A debate “moderator” in the tank for Obama; Update: McCain campaign didn’t know about book; PBS and McCain shrug; Update: Ifill plays the race card
Scroll down for updates…race card-playing Gwen Ifill did not inform the debate panel about her book…
My first syndicated column of the week, filed this afternoon, shines light on PBS anchor Gwen Ifill, who will moderate Thursday’s only vice presidential debate. Try as she might to deflect questions about her impartiality, her biases — and her conflict of interest — are clear. But don’t you dare breathe a word about any of this. You know what will happen if you do…
RACIST!
Sidenote: TVNewser reports that Ifill has broken her ankle, but she’s still going to do the debate. But will she disclose her conflict of interest? Inquiring minds want to know.
Ask the Commission on Presidential Debates if she will acknowledge her conflict of interest: 202-872-1020.
And here’s the e-mail address of Janet H. Brown, Executive Director of the Debates Commission: jb@debates.org
Hopefully, their email system works better than the House.
Tons of readers recommend that Sarah Palin open her debate remarks by congratulating Ifill on her book and asking her to tell everyone the title.
***
A debate “moderator” in the tank for Obama
by Michelle Malkin
Creators Syndicate
Copyright 2008
My dictionary defines “moderator” as “the nonpartisan presiding officer of a town meeting.” On Thursday, PBS anchor Gwen Ifill will serve as moderator for the first and only vice presidential debate. The stakes are high. The Commission on Presidential Debates, with the assent of the two campaigns, decided not to impose any guidelines on her duties or questions.
But there is nothing “moderate” about where Ifill stands on Barack Obama. She’s so far in the tank for the Democrat presidential candidate, her oxygen delivery line is running out.
In an imaginary world where liberal journalists are held to the same standards as everyone else, Ifill would be required to make a full disclosure at the start of the debate. She would be required to turn to the cameras and tell the national audience that she has a book coming out on January 20, 2009 – a date that just happens to coincide with the inauguration of the next president of the United States.
The title of Ifill’s book? “Breakthrough: Politics and Race in the Age of Obama.” Nonpartisan my foot.
Ifill’s publisher, Random House, is already busy hyping the book with YouTube clips of Ifill heaping praise on her subjects, including Obama and Obama-endorsing Mass. Governor Deval Patrick. The official promo for the book gushes:
“In The Breakthrough, veteran journalist Gwen Ifill surveys the American political landscape, shedding new light on the impact of Barack Obama’s stunning presidential campaign and introducing the emerging young African American politicians forging a bold new path to political power…Drawing on interviews with power brokers like Senator Obama, former Secretary of State Colin Powell, Vernon Jordan, the Reverend Jesse Jackson, and many others, as well as her own razor-sharp observations and analysis of such issues as generational conflict and the ‘black enough’ conundrum, Ifill shows why this is a pivotal moment in American history.”
Ifill and her publisher are banking on an Obama/Biden win to buoy her book sales. The moderator expected to treat both sides fairly has grandiosely declared this the “Age of Obama.” Can you imagine a right-leaning journalist writing a book about the “stunning” McCain campaign and its “bold” path to reform timed for release on Inauguration Day – and then expecting a slot as a moderator for the nation’s sole vice presidential debate?
Yeah, I just registered 6.4 on the Snicker Richter Scale, too.
Despite the protestations of her colleagues that she will be fair, Ifill has appeared on numerous radio and TV talk shows over the past several months to cash in on her access to the Obama campaign. She recently penned a fawning cover story on the Obamas for Essence magazine that earned much buzz. The title? “The Obamas: Portrait of an American Family.” A sample of Ifill’s hard-hitting investigative journalism, illustrated with Kennedyesque photos of the Obamas and children posing at home on the backporch and by the piano:
“Barack Obama is sitting in the back of his rented luxury campaign bus with its granite counters and two flat-screen TVs. The Illinois senator’s arms are wrapped around his wife, Michelle, whom he doesn’t get to see much these days. At this very moment he is, of all things, singing.”
During the Democratic National Convention, Ifill offered her neutral analysis before Michelle Obama’s speech on NBC News: “A lot of people have never seen anything that looks like a Michelle Obama before. She’s educated, she’s beautiful, she’s tall, she tells you what she thinks and they hope that she can tell a story about Barack Obama and about herself…”
During the Republican National Convention, the PBS ombudsman fielded numerous complaints about Ifill’s coverage of Sarah Palin’s speech. Wrote Brian Meyers of Granby, Ct.:
“I was appalled by Gwen Ifill’s commentary directly following Gov. Sarah Palin’s speech. Her attitude was dismissive and the look on her face was one of disgust. Clearly, she was agitated by what most critics view as a well-delivered speech. It is quite obvious that Ms. Ifill supports Obama as she struggled to say anything redemptive about Gov. Palin’s performance. I am disappointed in Ms. Ifill’s complete disregard for journalistic objectivity.”
Like Obama, Ifill, who is black, is quick to play the race card at the first sign of criticism. In an interview with the Washington Post a few weeks ago, she carped: “[N]o one’s ever assumed a white reporter can’t cover a white candidate.”
