Of course it was.

Slanted: the question suggested a direct link between Clinton’s anti-terrorism effort and 9-11. As Mr. Clinton pointed out, it’s not a question Fox reporters like to ask anyone in the current adminsitration. So I’d say, yes, it was slanted.

Hostile: If my memory is correct, the question was phrased, “Why didn’t you do more…” That’s a prosecutorial formulation that presumes that more should have and could have been done and the need to do so was apparent at the time.
So I’d say, yes it was hostile.

Am I disturbed that Wallace asked it? No. As you correctly point out, Wallace is not alone in asking aggressive questions.

Do I think Clinton responded approriately. Indeed I do.

And a key difference from Wallace’s Rhetorical question and Thomas’ and Gregory’s questions is that, aggressive though they are, they are asking actual questions, looking for facts.
In fairness, if you can point to one of them asking an imflammatory and purely rhetorical question, such as “when the President recieved that fateful August 6th PDB which he failed to act upon, arguably doing more to allow Bin Laden to attack us than any other single action, what did he have for breakfast that day?” then I will condemn them with equal intensity. However if your problem is that they ask aggressive/hostile questions and that you think Wallace’s question-like statement is likened to those, than the problem seems to be your inability to differentiate the two, not ours.

You must not really want to talk about the merit of the question.

Or how about Jennifer Loven? Or how about David Gregory?

You think that Wallace’s question was unfair?

Explain.

(remember that from the pResident?)

(wondering when ferris will get the irony)

The NIE says that the war on terror was actually won. Al Qaeda was close to being dismantled. Terrorist funding was drying up. bin Laden was trapped in a cave.

That is until conservatives came along and lost it by having such a hard-on for Iraq’s oil. Now terrorists are bigger than ever, thanks to conservatives. Thaks to conservatives, bin Laden escaped. Conservatives caused America to lose. It really doesn’t matter why – conservatives lost the war on terror.

In short: Clinton’s military had won the war, but conservatives gave it back.

(Exhibiting FauxNews debating style).

I’m sure you did a search, so tell us how many instances a news article cited “critics” without actually quoting from a critic.

Then you should search Fox transcripts for “some say …” and see if any actual “somes” are quoted.

I thought the best part was how Wallace tried to hide behind “viewers’ emails,”

Try doing a search at the New York Times using the phrase “critics say”…