[bigrun]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

I don't blame them for ending the interview. The guy is supposed to be on there to answer questions about the Benghazi incident and instead he's just on there to attack the network. The guy obviously had nothing to offer on the subject. All he had to offer was cheap shots against Fox. What would have been the purpose of continuing the interview? The guy obviously had an ax to grind and had nothing of substance to say.

Having a differing viewpoint was not why the interview was cut short. It was cut short because the guy started taking cheap shops against the network.

By the way, you guys live in a dream world if you don't think Benghazi is a big story. Fox is hardly the only news source talking about Benghazi. David Gregory was on the Tonight Show a few nights ago and he was discussing the White House intentionally misleading people on Benghazi. I guess David Gregory must be operating as a wing of the Republican party.

How is that a cheap shot when it is the truth? Fox can't handle the truth!...David Gregory is a good reporter and not the only 'lamestream' reporter to make that assertion..