It’s not the color of your skin, sweetie. It’s the color of your politics. Perhaps Ifill will be able to conceal it this week. But if the “stunning” “Breakthrough” she’s rooting for comes to pass on January 20, 2009, nobody will be fooled.
***
Here’s the video clip of Ifill’s reaction to Palin’s RNC speech:
***
As Instapundit’s newsroom correspondent put it: “The fix is in, and it’s working.”
Bob Unruh adds:
Ifill declined to return a WND telephone message asking for a comment about her book project and whether its success would be expected should Obama lose. But she has faced criticism previously for not treating candidates of both major parties the same.
During a vice-presidential candidate debate she moderated in 2004 – when Democrat John Edwards attacked Republican Dick Cheney’s former employer, Halliburton – the vice president said, “I can respond, Gwen, but it’s going to take more than 30 seconds.”
“Well, that’s all you’ve got,” she told Cheney.
Ifill told the Associated Press Democrats were delighted with her answer, because they “thought I was being snippy to Cheney.” She explained that wasn’t her intent.
Uh-huh.
***
Greta Van Susteren reports that McCain didn’t know about Ifill’s book. “[T]he campaign (actually both) should have been told before the campaign agreed to have her moderate. It simply is not fair – in law, this would create a mistrial.”
***
Update: PBS and McCain agree: No big deal.
Update: Ifill plays the race card. Did I call it or what?
Ifill questions why people assume that her book will be favorable toward Obama.
“Do you think they made the same assumptions about Lou Cannon (who is white) when he wrote his book about Reagan?” said Ifill, who is black. Asked if there were racial motives at play, she said, “I don’t know what it is. I find it curious.”
And note this:
The host of PBS’”Washington Week” and senior correspondent on “The NewsHour” said she did not tell the Commission on Presidential Debates about the book.
Update: Comic relief from Jim Treacher.
Update: Tim Graham at Newsbusters writes…
Gwen Ifill responded to questions about impartiality in an AP interview with David Bauder by suggesting the critics might be racist: “Do you think they made the same assumptions about Lou Cannon (who is white) when he wrote his book about Reagan?” Asked if there were racial motives at play, she said, “I don’t know what it is. I find it curious.”
This is a curious complaint, since (a) Cannon was never the sole moderator or even a questioner in a Ronald Reagan debate in 1980 or 1984 and (b) Lou Cannon wrote at least five books about Reagan. Ifill is probably referring to President Reagan: Role of a Lifetime, released in 1991. An Amazon.com search also suggests the titles Ronald Reagan: A Life in Politics (2004), Governor Reagan (2003), Ronald Reagan: The Presidential Portfolio (with Michael Beschloss, 2003), Reagan (1982), and Ronnie & Jesse: A Political Odyssey (1969).
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
 |
Biden: Tea Party stopped us from growing the economy
May 23, 2012 01:55 PM by Doug Powers
32 Comments
Catholic lawsuit against Obamacare mandate cites 1993 legislation written by Ted Kennedy and Chuck Schumer
May 22, 2012 04:35 PM by Doug Powers
45 Comments
Biden: Hey, I don’t blame people for voting for a convicted felon instead of my boss
May 18, 2012 01:21 PM by Doug Powers
73 Comments
Senate narrowly votes down Obama budget
May 16, 2012 06:09 PM by Doug Powers
47 CommentsObamacare cronyism: The First Lady’s patient-dumping, privacy-meddling scheme
May 16, 2012 08:56 AM by Michelle Malkin
102 CommentsTransparency update: Donors told to hand over cell phones upon entering Obama fundraisers
May 15, 2012 04:40 PM by Doug Powers
42 Comments
#ObamaInHistory
May 15, 2012 12:29 PM by Michelle Malkin
122 Comments
Categories: Barack Obama,John McCain,Media Bias,Michelle Obama
Twitchy
» Weaponized misogyny: Hustler punishes S.E. Cupp for pro-life views with explicit fake imageNewsBusters.org
» With a Straight Face, Matthews Spins: It's a 'Fact' That Obama Is Not a 'Reckless Spender'JustOneMinute
» Zimmerman Case - The Evolution of The EvidenceNice Deb
» Obama Promise Kept: Energy Prices Soon to Skyrocket from $16 per Megawatt to up to $357 per MegawattRedstate
» Daily Links – May 23, 2012
chapoutier has hijacked this thread. It is getting tiresome. Guess I’ll go back to my jigsaw puzzle.
Are you kidding? In a world filled with people who maim and murder at the drop of a hat, can you imagine what might happen should a VP Biden let off one of his infamous gaffes before a head of state or a terrorist leader like Ahmadinejad? (Obama said he would meet w/him, unconditionally.)
Talk about a jihad war dance, my friend, that indeed would be a disaster!
BTW, why do you have such a low opinion of Vice President Palin?
Is it her gender, her personality, her tenacity to succeed – depsite some heavy obstacles – what? Because I can’t see it. She is one of us non-elites, you know.
Uhhhh….they weren’t there before?
How many times have we heard about Wright? He had a news conference spcifically about the guy for pete’s sake. And how many times has Ayers been brought up? How many commercials have the AIP run about Ayers? How many posts has MM or Hewitt or whomever put up? What exactly is Stanley Kurtz trying to dig up?
