Hot Air Mobile
Home The Vault Gear About
Hot Air -- get your fill


Defining “moderator”

posted at 7:51 am on October 1, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
Share on Facebook | regular view

Perhaps the Commission on Presidential Debates doesn’t understand the term “moderator”.  According to Websters Dictionary, the word refers to a mediator, someone unaffiliated or neutral between two or more positions to facilitate discussion and negotiation.  Jim Lehrer moderated the first presidential debate between Barack Obama and John McCain, and did a fine job, mostly because he gave the appearance of fairness and objectivity.  Lehrer hasn’t written books or magazine articles praising one of these men, nor does he have a financial interest in the outcome of the election.

Instead, as Michelle Malkin notes, the CPD has chosen Gwen Ifill, the PBS host and author of an upcoming book on Barack Obama scheduled for publication on Inauguration Day, to moderate the debate between Sarah Palin and Joe Biden:

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.

Here’s the YouTube clip of Ifill explaining her book:

Let’s say for the sake of argument that Ifill doesn’t show any particular bias in this book towards Obama, even though Michelle documents both an Essence flack job and complaints about her coverage of the Republican convention that make her bias clear.  Instead, let’s just focus on the financial interest Ifill has in an Obama victory in five weeks.  If Obama loses, how will her book sell?  Not nearly as well as if Obama wins, and everyone knows that.

Moderators should not have a financial stake in the election.  That should be exceedingly obvious, and is to most people outside of the mainstream media and the Commission.  Her pending book publication should alone disqualify her to moderate any of the debates this cycle.  If Ifill had any sense of journalistic ethics, she would have turned them down herself.

Of course, the CPD could make this a habit.  Let’s have Brent Bozell and Glenn Beck moderate the final two presidential debates.  After all, that fits perfectly in the new Ifill tradition.

Update: T-Steel, one of The Moderate Voice’s rational and sane center-left writers, wonders what the CPD was thinking:

My dear ladies and gentlemen, in Election ‘08 where partisanship is as thick as a the foundation of the Empire State Building, having a moderator that appears “so friendly” to Senator Obama just doesn’t look right and opens the door to “the fix” talk. Although Ifill isn’t one of those screaming political pundits, I’ve heard her on various radio shows (especially urban radio) where she just gushes about Senator Obama’s historic run for the presidency. And with so much riding on Governor Palin’s performance in this debate, why have someone with an Obama tilt moderate? While I’m hardly a conservative and/or Republican (I do have a smattering of some conservative views), they have every right to not like this situation. And I would say the same if the moderator was a person who gushed about a McCain presidency.

I have a hard time believing that Gwen Ifill will NOT be tougher toward Governor Palin than Senator Biden. She seems to have much vested in an Obama presidency. She is a professional. She may moderate fairly. But with today’s political environment, couldn’t PBS find someone who hasn’t written a book and articles that are clearly positive to ultra-positive towards Senator Obama?

Update II: No, Kathryn Jean Lopez did not say Republicans should just “suck it up” regarding Ifill.  She was quoting an e-mailer.  She said that the idea that the blame lies on the four Republicans at the CPD was a “fair one”, and I agree.  What were they thinking when they signed off on Ifill?


Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4

Figures :/

aikidoka on October 1, 2008 at 7:54 AM

WTF

Purple Fury on October 1, 2008 at 7:54 AM

You’re pretending they care. Noble of you, but sadly misplaced.

TexasDan on October 1, 2008 at 7:55 AM

What is going on here? I feel like this is some strange bad dream. Ifill?? Who doesn’t believe this financial crisis is a manufactured crisis? RCP has Obama/Biden with 348 electoral votes with no toss ups? I have been on a hospice case for the last two weeks and I feel like I’ve woken up in a BAD dream!

red131 on October 1, 2008 at 7:55 AM

Here’s who should be the co-moderator.

A pity one has to go overseas to read stuff like this (present site excluded, natch).

Mr. Bingley on October 1, 2008 at 7:56 AM

You’re pretending they care. Noble of you, but sadly misplaced.

TexasDan on October 1, 2008 at 7:55 AM

They do care. They very much want Obama to win, and are willing to bend or break any rule to reach that goal.

MarkTheGreat on October 1, 2008 at 7:56 AM

Holy Shi&, The Obamaites have really have brass ba&&s. Talk about not even trying to hide a bias.

Tim Zank on October 1, 2008 at 7:57 AM

This is the definition of a conflict of interest. It’s not her husband who has a financial interest in the outcome of the election, it is her.

CanadianGuy on October 1, 2008 at 7:57 AM

This spartan analysis leaves aside her other hilarious Democrat/Liberal bias-verging-on-activism. She belongs on MSNBC.

