| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Politix |
| VP Debate Moderator Releasing Pro-Obama Book on Inauguration Day |
| 2008-10-01 |
| Posted by:tipper |
| #12 The Repubs were not going to get anything close to an unbiased, neutral moderator. Might as well accept one with an obvious conflict of interest - she has a motivation not to be too flagrant with everyone watching. |
| Posted by: Glenmore 2008-10-01 19:21 |
| #11 James Taranto, editor of the Wall Street Journal's OpinionJournal.com, discusses Ms. Ifill in today's Best of the Web. He thinks this is all a tempest in a teacup: Journalism entails endless conundrums of this sort. Every reporter who covers a particular campaign has an "investment" in that campaign. This is presumably why debate moderators are not usually selected from the traveling campaign press. Further, it is quite possible that the appearance of a conflict of interest will actually work to neutralize the reality of such a conflict--that is, that Ifill, knowing her book puts her under additional scrutiny, will take extra care to be fair. It also occurs to us to wonder just how important the moderators of these debates are. We've watched every presidential and vice presidential debate since 1988, and in our memory the moderators are just a blur--an endless procession of Jim Lehrers, a significant percentage of whom were Jim Lehrer. There is one exception: CNN's Bernard Shaw, who opened the second Bush-Dukakis debate by asking the Massachusetts governor: "If Kitty Dukakis were raped and murdered, would you favor an irrevocable death penalty for the killer?" This was a highly dramatic question, one that some Dukakis partisans thought unfair to their man. In truth, though, Shaw's question worked to Dukakis's disadvantage only because Dukakis played to type, answering it with a rote recitation of his position against capital punishment. He could have answered in a way that was both human and thoughtful: "If someone did that to my wife, I'd want to rip the bastard limb from limb with my own hands. But in a civilized country... |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2008-10-01 18:43 |
| #10 i'm w/ you Steve -- the expectation that my gender / social class / whatever should determine my vote, and likewise, that if i rebel against that notion, that i'm somehow not an 'authentic' whatever because of it is galling. |
| Posted by: Querent 2008-10-01 17:23 |
| #9 They have proven they want it more then we do and therefore deserve it. Well they've certainly worked harder to steal it, if that's what you mean. I confess that I get rather upset when someone tries to steal my vote. Makes me ornery and more likely to vote against that party. So while McCain isn't the perfect candidate for me, when I see ACORN, Soros, Move.on, the Ohio SoS, the MSM, and Democratic glad-handers large and small out there trying to take the election for themselves, it makes me determined to help Mr. McCain. |
| Posted by: Steve White 2008-10-01 13:34 |
| #8 I completely agree with you Betty. With the craptastic campaign McCain is running, he does not deserve to win. His "bipartisanship" banter is feeble and will not work because the Dems do not want no participate. He comes off tired, out of ideas and just holding on until the end. I cannot believe this is the best this country has to offer for presidential nominees. We republicans deserve what is about to be served to us. We have failed as a party and have been out performed by the Democrats. They have proven they want it more then we do and therefore deserve it. We let ourselved down. |
| Posted by: Yosemite Sam 2008-10-01 11:06 |
| #7 MARK GOLDBLATT: This is what Gov. Palin needs to do. "Thank you for the question, Ms. Ifill — patronizing though it is. And, yes, if pressed, I could probably stand up right now, walk across the stage and name every country on that blank map of the Middle East you’ve so graciously set up for me. But I think I’ll pass. First of all, I’d rather not spend next week fielding questions about whether I saw Tina Fey doing another impression of me of Saturday Night Live, this time bending over to point out Yemen — during which, of course, she’ll throw in a blank stare and gratuitous wiggle of her butt in order to suggest that the only reason John McCain picked me for the vice presidential slot was because I was once a beauty queen. Second of all, I’d rather not log onto the Internet next week and discover that one of your producers has surreptitiously supplied Bill Maher, who two weeks ago called me a “category five moron,” with a camera angle that shows a flash of cleavage — which, of course, he will freeze-frame and weave into an obscene rant. The