I think she would go further (if Barry was there). She would unabashedly try to kiss his manberries on national television.
(Oops… is my language too over the top for this blog?)
chapoutier, your lack of ligic is a symptom of your liberal bias.
Only from the aspect that he failed to control Obama’s rudeness and tendency to interrupt. Of course, most of the fault for that was with Obama.
ligic = logic
Chafe-powder,
Logic is only dizzying to you because it makes sense.
Ok. If Gwen Ifill, then why not Michelle Malkin? For that matter, why not Michelle Obama? Why not Sean Hannity? Why not Rev. Wright? Why not Rush Limbaugh? Why not me? If Gwen Ifill’s “honesty” about her bias matters more than her professionalism or her journalistic integrity, than why not pick a name out of a hat? What would be the difference?
Ya know, there’s a guy in front of our building right now who’s having an argument with somebody in his head. Maybe he could moderate. What would be the difference?
Her policy positions, from what I can make out of them. And the fact that I do not think she knows enough to be veep.
Playing the gender class or this creative new “hates tenacity” card is just as stupid as being accused of hating Obama because of his race.
And btw, I grew up relatively poor and until 6th grade lived and worked on a small family-run dairy farm. I have either earned merit scholarships or had to take out loans for every penny of my higher education. I have shot a deer. I have grown to like Budweiser.
There is a money stake involved here. Ifill is literally betting on a Obama win. If Obama wins, her book release is “timely” (big payday) if not it is irrelevant (tiny payday). She has an interest in this more than most. The temptation to influence outcome would be very great for most. Now how does that compare to MM or anyone else not counting on Obama as a payday?
All very good questions, the answer to which is, Obama has been lying about his past actions and associates. He has also failed to release any of the records. It’s always about the coverup, right?
Well then tell us chap. How many times has Ayers been brought up in the MSM, or MSNBC, or CNN. Tell us…please!
Tried to phone but line was busy. Surprise!!!
You forgot PBS. Better yet, how many times has the impartial Gwen Ifill asked Obama about Wright, or Ayers, or Rezko?
I didn’t think Gwen Ifill was all that bad in the 2004 VP debate. In comparison to the somnolent Jim Lehrer, she was actually awake. Maybe she didn’t intend to be tough on John Edwards and Edwards was so dumb that he actually could not hit her softballs but by most accounts Dick Cheney did quite well in that debate. Tom Brokaw is far worse than Ifill. Just watch the 1988 VP debate. Brokaw was smarmy and condescending to Quayle. Ifill was not nearly as bad.
Given that she’s got more executive experience than your entire ticket, and is at least as comprehensible without a teleprompter, it doesn’t speak very well for the Obamessiah, does it? Personally, I think her really big problem is that the campaign is trying to make her spout McCain talking points rather than just be herself. I can understand why, but I still think it’s a big mistake.
Eye-full is expanding the racist division that Obama is perpetrating. What ever happened to the MLK concept of a color-blind society…the one we constantly have shoved down our throats?
This book will be nothing more than a deification of Obama…much like the mythification of “The Prophet” Mohammed.
Michelle, I emailed jb@debates.org right away this morning…let’s all get on this and demand she be taken off the debate. Email:
Hello,
I am disappointed and appalled that Gwen Ifill will moderate the VP Presidential debate. Her new book and her personal views are highly biased towards Barack Obama. If there is any question of her bias which there clearly is, she should immediately be removed from conducting this forum.
Thank you
And I’m betting you’re voting for Obama based on your comments. But I can not for the life of me understand why anyone who claims to have been poor would vote for an individual who wants to tax the lifeblood out of you.
I’m a small business owner, and can just barely afford my current taxes. After Obama wins (and he probably will), I will be taxed out of business. That’s the thing about liberals: they suck every ounce of entrepreneurial spirit out of America.
Anecdotally I can say I have seen mention of him many times on MSNBC. As for more definitive proof, if you go to the New York Times, search “Ayers, Weather, Obama” you will get 2,480 links to articles.
I said nothing of her “executive experience”. And I guess we agree to disagree on Obama’s coherence without a teleprompter. But if you think this:
Is a coherent answer to a question about the bailout, then again, I guess we will agree to disagree.
like mayor Kwame Kirkpatrick
It didn’t bring in enough money or votes.
Hmm, isn’t this supposed to be about a moderator who’s in the tank for Obama? 322 posts later we’re debating the VP choices, whether or not Michelle would be a fair moderator, and Chap growing up on a farm.
Back to the point..
For or against, she’s got a book coming out about Obama – she should not be moderating this debate, period.
Dont be surprised if your BALLOT happens to be on OBAMA LETTERHEAD.
Anyone get an e-mail back yet? i ahve not
Ryan,
I was using MM as a counter example of whether or not obvious political bias automatically disqualifies one from 1) objectively being able to be a fair moderator and 2) whether the mere specter of partiality should disqualify someone.
That is very much OT.
So thats your problem…too much Oberdick. I’m sure it was in defense of Obama…and in defense of Ayers terrorist actions.
