America in the Balance

MIKE WALLACE PROVES THAT THERE IS

INDEED NO FOOL LIKE AN OLD FOOL

by

Ken Eliasberg

When I first heard that Mike Wallace was going to interview the President of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, I was surprised; I didn’t realize that Mahmoud was such a social creature (on the other hand, given his religious beliefs, he might have felt that a discussion with Wallace would be an act of martyrdom, or, at the very least, get him some sort of dispensation here, if not in the hereafter). I was then really taken aback when I read a couple of preliminary reviews in which Wallace had apparently concluded that good old Mahmoud was a “reasonable” man. Now let me say at the outset, I have never been—even in my liberal days—a big fan of Mike Wallace, finding him consistently more pushy and precious than profound.

So you might say that I was forewarned with what was to come in the interview itself. You might say it, but you would be wrong—the interview was a real shocker. Let me give the whole story away (although there’s really no danger of burying the lead in this case) with this simple statement—I had no idea that Ahmadinejad was quite so intelligent (scary thought); nor had I fully appreciated Mike Wallace’s level of stupidity. This interview was an incredibly successful coming-out party for Iran’s president, and a pathetic effort by Wallace for what I hope was his swan song. And I derive no pleasure in my criticism, for, while, as I observed, I never thought he was a genius, I did give him credit for being a lot more capable than he demonstrated in this interview—Ahmadinejad completely controlled the interview, and Wallace reminded you of that Bruce Willis line from Die Hard, “who’s driving that car, Stevie Wonder” ?

Up-Ahmadinejad.- Wallace succeeded in doing the impossible—he humanized Hitler. Way to go Mike, baby. Ahmadinejad could not have bought this kind of public relations with a year’s worth of Iran’s oil revenues and the best advance team on the planet. While stating his horrid views, he was, thanks to Wallace’s incredibly helpful mismanagement of the interview, able to temper them, or, at the very least, make them seem more moderate than they were. And since Wallace could never press home a point or proceed to some sort of understandable destination, Ahmadinejad had no choice but to look good—because Wallace looked so bad

Down.- You guessed it “good old Mike. When he wasn’t fumbling, bumbling, or stumbling to some sort of point (which he was never able to make), he was unctuously ingratiating himself with Mahmoud. I have never seen an interview—which could have and should have been the opportunity of an interviewer’s lifetime—so completely controlled (to the detriment of the free world) by the interviewee. Actually, this was an ego trip for Wallace—he got “the get,” a T.V. term for securing an interview with a star (in any genre, sports, entertainment, politics, government, etc.,etc.). It’s unfortunate—for everyone concerned (except, of course, Ahminadejad)—that Wallace blew “the get.” Not only did Wallace hurt his country, he hurt his faith. Wallace is Jewish, and the jocularity of the interview almost gave the impression that they were buddy-buddy, thereby making Ahmadinejad seem a lot less anti-semitic than he actually he. Ahmadinejad professes only to be anti-zionist; nothing personal—he’s got nothing against Jews. Right. anti-zionist is really a euphemism for anti-semitism.

Dennis Prager in his August 15, 2006 column for Townhall.com, appropriately entitled CBS is now officially the communication for barbarians service, makes the following observation:

“A little over three years ago, CBS sent Dan Rather to Baghdad to ask meaningless quesions to, and provide propaganda a vehicle for, Saddam Hussein. Last night, Communication for Barbarians Service broadcast Mike Wallace’s equally meaningless interview with the

Islamic Republic of Iran’s fanatical leader.

Interviews with evil leaders are meaningless at best and destructive at worst. Few reporters will ask real questions or challenge the propaganda responses of these leaders. These interviews merely offer them invaluable