Fox host Martha McCallum snaps at on-air guest for 'disrespectful' name
Fox host Martha MacCallum snapped at Randi Weingarten, the president of the American Federation of Teachers, after she called the journalist 'sweetheart' on-air.
The pair discussed the Supreme Court case that was taken up early Tuesday about censorship over LGBTQ + materials in public schools.
They scoffed with each other after Weingarten praised a Massachusetts school district for creating 'a real culture of a safe and welcoming school.'
MacCallum then chuckled and shook her heard before stating: 'So what you're saying is if we can find other areas in the country where the proficiency levels are also abysmal and should be embarrassing to any education organization, then we can start to make assessments and say, "Oh it's because of choice." or "Oh it's because of money?" We know that money doesn't equate to a better outcome.'
While the news anchor explained the topic, Weingarten abruptly cut her off - and it did not sit well with 'The Story' host at all.
'Martha, Martha, Martha, sweetheart, sweetheart listen to me,' Weingarten said as she moved her hand toward the camera.
'Please don't call me sweetheart,' McCallum quickly replied as she shook her head and appeared to be in disgust about the 'condescending' phrase.
Weingarten swiftly apologized for her comment, telling McCallum: 'I'm sorry, my bad,' before carrying on with their conversation.
While she did so, McCallum's face told a different story as she appeared to be annoyed with the guest for the duration of the segment.
Further into their discussion, MacCallum told Weingarten that books suggesting that someone should change their gender or that they were born in the wrong body will 'freak out' kids and their families.
Weingarten then said that schools across the county have the obligation to alert parents about any controversial book, including Harper Lee's 'To Kill A Mockingbird.'
'You don't want a child to hear a book read to the whole classroom and go home and say "Why am I being taught that I was born a girl but that was just a guess?" I mean, that is going to freak out some children, MacCallum said.
'They're going to be very confused at four, five and six years old and I know that you said you don't agree with reading this in the classroom, but I'm saying this is the problem. And then that same kid can't read and is pushed all the way to 8th grade and they still can't read.'
Weingarten then quipped: 'So Martha, I suspect that you and I agree on more than we don't. I know you don't believe me.'
'But, what I'm saying to you is that I saw that case and if you had not socialized books with parents and a book that may be controversial and you talk to the parents of your kids in that classroom, that's gonna be a problem regardless of what's in the book.
'And look, that was a problem, look at 'Catcher in the Rye,' think about 'To Kill A Mockingbird,' think about other books out of different eras that's a problem. You have to actually spend time, as a schoolteacher or a school principal, with parents before you end up talking about issues that some people will think is controversial,' she added.
This is not the first time MacCallum and Weingarten have spared on-air, as they had a similar heated conversation in 2021 regarding the reopening of schools following the Covid-19 pandemic.
MacCallum cited a New York Post report that accused the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) of influencing the CDC's timeline for when schools were supposed to reopen nationwide, Mediaite reported.
After welcoming Weingarten on the show, the labor leader said the AFT was concerned about coronavirus variants that kept schools closed in the United Kingdom.
'We believe that the conditions have changed now so that everybody can be back in full time, but the bottom line is this: I begged the Trump administration, I can show you — I have many, many letters right now. I went to my office to find them,' Weingarten said.
'I begged the Trump administration to do exactly what the Biden administration did, which is real safety guidance that the former president didn't mock every other day.'
She then went on to praise former President Joe Biden, but that's when MacCallum cut her off and said: 'transmission among children is very low.'
The Fox host then went on to note that schools in China and Europe had already reopened at that point.
This is not the first time MacCallum and Weingarten (pictured with Jill Biden in December) have spared on-air, as they had a similar heated conversation in 2021 regarding the reopening of schools following the Covid-19 pandemic
MacCallum then went on to say that Weingerten previously blamed the slow school return on the lack of money allotted for other pressing issues, including mold.
'Obviously you didn't have the pull with the prior administration, but in this administration there's been $20 million that has gone from — to Democrats — from teachers unions and teacher organizations. So that money seems to be working,' MacCallum said.
Weingerten then refuted her statement and praised the Covid-19 vaccine as 'a real game changer.'
MacCallum, again, pushed back on her statement before Weingerten said: 'The bottom line is it's time for our kids to be back in school.