You get 3,420 links if you search “Bristol Palin”. So that tells us who the bigger story is there!
I emailed Brown…
Ms. Brown,
In the interest of at least feigning impartiality in tomorrow evening’s vice presidential candidates debate, would it not be at the very least wise to have Ms. Ifill recused as the “moderator “. At the very least, have someone with a less overt Obama leaing stance…..Hillary Clinton comes to mind.
Sarcasm aside, she would be less biased. Just saying…
Warm Regards,
No. Rarely watch that. Too much other good stuff on then. Mostly Morning Joe.
If you think Obama’s coherent, I guess we’ll just have to agree to disagree. Better coached than previously though, I agree. You said you thought she was too inexperienced. If the President isn’t an executive, what exactly do you consider him to be? One of the more foolish answers I’ve seen from you, and a sure sign of desperation. Repeat: She has more executive (and leadership!) experience than your entire ticket. Since the thread has been hijacked anyway, let me also point out that hiding out well away from Washington and telling them “call me if you need me” is neither leadership nor doing his job, which when last I looked, was being a US Senator.
So it’s a subjective sort of dislike, based on assumption and judgements made from afar?
Are you really being fair?
Also, I congratulate you on your success. I only wish you could see that Obama’s policies would severely limit or curtail those same possibilities to other young Americans who are trying to work themselves up success’s ladder, just like you.
The email I sent to Janet Brown.
Ms. Brown,
I am just wondering if Gwen Ifill will be required to disclose to the candidates and to the public that she is in fact an Obama supporter and is writing a book that will include him?
It seems only right.
I’m sure if Rush Limbaugh were moderating a debate his support of conservative ideals would have to be disclosed.
If the debate commission does not take care of this, it will prove that the commission is also biased and that the debates are in fact fixed to a point.
Thank-you for taking the ethical path on this matter.
No. I said she did not have enough knowledge.
Surprise! I am a Democrat who (generally) goes along with the Democratic platform. She is a Republican who, by all indications is on the conservative side. I do not think it is in any way subjective to say i disagree (generally) with her policies. And I do know her stance on certain big issues (like abortion, teaching creationism) and I know full well I disagree with those.
Right after she’s introduced and gives some customary thanks I’d like Gov. Palin to say “Good luck on your book, Ms. Ifill”.
I see that as her brain working too fast for her mouth. Happens with some smart people, and in her case (having seen her semi-extemporaneous speech at the Republican Convention) I would guess it’s caused by the fact that she’s trying to remember McCain talking points rather than simply speaking her own mind. A mistake, in my estimation, not of her making. Obama’s verbal pauses and shuffles are something else entirely. He give every indication of somebody who is trying very hard not to blurt out what he really thinks – looking for a politically palatable answer.
That would actually be really funny.
My email to Janet Brown at jb@debates.org with similar one to PBS posted at http://www.pbs.org/weta/washingtonweek/feedback.html (Did I miss anyone?)
Dear Ms. Brown,
I call upon your sense of justice and fairness regarding Gwen Ifill moderating the vice presidential debate.
There is a legitimate, and dare I say legal, conflict of interest involved. She has a vested financial interest in one candidate winning over the other. The term “moderator” implies someone impartial, in the middle, with no strings attached. That cannot be said about the author of a book heavily promoting one of the candidates. How is that just, fair, or impartial?
I call on you to do the right thing and replace Ms. Ifill–or at the very least make an announcement at the beginning of the debate regarding her book and the conflict of interest it represents.
I’ve been to 40+ countries and seen much injustice. Our country’s free and relatively untainted election system is a model for the world. Please do not taint it through your actions.
Thank you.
Of what? Rabble rousing? Pushing legislation advocating infanticide? Running for President? Sorry, that dog just don’t hunt. Obama’s lack of knowledge of anything but Marxist cant is so bad even I get embarrassed for him. And she’s running for vice President. He’s the “top” of an excruciatingly bad ticket. We’ve elected governors before, with mixed results. We’ve never elected anyone to the Presidency with as little experience and knowledge as Obama.
So thats not your problem but factually correct.
Your silence on this is very telling!
How about if they ADD another moderator…say someone like Joe Hilley or Kayleen Johnson?
That’s fair? Right?
I suspect you are confusing a lack of knowledge of the issues with profound disagreement on the merits of an issue.
Thought that this email I received was very interesting so I wanted to share it with you all.
————————————–
Pause a moment, reflect back.
These events are actual events from history.
They really happened!!!
Do you remember?
1. 1968 Bobby Kennedy was shot and killed by Muslim male extremist between the ages of 17 and 40.
2. In 1972 at the Munich Olympics, athletes were kidnapped and massacred by Muslim male extremists between the ages of 17 and 40.
3. In 1979, the US embassy in Iran was taken over by Muslim male extremists between the ages of 17 and 40.
4. During the 1980′s a number of Americans were kidnapped in Lebanon by Muslim male extremists between the ages of 17 and 40.
5. In 1983, the US Marine barracks in Beirut was blown up by Muslim male extremists between the ages of 17 and 40.
6. In 1985 the cruise ship Achille Lauro was hijacked and a 70 year old American passenger was murdered and thrown overboard in his wheelchair by Muslim male extremists between the ages of 17 and 40.