Jaibones on October 1, 2008 at 7:58 AM

Sarah can flip this around on the moderator by talking past her to the American people and exposing the bias on live TV. The Commission on Presidential Debates chose this darling and McCain probably demurred because they seemed bent on finding the worst one they could. The woman has a financial stake in the election just like several members of Club Barry had a financial stake in the implosion of FM/FM….

best way to expose something is to put it on TV.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RhkmZM0A4NY

sven10077 on October 1, 2008 at 7:58 AM

Let’s have Mr. Freddoso moderate one Presidential debate…

*channelling John Dean*…

“yyyeeeeeeeeeaaaaahhhhhhhhrrrrrrrrggggghhhh!!!”

Lockstein13 on October 1, 2008 at 7:59 AM

Does McCain want to win? We have had 8 years of Bush playing nice and not wanting to besmirch the office of the President. How long do they expect us to lie down and wait for our bellies to be scratched? I told McCain campaign ‘no more money from me until I see some results’. Sorry I’m sick of the pass being given to the ‘messiah’. Where are the 527’s? Take the damn gloves off and push back. We can’t do it by ourselves!

red131 on October 1, 2008 at 7:59 AM

Instead of everyone coming on here and griping and moaning about this, what about taking a moment and dropping a couple hundred lines to the Commission on Presidential Debates and letting them know we are not going to tolerate this kind of nonsense anymore. We should demand that this gal be pulled from moderating the debates and put Jim Lehrer in there instead.

I’m serious. We shouldn’ allow this to happen.

I’m writing this guys right now.

Join me!

pilamaye on October 1, 2008 at 8:00 AM

Oh Surprise! A liberal moderator with “no bias”. Lets not even get into the race thing, oops, color me racist. Her coverage of the GOP convention might as well have taken place at a Klan rally, or is that the way a NPR reporter with no bias covers any and all events? Perhaps you just have to have no expression or emotions at all to be an NPR reporter…or perhaps you just have to pretend.

serenity on October 1, 2008 at 8:00 AM

Somebody. Fight. Back. Hard. Please.

horatio on October 1, 2008 at 8:00 AM

pilamaye on October 1, 2008 at 8:00 AM

I wrote at 6 am EDT.

red131 on October 1, 2008 at 8:01 AM

Here is a pdf of the debate contract signed by Kerry and Bush in ‘04.

Is a similar contract publicly available for McCain-Obama?

JiangxiDad on October 1, 2008 at 8:02 AM

Ok, this is the last straw. The left has abandoned any pretense of fairness and has decided to bludgeon Palin from behind. Typical of them though, they truly believe that the unwashed masses are blatantly stupid. Palin should stand up during the process and tell her to take her debate and stick it in their ear . . . or the orifice of her choice.

rplat on October 1, 2008 at 8:02 AM

Priceless,a Liberal biased moderator,and
supports Obama,this should of raised flags,
or general quarters at least!

First its Gibson,then the perky katie Couric,
and now Gwen Ifill as the ever helpful Liberals!

I can’t wait for Gwen to say to Biden,ya I know
your over your time limit,but take your time,and
when it comes to SarahCuda,it going to be,

YOUR TIME IS UP,Sarah Palin if you don’y obey me
I”LL CUT YOUR MIC OFF!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

canopfor on October 1, 2008 at 8:03 AM

Let’s have Brent Bozell and Glenn Beck moderate the final two presidential debates.

Or, Rush

franksalterego on October 1, 2008 at 8:04 AM

Yeah it does looks as the fix is in…..SDS is on full tilt boogie!

grapeknutz on October 1, 2008 at 8:04 AM

Perhaps a portion of the debate time can be devoted to Palin vs. Ifill.

Or Biden + Ifill,vs. Palin + ?

JiangxiDad on October 1, 2008 at 8:04 AM

We should demand that this gal be pulled from moderating the debates and put Jim Lehrer in there instead.

pilamaye on October 1, 2008 at 8:00 AM

Pilamaye — I think that is a very intelligent suggestion. He’s her boss, or at least her very senior colleague.

If Ifill stays, one can only hope her condescension is so great that the audience sympathizes with Palin.

BigD on October 1, 2008 at 8:05 AM

Oh look, an iceberg. I fear this will all end in tears….

serenity on October 1, 2008 at 8:05 AM

Here’s who should be the co-moderator.

A pity one has to go overseas to read stuff like this (present site excluded, natch).

Mr. Bingley on October 1, 2008 at 7:56 AM

As they say in those credit card commercials: Priceless

theregoestheneighborhood on October 1, 2008 at 8:05 AM

Does anyone get the feeling this has been
a design all along,I bet Gwen and Hopey,
had coffee with a little,’Wink”Wink’ Chit
Chat!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

canopfor on October 1, 2008 at 8:05 AM

Ed,

The entire Obama campaign is one huge fraud. Every aspect including the huge amount of money collected.

