't hate" response, it does not apply with Trump.
So now to the "far right wing author" MM number one the author is not "he". Jordon Boyd is a women with her picture prominently displayed with the article. She is a graduate of Baylor University hardly a hot bed of the conservative far right. You ought to do some research before you continue with most every post here that does not compliment what ever Trump is against has to be from a "far right wing" source. You sir have over stepped and thrown it around to the point not even knowing the author, her politics or thinking. You ought to be ashamed as this is a stunt commonly used by left wing loons.
Is it possible to acutely like someone but totally disagree with their ideology?
Gunter -Met
Mcfarm -Met
President Trump-President Obama
Edit
Ruth Ginsburg and a conservative justice who 's name escapes me
Is it possible to acutely like someone but totally disagree with their ideology?
Of course it is cutworm.
I don't have a problem with anybody's ideology here either.........as long as they use authentic facts and truth.
My objective is to hold people accountable to that.
authentic fact. First Wallace praises Fox for never ever restricting him in any question, interview, or subject matter or content....then he claims he is leaving for more freedom. Make up your mind .
mcfarm,
The way that I perceived that is that he's not leaving because FOX restricted him regarding topics and questions and is referring to other freedoms.
There is alot more than just what topics and questions that a journalist asks when interviewing somebody.
I get it though. You didn't like Chris Wallace so you will twist anything that he says to have a meaning that trashes him.
You, along with FOX(which you use as a top source) have shifted much farther right with your political ideologies since their party lost the White House and both houses in Congress.
It's actually what the party and media sources NOT in charge do. We saw in big time with the MSM when Trump was president.
Chris Wallace is NOT far right. In a far right environment, even if he gets to ask people that he picks and that he interviews with, the questions that HE wants to ask, do you not see him having less freedom to do things that are not far right because of what FOX represents(far right)?
For anybody that is not far right currently, I completely understand them leaving FOX.
Their token liberal punch bag, Juan left last Summer.
Personally, I thought he had too many positions that the viewer could see were intentionally the opposite of everybody else.......for the sake of it being the opposite because sometimes his rational didn't make sense (sometimes it did though).
When your job is to disagree with every one of your colleagues as much as possible........that might appeal to people that live for confrontations but most people wouldn't get much fulfillment/reward out of that.
People go to echo chambers to be with birds of a feather, repeating the same things to each other that they all enjoy hearing and reinforcing to each other for a reason.
Psychologically, it's appealing and nurturing to the human psyche. Its much less stressful than disagreeing or fighting. It feeds our cognitive bias and makes us feel good about ourselves and beliefs.
Working in an environment that features everybody that disagrees with you is a tough job psychologically to do. And it might very well offend your personal belief system and ethical standards to be part of it.
You dislike Chris Wallace because you recognize that he's not far right.
At least give the guy credit for confirming that and doing what makes complete sense for his professional career based entirely on what your political opinion of him is.
I think it shows class on his part to not come out with statements that tear down his employer for numerous years. Calling FOX news extreme or far right or having an ideology that he disagrees with.
Professional people, especially in the field of journalism should not make public statements like that. Juan avoided stating that too and was very professional in his departure.
1. It's destroys their credibility at being objective journalists. Once a journalist attacks fellow journalists or stations for having political views from one side........it shows blatant bias to the other side. Shaun Hannity or Tucker have a home and identity at FOX. The rest of their careers will always be spent making far right commentary........it's who they are. They can bash CNN or other liberal people out the whazoo and it helps their image. Chris Wallace has a career based on being objective. If he bashes one side publicly, it detracts from that.
2. Anybody that parts ways with an entity or employer and says things to damage them after they part ways looks vindictive and bad. Chris Wallace certainly had some viewers at FOX that liked him, that are obviously FOX fans. If he left and trashed FOX, he would alienate many of those people who are sticking with FOX and be seen as a huge traitor.
3. The only thing to be gained with blatant negative comments about his previous employer would be if he wanted to hurt FOX. He is not that kind of human being.
well there you go again MM. I use Wallace's words and what he said. I turned or twisted nothing. But you are correct bout one thing. Wallace can absolutely go to cnn pull his pants down and play with himself live on Skype and never be sanctioned by your most trusted outfit. Kind of desperate over there don't ya think?
As I said before mcfarm, personal opinions about Wallace will be based to some extent on the political affiliation of the person with the opinion and are personal opinions that can't be proven with data or facts and can never be resolved.
So we will disagree on that level.
We do agree that his presidential debate moderator stint was a disaster..........you because you think that he constantly attacked Trump..........me because I think that he let Trump bully both him and Biden(which is why Trump lost the debate-from being so mean and rude the entire time and people didn't like that-if you remember, before the 2nd debate, a big discussion was about having a mute button to control Trump, so that they could actually have meaningful discourse ).
So those are just opinions that will never be settled with empirical data.
You, along with FOX... have shifted much farther right with your political ideologies since their party lost the White House and both houses in Congress.
It may seem to some that is true for me... But...I contend that it is the policies implemented in the last year and the results of those policies that make my positions look farther right. I haven't changed, the left moved from being liberal.
cutworm,
You are right about that. Thanks for stating it.
Much of the right's position currently is based entirely on fighting the left.......because the left got control, so the fight has been ramped up to oppose the left.
There is one huge exception on this however cutworm.
While Trump was in office, pushing the vaccine and its development hard. Almost every day making promises on getting the vaccines to us in record time(which he delivered on) almost all republicans were totally on board with anything to do with vaccines...because Trump was a strong advocate. Promising to us that it would rescue us from COVID. Republicans believed that from Trump.
Democrats were the ones questioning the vaccines in 2020. Harris said she wasn't going to get vaccinated if it was Trump that said she should. Democrats and the MSM stated that vaccines couldn't be developed that quickly and be safe and Trump was wrong.
Then, the vaccines DID come out in record time as Trump promised but he lost the election and Biden took over as the vaccine cheerleader.
The party affiliation with vaccines immediately flip flopped.
Democrats were pro vaccine with Biden, their president who they trusted.
Tens of millions of Republicans became anti vaxx, along with their distrust in government, especially Biden and Fauci, where the vaccination messages were coming from.
You know this is true.
The biggest reason to fight the mandates and honor people's individual wishes is totally based on the fake fact that vaccines are dangerous and some people are willing to take the risk, others shouldn't be forced to do it.
If there was ZERO risk and nobody ever died or had a side affect from a vaccine there would be no issue right?
There would be no justification for anybody to ever refuse to get vaccinated.
The justification had to be manufactured with DISinformation about an elevated risk to vaccines.
You know this is true.
If there was ZERO risk and nobody ever died or had a side affect from a vaccine there would be no issue right?
There would be no justification for anybody to ever refuse to get vaccinated.
If what you say is true what happens to the ethics of medicine that the patient is in charge of his health. (oh, I get it the gov will decide what is good)
What about religious reasons?
"tens of millions of repubs are anti vac"..... holy crap MM where do you get that one? I do n;t know hardly one repub that is anti vac. For the millionth time we have explained to you vacs are great, vacs save people, a fraction of free people are anti vac. We are simply trying to maintain our republic and not get locked down again.....which I will predict will happen again for the second time today.
"What about religious reasons?"
OK, a tiny amount of people might have a legit religious objection.
Most that do, are misinformed about what their religion actual states about the COVID vaccine and/or are using it as an excuse to not get vaxxed.
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/77204/#77210
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/76988/#76998