7. In 1985 TWA flight 847 was hijacked at Athens , and a US Navy diver trying to rescue passengers was murdered by Muslim male extremists between the ages of 17 and 40.
8. In 1988 , Pan Am Flight 103 was bombed by Muslim male extremists between the ages of 17 and 40.
9. In 1993 the World Trade Center was bombed the first time by Muslim male extremists between the ages of 17 and 40.
10. In 1998, the US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania were bombed by Muslim male extremists between the ages of 17 and 40.
11. On 9/11/01, four airliners were hijacked; two were used as missiles to take down the World Trade Centers and of the remaining two, one crashed into the US Pentagon and the other was diverted and crashed by the passengers. Thousands of people were killed by Muslim male extremists between the of 17 and 40.
12. In 2002 the United States fought a war in Afghanistan against Muslim male extremists between the ages of 17 and 40.
13. In 2002 reporter Daniel Pearl was kidnapped and murdered by– you guessed it–Muslim male extremists between the ages of 17 and 40.
No, I really don’t see a pattern here to justify profiling, do you?
So, to ensure we Americans never offend anyone, particularly fanatics intent on killing us, Airport security screeners will no longer be allowed to profile certain people…
Absolutely No Profiling!
They must conduct random searches of 80-year-old women, little kids, airline pilots with proper identification, secret agents who are members of the President’s security detail, 85-year old Congressmen with metal hips, and Medal of Honor winner and former Governor Joe Foss, But leave Muslim Males between the ages 17 and 40
Alone lest they be guilty of profiling.
According to The Book of Revelation:
The Anti-Christ will be a man, in his 40s, of MUSLIM descent, who will deceive the nations with persuasive language, and have a MASSIVE Christ-like appeal….the prophecy says that people will flock to him and he will promise false hope and world peace, and when he is in power, He will destroy everything.
And Now:
For the award winning Act of Stupidity
Of all times the People of America want to elect, to the most Powerful position on the face of the Planet The Presidency of the United states of America
A Muslim
Male
in his 40s!!
Say what you want, he was born a Muslim (and is still considered a Muslim by his family), to a Muslim father.. His mother remarried, yep another Muslim so what makes you think she didn’t raise him as a Muslim? His African family is Muslim, he attended a Muslim school.
HELLO!!!!!!
Have the American People completely lost their Minds, or just their Power of Reason ???
I’m sorry but I refuse to take a chance on the ‘unknown’ candidate who will probably appoint as many as 4 Supreme Court Judges.
As the writer of the award winning story ‘Forrest Gump’ so aptly put it,
‘Stupid Is As Stupid Does.’
Ifill, yep, I know how Ifill operates.
http://imustimes.wordpress.com/2008/09/29/imus-questions-ifills-veracity/
Wow…
I didn’t know there were Muslims around when Revelations was written.
What passage are you citing again? Or better yet, what Bible are you qouting from?
Here is the email I sent to Janet Brown:
Janet, I am very disappointed in you. Gwen Ifill moderating the vice presidential debate is not a good nor a fair choice. Moderate means something, look it up. Why is it that you can’t win fairly but have to cheat? You and your “commission” are obviously partisan and it is showing by your total lack of responsibility and fairness. We are all American citizens (I hope) and deserve an equal playing field. It might be too late to pick another moderator at this time but I hope you will at least direct Ms. Ifill to come clean and admit her bias for Obama before she asks questions. Also, please direct her to be extremely careful to not input her own prejudices and bias’ into the debate.
My e-mail to Janet Brown:
Ms. Brown:
Please explain to me how Gwen Ifill was first selected, then retained as the Vice Presidential debate moderator while it is common knowledge that she is clearly advocating for one of the candidates; specifically Barack Obama? Ms. Ifill’s biases are plain to see, and how you could retain her as moderator is stunningly myopic. Ms. Ifill has demonstrated her partisan bona fides time and again throughout this election cycle, as well as the 2004 presidential race. Of Ms. Ifill’s selection as moderator, respected journalist Greta Van Susteren wrote:
“I confirmed for us here on GretaWire: the McCain campaign did NOT know about Gwen Ifill’s book (I think I told them when I made my efforts – emails about midnight – to find out!) I am stunned….the campaign (actually both) should have been told before the campaign agreed to have her moderate. It simply is not fair – in law, this would create a mistrial.”
It would be appropriate for her to recuse herself from this, and any further debates this election cycle. In the event she refuses to do so, it is your responsibility to remove and replace her with a nonpartisan journalist who has no interest, financial or otherwise, in the outcome of the debate or the election. Should you astoundingly choose to keep her on as debate moderator, I expect nothing less than full disclosure at the outset of the debate, outlining her upcoming book about Obama to be released on inauguration day, as well as her fawning coverstory article in Essence Magazine. The American People deserve nothing less!
Effectively, she makes money if he’s elected, and doesn’t if he’s not.
The most basic conflict of interest of them all.
Astonishing.
Greta Van Susteren has been a pleasant surprise in the last month or so.