point, Ms. Ifill, is that ever since I accepted Sen. McCain’s invitation to be his running mate, I’ve become an object of ridicule and derision among the media elites whose commitment to political correctness apparently admits an exception for howling, sophomoric sexism as long as it is directed at their ideological adversaries. It’s not that I expected a fair shake, Heaven knows. I realize that there’s a deep-seated emotional investment among liberal commentators in the candidacy of Barack Obama. I watched them chew up and spit out one of their perennial darlings — Hillary Clinton — when she stood in the way of their group hug. I heard Senator Clinton called a “big f — -ing whore” by an Air America host; I heard one MSNBC host accuse her of “pimping out” her daughter, another call her a “she-devil,” and a third suggest that she needed to be taken into a backroom and beaten senseless to convince her to drop out of the primary race. And I heard a CBS News anchor — yes, the same one who turned a recent interview with me into a pop quiz — ask Sen. Clinton if she remembered being nicknamed “Miss Frigidaire” in school. Ugly stuff, isn’t it? So it’s no surprise that when Senator McCain began to surge in the polls after he selected me as his running mate, the liberal media would come loaded for bear every time I made a public statement. Ever since Senator McCain made that selection, by the way, I’ve been working hard to get up to speed on foreign policy and global issues. The reason I wasn’t up to speed beforehand is that, curiously enough, I’d been focusing all my energy on doing the jobs I’d been elected to do. When I was elected mayor of Wasilla, I tried to be a good mayor. When I was elected governor of the Alaska, I tried to be a good governor. I didn’t regard either position as a stepping stone to anything else. I saw no need to go on fact-finding tours, at taxpayers’ expense, to foreign countries in an effort to bolster my geopolitical credentials for higher office. By the time John McCain and I take office in January, rest assured I will be up to speed on geopolitics. I will be altogether qualified to be a heartbeat from the presidency. And I’ll surround myself with altogether qualified advisers and staff, not yes-men and yes-women. Because I know from experience — the very experience my opponent, Sen. Biden, lacks — what it is like to make an executive decision. I know what it is like, after the legislative wrangling is done, after the wheeling and dealing by party hacks who are determined to maintain political cover and plausible deniability, to have the buck stop at my desk, to enact a law by my signature, to put my name on the bottom line. So no, Ms. Ifill, I think I’ll keep my seat. You can take down your blank map. I came here tonight to discuss, to the best of my abilities, the international and domestic issues that confront the United States and to provide the American people with an insight into my governing philosophy. I didn’t come to convince voters that I could be a Jeopardy champion. If that’s the main qualification for the vice presidency, then I’d suggest both Sen. Biden and I step aside for Ken Jennings." |
| Posted by: Beavis 2008-10-01 08:47 |
| #6 The sort of biased moderator we have all come to expect in these debates. How about a bumper sticker for these elitist Obama supporters that says: "In the Bag for Barack?" |
| Posted by: JohnQC 2008-10-01 08:44 |
| #5 I've got a replacement, Fred Thompson. |
| Posted by: Hellfish 2008-10-01 07:58 |
| #4 The fact that the "press" is so in the tank for Obama means people would be very hard pressed to find anyone in that field that wouldn't be biased against the Republicans. Maybe they just chose the most biased one and will release the Barracuda and let all hell break loose. Maybe. Either way, I'm so sick of the talking heads talking down to us for not supporting this moron that I'm about to skin the next one that I see at a rally yammering on about how great the "ONE" is and how stupid we are. |
| Posted by: DarthVader 2008-10-01 07:51 |
| #3 Couldn't agtee more with you Betty. It's almost as if McCain is setting her up as a scapegoat for when he loses, instead of releasing the unique phenomenon that is the Barracuda. Why was she forced to take trivia pursuit quizzes when she could have been doing what she does best, energizing the base in her own unique manner. Maybe McCain is the one who should be dropped from the ticket. |
| Posted by: tipper 2008-10-01 05:31 |
| #2 Michelle Malkin has an excellent update. |
| Posted by: tipper 2008-10-01 05:22 |
| #1 well shame on the McCain camp for agreeing to have moderators who are so obviously biased. |
| Posted by: Betty Grating2215 2008-10-01 02:07 |