Almost certain he will name Wallace "Worst Person in the World"

Can you imagine Olby's abject disappointment to learn that it was Chris Wallace's interview with the ex-prez that garned all the press attention and not the money that Olby forked over to BC for "eight more schools in Kenya" publicity stunt? You know he's got to be sitting there in his bathtub moaning about how many baseball cards he could have brought with that donation and no one gives a damn about it. Why it's all about Chris Wallace who actually dared to ask a hard question of Clinton instead of giving him another blog job like KO did.

It's not possible - or is it? - that Olbermann will actually have David Brock on to "discuss" the interview?

No. Even Olbermann can't be that low, that much of a partisan hack.

Or can he?

Maybe he's thinking that Soros will thank him by buying a billion copies of his "book".

SMG

Special comments seem only to be reserved for demagogic attacks on the current administration....Wallace is going to be treated like O'Reilly....Worst Person mention and possiblly a segment with a, "journalism expert."

The expert will be leftist....Brock or someone of his ilk, and Wallace's tough questions will be called various things....

sandbagging (we heard this one already)
an ambush
unfair
disrespectful
inappropriate
biased
misrepresentation
playing to their viewers
partisan

It is interesting that Olbersham does the same exact thing BUT WITHOUT THE PRESENCE OF A REPRESENTATIVE FROM THE GROUP HE IS CRITICIZING. At least Clinton had the opportunity to scream at Wallace (behavior I find ridiculous, especially leaping out of his seat touching the guy's leg!)

Hey Olberphony.....conduct a real interview with Rice, Rummy or Cheney and then you can be critical of real journalists!

KfK and cee, you both make a good point, I ought to have added a WPIW nod for wallace. That said, I think Keith will either ignore it or make a big deal out of it. Given the media coverage on the morning talk shows (I saw CBS and NBC lead with it) I can't imagine he will play it down. Plus he gets to mention that HE WAS PRESENT when the interview took place (my best guess is that KO was waiting his turn and was able to watch the interview personally or on a monitor).

I'm sure he was the last to get to interview Mr. BJ Clinton, so he saw the other sixty interviews in person, including those given to college students and the foreign press. I would love to see what happened before the cameras rolled. My guess:

Olbermann: "Oh Mr. President, they were so mean to you."
BJ Bill: "Thank you"
Olbermann: "Do you need a hug."
BJ Bill: "No, thank you"
Olbermann:"My lord they are unfair at Fox!"
BJ Bill: "Indeed they are"
Olbermann: "How dare they ask you real questions with real facts!"
BJ Bill: "Can we please start the interview? I need to get going"
Olbermann: "Yes sir!"

I may as well add here that I'd like to knock down this balloon being floated that Clinton's outburst was some stroke of political genious, was pre-meditated and that he was spoiling for a fight.

Clinton's purpose in giving that interview along with MANY others that week was to promote the Clinton Global Initiative. And for the entire week he was on message and getting a huge amount of attention for what is a major "legacy" project for him. Media from all shades of the political spectrum were lauding Clinton for bringing people together, raising so much money and advancing such noble causes. If you were managing the PR for the event you would have to been thrilled with the amount of earned media from the event. And Clinton made it all the way to the afternoon of the last day of the conference reminding people of what so many liked about him when he first ran for President.

So, Howard Dean aside, someone is going to need to explain to me how taking the focus OFF the Clinton Global Initiative was part of some "plan"? Worse, his behavior, especially wagging his finger in Chris Wallace's face, reminded people of ANOTHER Clinton - the "I did not have sex with that woman" Clinton. I might add that it did a few other things such as reflecting poorly on Hillary just weeks before she will be "deciding" whether or not to run for President AND taking Iraq out of the news cycle for another weekend on the morning talk shows.

If I had to guess, Clinton was very tired, was not eating properly and was at maximum stress. When you organize any event - whether it be a global conference or a wedding or a tailgate party - it is very stressful. You feel like you are holding your breath. And there is a point at which all the planning is done, the event is done and you are finally ready to exhale. In my experience this is the point of maximum stress and the Wallace interview was a form of exhaling. I imagine if he had it to do all over again he would have chosen a less public way to unwind.

Bob,

Bill tends to attack and protest when his legacy is threatened. It is his way of making people think twice before asking him things he doesn't like, and in the process feign outrage to cover his tracks. As a result, he gets softball questions. Bush doesn't do this, so he has to take crap from dopes like Matt Lauer. I think Bush's method is smarter and better for one's legacy anyway.

In the end, Clinton's legacy will be Monica and the path to 9/11, whether he likes it or not, and it terrifies him. Jimmy Carter may be a humanitarian, but gas lines, policy failures and the hostage crisis will still be what defined his failed Presidency.

Look at this Peter Jennings interview to see Bill do exactly the same thing to ultra-liberal Pete Jennings that he did to Wallace:

http://www.dailyrecycler.com/blog/2004/11/buck-stops-with-ken-starr.html

Keith will probably try to get Chris' dad on and make him promise to give his son a good spanking for sassing and smirking at that nice Mr. Clinton like that.

o'reilly will be named wpitw for his defense of the clinton interview on good morning america.

You guys should try this

site..http://www.crooksandliars.com/ or hated.com

Maybe you are just not mentally challenging yourselves ? There has to be some reason for the continuned ignorance I see on this website.