Her trip to Alaska must have opened her eyes a bit.
That, and possibly her husband’s support for McCain.
In any event, I am so glad that she’s focusing more on the election and less on that Casey Anthony.
That is interesting and scary. However, I always heard that the anti-christ would be someone born in a foreign land. Barack was born in the U.S. Now, if his birth certificate was forged, and he is indeed a muslim, we would then have something to fear. As soon as I wrote that, I got a chill down my spine! The anti-christ is more than able to fix a birth certificate. I’m just saying…
If anyone is a blathering idiot, it’s YOU. For a lawyer, you are incredibly obtuse and morally blind – I can’t for the life of me imagine how inept you must be in your practice. Your malpractice insurance premium must be sky high.
Our Republic is in its death throes because of idiotic voters like you who jump on a demagogic bandwagon without fully examining the candidate’s record and experience. It’s because of idiotic voters like you who fail to critique the empty rhetoric of the Empty Suit that our nation will succumb to a socialist nightmare. It’s because of idiotic voters like you who go for flash and glitter rather than substance and character that America will devolve into a Third World country.
And you hijack this thread merely to gratify your prejudices? You turn a blind eye to this bias and use it to support your ideology? What a morally bankrupt and unethical piece of work you are.
As someone who purports to practice law, I am stunned that you fail to acknowledge the injustice of this issue.
What a lawyer. You give grounds for Shakespeare’s assertion.
Awww…
Hugs and kisses to you too atheling!
Aliquis me iam postulavit. Homo Sapiens.
My email to Ms. Brown:
Ms. Brown, it has come to my attention that the person who is currently scheduled to be the moderator for the ONLY VP debate that will be held, Gwen Ifill, has a severe conflict of interest. She has a book that is scheduled to be published on January 20th 2009, which, as you are certainly aware, is inauguration day. The book is “Breakthrough: Politics and Race in the Age of Obama.” That book will of course only be monetarily successful if Obama wins the election. Therefore the moderator has a vested interest in making sure that the Obama/Biden ticket wins. This cannot be allowed to happen. Ms. Ifill MUST be replaced by a neutral moderator. And she needs to be replaced immediately. I cannot believe that the presidential debates commission would knowingly, and with malice aforethought, chose a moderator with such a strong conflict of interest. I sincerely hope that it was not intentional and that Ms. Ifill duped you by not disclosing that bias. You have the opportunity to do the right thing here. I hope you choose wisely.
Let’s face it…this is a reparations election.
So, a radical, thin-resumed black presidential candidate? Whatever.
A black, biased moderator with a conflict of interest? Whatever.
It occurred to me a week or so ago that “affordable housing” was just reparations by another means. Rush thinks similarly now.
well if the fix is in we are in deep doo-doo come January….Palin will need to be on her toes that’s for sure and even that might not help considering how stacked the deck is before she answers the very first question…ain’t American politics grand?? NOT…sadly, we are witnessing the demise of America as we know or knew it….
I wrote an email to Janet H. Brown, Executive Director of the Debates Commission.
Ain’t holdin’ my breath, but wonders happen.
Nec pluribus impar…baby.
Frank Farenkoph, the gambling lobbyist from K Street (I love it when he refers to it as “gaming”) was allowed to negotiate for the Republicans. Was it any surprise that Farenkoph had a get along-go along attitude. He agreed to liberals like Jim Lehrer, Bob Schiefer and Tom Brokaw. And this may be amazing but Gwen Ifill is far more fair to Republicans than all three of them put together. She did not coddle John Edwards back in 2004. Granted, Edwards is not exactly Edward Teller in the intelligence department but Ifill picked him apart. Brokaw is infitely worse. He is a dyed in the wool liberal. He rolls his eyes and shakes his head when interviewing conservatives.
I would like to see Michelle Malkin ask the questions. It would be great to see Joe Biden squirm when asked about his ficitious family history. And best of all, Michelle is easy on the eyes.
Do the references to the NYTimes give any information as to where the articles were placed, i.e. front page vs. with the obit column? Number of appearances have little to do with context and placement.
Off Topic, but I thought you’d all like to know (be careful when you open the link, there is a photo of Bernhard and it’s not pretty):
Sandra Bernhard kinda gets a pass from me.
She is SOOOO butt ugly that I feel sorry for her. I treat disabled people with a little more tolerance…
From the Commission of Debates on website.
“Selection of Questioners
Pick a person/persons who are familiar with the issues and candidates in the election being debated. Journalists are likely to be more experienced and comfortable with handling the technical requirements of a broadcast setting. Above all, choose a moderator or panelists whom you and the debate participants trust to be professional and fair.
If you decide to organize the debate as a town meeting, select an unbiased audience. Consider asking a neutral, independent organization, such as a polling or research group, to identify impartial individuals to serve as members of the audience.”
Can Gwen Ifill be unbiased? I guess we will soon find out..
All this does is make it appear that the democrats need an advantage in the debate because they could never win straight up. This is business as usual. They get help from the media, acadamia, hollywood, unions.