'I am grateful that the Biden administration is listening to parents and to teachers and to administrators and to even Fox to try to figure out how we get people vaccinated, how we get our kids back to school and how we get our country back to being back.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Reuters
2 hours ago
- Reuters
Tech giant SAP asks US Supreme Court to reconsider rival's antitrust win
June 4 (Reuters) - Europe's largest software maker SAP ( has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to review a decision that said the technology giant must face a lawsuit by U.S. data technology company Teradata accusing it of violating antitrust law. SAP in a petition, opens new tab made public on Tuesday said a decision by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in California that reinstated Teradata's lawsuit will threaten American tech innovation if it is left in place. Teradata accused SAP of violating antitrust law by 'tying' sales of business-planning applications with the purchase of a key SAP database that can perform transactional and analytical functions. Teradata makes a rival analytics database. In its filing at the high court, SAP said the integration of software products can often benefit consumers and 'represent an effort to 'compete effectively,' rather than to stifle competition." SAP declined to comment. Teradata did not immediately respond to a request for comment. San Diego-based Teradata filed its lawsuit against SAP in federal court in California in 2018. The two companies once had a joint venture, but SAP terminated it after developing its own analytics database. SAP won in the district court, but the 9th Circuit revived Teradata's case in December. The appeals court said there was material dispute between the companies that a jury could decide. If the Supreme Court takes the case, the justices could rule on which legal standard judges should use to weigh antitrust tying claims. Two key legal standards guide how judges resolve whether conduct restrains competition: the 'per se rule,' where alleged conduct is presumed illegal, and the 'rule of reason,' where judges balance between anticompetitive effects and a defendant's procompetitive justification. The 9th Circuit, using a version of the 'per se rule,' applied too stringent a standard in evaluating Teradata's claims, SAP told the justices. SAP said the appellate court's ruling clashed with how a Washington federal appeals court resolved a landmark antitrust case against Microsoft in the 1990s. The case is SAP SE et al v. Teradata Corp, U.S. Supreme Court, unassigned. For SAP: Kannon Shanmugam of Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison For Teradata: No appearance yet
Reuters
2 hours ago
- Reuters
Prosecutors wrap up closing arguments in Harvey Weinstein sexual assault retrial
NEW YORK, June 3 (Reuters) - Prosecutors made their final pitch to jurors on Wednesday in the rape and sexual assault retrial of Harvey Weinstein, opens new tab, a day after the former movie mogul's lawyer said during his closing argument, opens new tab that the three alleged victims lied on the witness stand. Picking up where she left off during closing arguments on Tuesday, prosecutor Nicole Blumberg sought to weave together for the jury the accounts of the three women who testified that Weinstein had attacked them. "Members of the jury, he raped three women. They all said, 'no,'" Blumberg said. Weinstein, 73, is on trial for a second time after a New York state appeals court threw out his conviction in April 2024. Experiencing a litany of health problems, Weinstein was present in court on Wednesday in a wheelchair, wearing a dark suit and tie. He is accused of raping aspiring actress Jessica Mann in 2013 and assaulting the two other women in 2006 and 2002. The trial began in April. A lawyer for Weinstein on Wednesday twice moved for a mistrial based on comments by Blumberg during her arguments, but the motions were swiftly denied by state Supreme Court Justice Curtis Farber. Blumberg on Tuesday called Weinstein a serial predator who promised career advancement in Hollywood to women, only to then coax them into private settings where he attacked them. Weinstein, who has denied ever having non-consensual sex or assaulting anyone, has pleaded not guilty. "The defendant used his power and influence to create many, many award-winning movies," Blumberg said. "But he also used that same power, that same influence, to isolate women, trap women in places where he'd be alone with them and abuse them." Defense attorney Arthur Aidala on Tuesday accused the three alleged victims of lying on the witness stand out of spite after consensual sexual encounters with the Academy Award-winning producer failed to deliver them Hollywood stardom. "They are lying about what happened. Not about everything, but about a small slice - just enough to turn their regret, their buyers' remorse, into criminality," Aidala said of the accusers during his closing argument. Weinstein faces a maximum sentence of up to 29 years in prison if convicted on all changes. He already will likely spend the rest of his life in prison due to a 16-year prison sentence given to him after being found guilty in December 2022 of rape in California. He was convicted of rape by a jury in the previous trial in Manhattan in February 2020, but the New York Court of Appeals threw out the conviction and ordered a new trial, citing errors by the trial judge. Weinstein had been serving a 23-year sentence in a prison in upstate Rome, New York, when the conviction was overturned. That conviction was a milestone for the #MeToo movement, which encouraged women to come forward with allegations of sexual misconduct by powerful men. More than 100 women, including famous actresses, have accused Weinstein of misconduct. Weinstein has been held at New York City's Rikers Island jail since his conviction was overturned. He has experienced several health scares while being held at Rikers, and in September was rushed to a hospital for emergency heart surgery.
The Independent
2 hours ago
- The Independent
Court problems ‘real danger' to Britain's reputation if not tackled
There is a 'real danger' to Britain's reputation internationally if problems such as court backlogs are not tackled, a justice chief has said. The deputy president of the Supreme Court, Lord Hodge, told a committee of peers that as problems persist, it 'weakens our sell of the UK as a successful rule of law society'. He appeared alongside Supreme Court president Lord Reed, who said the sheer cost of access to the courts can be a barrier to access to justice, for example in family law. Asked by the Lords Constitution Committee if he saw access to justice as an actual threat rather than a potential one, Lord Reed replied: 'In some areas of practice, I think it is an actual threat. 'For example, if you're a rape complainant, and the trial is being fixed for 2028, then, you know, either you have a terrible strain hanging over you for years, or you decide that it's not worth it and just give up.' Lord Hodge added: 'We're acutely aware of the access to justice issue, and in our outreach work presenting the UK as a rule of law society, we're also aware that if the problem persists, it weakens our sell of the UK as a successful rule of law society.' He said while in commercial law people get an 'excellent service' in courts across the UK because there is money to fund the litigation, the real problem is for areas such as family or housing claims where there is not group funding. While it is not the responsibility for the Supreme Court top judges to campaign on the issues in those courts, overseen by the Lady Chief Justice, he said: 'I think all we can do is speak out in our extrajudicial lectures to warn of the real threat to access to justice and its wider impact on the UK's reputation.' Lord Reed said the issue was raised with international counterparts two weeks ago when being asked about how the UK operates, and was asked about how criminal justice is dealt with in the courts. 'I explained that there were problems with long backlogs, and people were very surprised to hear that,' Lord Reed said. 'And in fact, one of them said, the president of a constitutional court said, 'I'm very surprised to hear that because we regard the United Kingdom as a model'.' Lord Hodge added: 'So I think there is a real danger to Britain's reputation internationally if these problems aren't tackled, but neither Lord Reed nor I have any official locus beyond what we can say in lectures and things of that nature.' In criminal courts, the backlog for crown court cases hit a new record high by the end of last year at 74,651. Justice minister Sarah Sackman KC also warned the backlog 'could hit 100,000 by the end of 2029'. A review by Sir Brian Leveson is looking at how to overhaul the court system and is expected to give recommendations for reform this spring.