I'm pretty sure Clinton really did just kind of snap. He has been hitting the circuit hard with this aid thing, and I'm sure in his mind this interview was supposed to have some kind of protected status because of that. I'd bet that if Wallace had just done the whole aid thing and then the politics, and separated them, Clinton would have been prepared and wouldn't have taken it the way he did. It did look like a sandbag, like he just went right after it. Clinton was tired and probably thought "that's it?! And now you're going to try to undermine it by whipping up the Fox base?" But even at that, there is no way Clinton would have been so combative in an appearance on behalf of the charity if he could have controlled himself. He lost it.

A good interviewer (or one who cared about the charity) would not have interspersed the politics and the charity stuff knowing that the politics would hurt the charity with that audience. And a more rested Clinton would have kept things a bit calmer.

On the substance of the rant, I don't think anyone can gainsay that Clinton was at least a lot more engaged on Bin Laden than the neophyte Bush in the runup to 9-11. But ultimately they both blew it. Not much point in trying to figure out whose hindsight is better.

Caught the tail end of the radio show today with Dan Patrick and Olby, who is promising to reign fire down upon Chris Wallace and Fox for their Clinton interview. That's a shock huh?

who is promising to reign fire down upon Chris Wallace and Fox for their Clinton interview
*************************************************
Yea I'm sure Wallace is shaking in his boots...more likely his reaction would be...Olbermann who?

Oh boy, Mr. Wallace must be worried. After having B.J.

wag his finger in his face
poking his leg
raising his voice
describing his expression as a smirk

I am sure Olbyfool's rhetoric will make Wallace cry. What a tough business......people have to have a thick skin.

I predict that Olbe will get Bill Clinton on his show and he will suck Clinton off on national TV. That would be great for his ratings.

"reign fire down upon Chris Wallace and Fox for their Clinton interview."

I heard the last part of the radio show too. But I think I heard Olbermann promise to "rain fire and brimestone" on Bush for something that Clinton claimed that, according to KO, "Everyone missed."

E.g., that Bush never had a meeting about Bin Laden for his first eight months or that Clarke had provided the Bush Administration with some sort of "plan" to get OBL and that the White House ignored it.

In any event, the target will be, once again, the White House. With, of course, several guests defending the Administration.

Okay, one.

Okay, really, none.

SMG

Defending the White House ? It is too late for that. Just give Dumbya a bag of pretzels and some alone time. Mike Wallace must be ashamed of his son.
I do not remember anyone moaning about the softball questions that O'lielly ask members and supporters of this criminal administration.

I'm still laughing at Keith's senstive (dare I say "romantic") moment with Mr. Clinton.

Did the interview get him out of last place for that evening?

"Defending the White House ? It is too late for that"

So, you think Olbermann should just turn the "spicket" on and flood the airwaves with a sliming of Bush?

SMG

I never realized how devasted the right was over being scorned by David Brock.

It's simple. Chris Wallace will be today's "Worst Person in the World". Wallace's big sin? Daring to ask the pathological liar why he didn't do more about bin Laden. Notice the similarities between Clinton's defiant nature toward Wallace and Clinton's very simliar behavior when he said, "I want you to listen very carefully. I did not have sex with that woman. Miss Lewinsky." Almost identical behavior.

It's simple. Chris Wallace will be today's "Worst Person in the World". Wallace's big sin? Daring to ask the pathological liar why he didn't do more about bin Laden. Notice the similarities between Clinton's defiant nature toward Wallace and Clinton's very simliar behavior when he said, "I want you to listen very carefully. I did not have sex with that woman. Miss Lewinsky." Almost identical behavior.

Bill O'lielly blurbed: "Mike Wallace must be ashamed of his son."

It is quite the opposite:

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/12/11/100751.shtml

A quick excerpt:

""Fox News Sunday" anchorman Chris Wallace says father Mike Wallace has "lost it" - after the legendary CBS newsman told the Boston Globe last week that the fact George Bush had been elected president shows America is "[expletive]-up.""

"O'lielly", you and Mike Wallace are kindred spirits, so I can see why you are so angry. Interesting how a lefty like Mike wound up with a normal son.
To be fair, I must say that Mike and Chris seem to care deeply for each other as this interview clearly shows:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,174703,00.html

I never realized how much the left was devestated by losing the Presidency (twic) and the hose and the senate and most of the governerships.............
Klinton just had a meltdown becasue he was actually asked a real question instead of the contstant CNNlike softballs and ass kissing he is used too on other networks. Klinton is a pathological liar and of course blames the vast right wing conspiracy for his foibles and dysfunction.

Interview? What interview? That was no interview, it was an excercise in journalistic fellatio.

Sorry wrong thread, the above comment was meant to refer to Olbys session with the great stainmaker.

Well clearly, folks are living in your own little right wing world. So let me give you the perspective of a guy who thinks that listening to a former president who can argue persuasively, has a command of the facts and speaks to the issues, unlike our current POTUS.

I listen to the demagogues on fox, and other right wing shills like you guys all the time (know your opponent). I'm glad that President Clinton was able to make his case forcefully, articulately and with passion. I'm glad he smacked down Chris Wallace. Mr Wallace would have had a lot more integrity as a journalist if he'd not pawned off the question as one coming from his viewers. Clinton knew what was coming. He had prepared for it, he made his case and I get pumped up each time I watch that interview.

Coming in at just slightly less enjoyable was KO's critique of the interview. I'm glad Mr. Olbermann is one of the few journalists who spoke to the issue and dealt with the concerns of people like me. Finally I would suggest you go watch the daily show episode where they lampoon the media over there response to this interview.

Honestly, what mattes more, the tactics and emotional tone of the argument, or Mr Clinton's issues. Why is it that universally the media spend more time talking about his attitude then the issues he raised?