Thanks, Michelle, for posting the Debate Commission’s email earlier – I sent in my “two cents worth” – just stated that here in “middle America”, the appearance of a conflict of interest is there – If Ms. Ifill did disclose to all parties (Debate Commission, Obama campaign, McCain campaign) details of her upcoming book, and they all still agreed upon her, we can’t complain –
However, if she didn’t disclose this book coming out, then NONE of these 3 parties did any “vetting” or research –
Don’t tell me she’s all they had to choose from -
I would like to know if Ifill voluntarily disclosed her involvement with the book, the title and thesis, as well as the projected distribution day, to the Presidential Debate commission before her name was even considered as a moderator.
At a very minimum, Ifill herself had an obligation to be forthright about her conflict of interest.
If she did not openly and thoroughly disclose her “book project” during the vetting process, she should recuse herself.
Conflict of Interest.
Just a little bit.
If you can’t get through the main numbers, call the GOP headquarters and swamp these people with calls:
http://www.rnc.org/ p/202.863.8500
Give them the message that McCain’s campaign is totally on the line for something this foolish.
Sorry, the above message is for those interested in stopping the lard piled on the crap sandwich.
Does this election remind anyone of the OJ trial?
Clowns and buffoons everywhere…
A conservative could write a book about the “breakthrough” of minority politicians and this being the “Age of Obama”. In fact many conservatives have praised Obama for making history as a presidential candidate of color, politics aside.
However, since many on the Right have already decided on this as a built in excuse
ifwhen Palin crashes tomorrow, I’d just as well see Ms. Ifill replaced. I’d replace her just to get rid of any appearance of impropriety. I’m tired of the victimhood, and would rather just nip this all in the bud.Although I initially praised the selection of Palin a a brilliant pick politically. I had no idea she would be so coddled. More importantly, I had no idea she was so ill prepared for the gig and lacking knowledge, or the important skill of thinking on one’s feet. I hope Gwen Ifill is replaced. They can let Glen Beck moderate this debate, and it won’t make any difference, or make Palin look any more competent.
Who knows? It’s not however, intellectually honest to suggest that Malkin who openly disdains Biden and Obama, would be more FAIR than Ifill.
I believe those who follow the logic of e.t. are simply kissing up to the host, or being willfully dishonest.
mistressjustice: I know you are buying all of the biased stories in the media but wouldn’t even you be able to see through you blind hatred to figure out that a person openly pulling for one side of the other would be a bad moderater?
This entire election is a joke.
nyc123me: I know, rampant liberal voter fraud, massive liberal media bias, Flat out lies about palin being called truth by said media, its not suprising most americans don’t know what Obama is really about. This is why I can never support obama if he wins and think he should be impeached asap.
I even heard one today that McCain was personaly responsiable for the bank de-regulation. Him, one single senator. Amazing isn’t it?
The ignorance of the left knows no bounds.
This is not why I came to this country, this is what I came to escape from. Looks like I may well have to move on again soon.
On October 1st, 2008 at 4:47 pm,
I haven’t read all of your posts here, but I guess you would disagree with the guests who suggest that Hannity or Malkin would be good moderaters. As you read, I do hope Ifill is replaced to avoid all the crap.
BTW, I don’t hate Palin. I actually think she’s smoking hawt, and I’d love to have some drinks with her and talk sports. However, after watching and listening to her for past month, I think she’s completely in over her head. Also, I obviously disagree with her many of her political views. But I could handle the views better if she were more competent and skilled. I don’t think she’s ready.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/judd-legum/ifill-book-public-weeks-b_b_130834.html
Grounds please??? You think it’s easy impeaching a president based on dislike or preference? You know better. You can’t decide on grounds of impeachment before the president enters office. You know better.
Yets she, runing for VICE-president, has more experience than Obama running for president.
How about election fraud. That will do to start with.We will need better grounds quickly before he does any damage to the us economy like pass the 800 bilion in spending he promised.
I haven’t read all of your posts here, but I guess you would disagree with the guests who suggest that Hannity or Malkin would be good moderaters.
I’m hoping someone has something big on Obama and they’re just holding it back until right before the election, so the media and the Obama-fascist machine don’t have time to sweep it under the rug.
Probably not. Niether would I although I would try. But at least I wouldn’t have written a book on one of the candidates.
AllahPundit say over at Michelle’s Hot Air:
He is totally wrong. Most Americans get all their news from the MSM, and we often forget this fact. Whenever Republicans are “above” responding to the bias of the MSM, the winners are always Dems.
This being “above” responding to the bias of the MSM is killing Republicans. We had eight years of it with President Bush.
This is very serious to have a debate “moderator” who is in the tank for Obama:
1) She definitely has given the questions to the Obama camp. Why wouldn’t she? She stands to gain from an Obama presidency.
2) She is going to ask softball questions about the Democrats and gotcha questions about the Republicans.
The McCain camp is running a Dole presidential campaign, and I really fear the consequences.
From the last line of this article at Yahoo News (emphasis mine):
[Ifill] “… said, “I don’t know what it is. I find it curious.”
“It” is the job description (in bold, above). Curiosity sated.
From Wiki: (again, emphasis mine)
“Louis Cannon (born 1933) is an American non-fiction author and biographer.”
That an author and biographer would have some bias concerning his subject is not surprising. Other authors might have a different bias and write a competing opinion. As we’ve seen, “fairness” and “lack of bias”, “completeness”, etc., are not a requirement for writing a book. The public has the time and ability to make its own decisions (to buy, to read, to believe).
Also from Wiki: (again, emphasis mine)
“Gwen Ifill (born September 29, 1955) is an American journalist, and television newscaster. She is the managing editor and moderator for Washington Week (PBS) and a senior correspondant[sic] for The News Hour (PBS). She is a political pundit, appearing on various programs.”
Once there was some expectation of “fairness”, “lack of bias”, “completeness”, etc., from journalists and television newscasters when they are merely reporting the news (OpEds are different), But we all see how things happen in reality.
There seems to be a clear difference in job descriptions between Gwen Ifill and Louis Cannon; why does Gwen not see this? Or does she see and attach no significance?
Tomorrow, she’s going to moderate the one and only Vice presidential debate for 2008. No second debate, no re-dos.
Now that we are aware of Gwen’s book, is the expectation of “fairness”, etc., reasonable? Her book, and article are clearly pro-(one of the Presidential candidates), and there is an economic interest on her part; one outcome, she makes a lot of money, the other outcome she makes bupkus.
I’m surprised that, given the volumes of noise about “journalistic integrity” and “journalistic ethics” the MSM loudly pontificate on a regular basis, she hasn’t stepped down.
This will be about as fair as a Salem witch trial.
Lets see, a list of 100 questions on the issues. Then we score them by which are advantageous to Palin and which are advantageous to Biden. Lets say 40 to Palin, 40 to Biden, 20 impartial.
Which ones do I choose? hmmm. Cheat or be fair. I have money invested as well as political idealogy, race promotion, etc hmm.
I wouldn’t put it past her with these biases to give Biden the questions beforehand so he looks good and Palin comes off as less knowledgeable.
Voter fraud is cheating and the Obama campaign is up to its knuckles in that Acorn known voter fraud group. America is better than that. Of all the people who could moderate these things, we have to have people like this. A shame.
I sent an e-mail to both the Presidential Debate Committee and PBS. I doubt that I will get a response.
I agree, Gabe. I think AP, while a fine fellow, sometimes falls for an “it’s all good” rationale, as does (sadly) McCain.
McCain and Palin should be very clear – in the MSM - that their competiton is not just Obama/Biden, but also the MSM itself.
That last sentence reiterates her qualifications as a journalist and moderator…in her mind. The mind of a propagandist. How groovy.
Care to actually back that up?
Let’s just be up-front. And I am sure someone will call me a racist and I don’t freakin care. There is not a black skinned person in this country that doesn’t feel that certain “tingle up their leg” that a black man is going to live in the white house. We are just fooling ourselves to think we are that colorblind as a nation. And for Gwen Ifil to try to make us think she is different and is going to be “impartial” and hey, maybe, even have her mind changed by this debate and vote Republican, well then I have a bridge she can buy in Alaska to nowhere.
Nowhere, which is where Obama is going to take this country and very, very few blacks in this country care. They only care that this President will be BLACK. Period.
This is what happens when the RINO McCain “reaches across the aisle”. The only time real conservatives should “reach across the aisle” is to knock the SOB out. Unless conservatives become ruthless in the very near future, be prepared for the reign of Chairman Obama, that is what “reaching across the aisle” will get us. Bring back dueling!
I heard McCain’s nicey nicey putrid response to the Gwen Ifill situation and this is why you’re losing John. Stop kissing up to the MSM.You’d think he’d get a clue by now.They only supported you when you were against Republicans.
Gwen, BABY!
You miss the point (intentionally???).
Was Lou Cannon moderating a debate, the outcome of which would heavily influence the sales of his book???
Gwennie, you are hopeless.
NY — For being a newcomer to America, you catch on quick.
As for finding a different country to go to (mentioned in a previous post), I hear Dubai is hoppin.’ Ironically, it’s a for capitalism — unlike some people I know.
They’re not extreme about Islam, but they know they have to put up with it to a point. So, if you’re looking to make your fortune, those days look to be gone in the U.S. I hope you managed to bank something while you were here. And now, with this new-and-improved bailout bill, all our passbook accounts will be insured OVER $100,000! (sarc off)
UNBELIEVEABLE.
How dare Ifill be allowed to be an integral part of this Debate as she CLEARLY has an agenda and is WHOLLY committed to the Democrats and OBAMA…period.
There should be a “BREAKING NEWS” disclaimer, running the bottom of the screen the entire time, IF Ifill is allowed saying “All questions asked, including facial expressions/gestures, against Sarah Palin (and the Republicians) have been APPROVED by OBAMA concerning Ifill – ps buy my book WORSHIPING OBAMA and let’s get him elected by Ifill”.
This would NEVER be allowed to occur if the “tables were reversed”.
The Republicans need to MAKE A STAND and just QUIT agreeing to go onto the BIASED Network shows AND allowing these LIBERALS to always control the debates. Stand up for once!
Nuff said.
Nostradamuslives by Jeff Schrembs