In 2002 James Taranto lovingly compiled signatories to the Not In Our Name antiwar petition including eminent Americans such as:

Mihel Aeildrhondel, “Aeildrhondelin Nation”
Lisa Lynn Alyson, “self-made thinker”
YASSIR DHATSMEH BEH-BEH
Eva Braun, “Hausfrau”
Daisy Cutter, “I volunteer to drop in on Saddam and deliver this message of peace”
patricia daniels, “person of light and peace”
Michael Danza, “Voter and Human”
Fletch F. Fletch, “Shepherd”
Leland Hall, “School” (click here to find out “who” Leland Hall is)
Jack Handy, “Deep Thoughts Inc.”
Rudolf Hess, “retired pilot”
Hugh G. Reckshun, “facilitator/actitivist”
Joern Christian Reppenhagen, “The world will not survive a second Hitler. Show that you have learned from the past: Say NO if asked for your support of total war. Say NO to Adolf W. Bush”
Sesroh Tootap, “FFA”
Emille Turdekowski, “Sanitation Engineer”

Now comes Kenneth Timmerman to note some of the contributors to the Obama presidential campaign who have exceeded the legal limit in the donations. Timmerman reports;

In a letter dated June 25, 2008, the FEC asked the Obama campaign to verify a series of $25 donations from a contributor identified as “Will, Good” from Austin, Texas.

Mr. Good Will listed his employer as “Loving” and his profession as “You.”

A Newsmax analysis of the 1.4 million individual contributions in the latest master file for the Obama campaign discovered 1,000 separate entries for Mr. Good Will, most of them for $25.

In total, Mr. Good Will gave $17,375.

Following this and subsequent FEC requests, campaign records show that 330 contributions from Mr. Good Will were credited back to a credit card. But the most recent report, filed on Sept. 20, showed a net cumulative balance of $8,950 — still well over the $4,600 limit.

Timmerman also notes the contributions of Good Will’s colleague Doodad Pro:

Similarly, a donor identified as “Pro, Doodad,” from “Nando, NY,” gave $19,500 in 786 separate donations, most of them for $25. For most of these donations, Mr. Doodad Pro listed his employer as “Loving” and his profession as “You,” just as Good Will had done.

In the case of both Good Will and Doodad Pro, the Obama campaign has refunded some of the contributions and promised to refund the rest, someday.

Obama appears to have numerous foreign contributors:

The FEC has compiled a separate database of potentially questionable overseas donations that contains more than 11,500 contributions totaling $33.8 million. More than 520 listed their “state” as “IR,” often an abbreviation for Iran. Another 63 listed it as “UK,” the United Kingdom.

More than 1,400 of the overseas entries clearly were U.S. diplomats or military personnel, who gave an APO address overseas. Their total contributions came to just $201,680.

But others came from places as far afield as Abu Dhabi, Addis Ababa, Beijing, Fallujah, Florence, Italy, and a wide selection of towns and cities in France.

Until recently, the Obama Web site allowed a contributor to select the country where he resided from the entire membership of the United Nations, including such friendly places as North Korea and the Islamic Republic of Iran.

Unlike McCain’s or Sen. Hillary Clinton’s online donation pages, the Obama site did not ask for proof of citizenship until just recently. Clinton’s presidential campaign required U.S. citizens living abroad to actually fax a copy of their passport before a donation would be accepted.

Pamela Geller first examined Obama’s foreign contributors in an Atlas Shrugs post and in “Obama’s foreign donors: The media averts its eyes.” (powerline)

Keemo on October 1, 2008 at 8:05 AM

I emailed this to Fox and Friends.

And I’m sure H7C will hammer it tonight.

Maybe Bill O will do a piece on it. He reaches a lot of indies.

csdeven on October 1, 2008 at 8:06 AM

If Ifill had any sense of journalistic ethics, she would have turned them down herself.

Riiiiggght. Journalistic ethics? I’d call that an oxymoron.

tru2tx on October 1, 2008 at 8:06 AM

They’re talking about this on Fox now.

CanadianGuy on October 1, 2008 at 8:07 AM

In her introductory remarks, Gov. Palin should cheerfully congratulate Ms. Ifill on her upcoming book and ask her to tell the worldwide audience the name of it: “Breakthrough: Politics and Race in the Age of Obama.” Which title, of course, assumes Obama will win. That might be a way to have Ms. Ifill at least behave for one night.

Bill Dupray on October 1, 2008 at 8:07 AM

Why do the Republicans put up with this crap? I think Bernie Goldberg was right wimps to the right.

Alan Poole

apoole on October 1, 2008 at 8:09 AM

That would be hannity and clombs.

csdeven on October 1, 2008 at 8:09 AM

Man the fix surely is in..

Obama will in all likelihood be our next president

He’s being supported by the “working class” ..his policies will lead to a virtual halt in construction, closed factories and stagflation..in other words it’s the working class that will suffer the most

there’s a word for that:

JUSTICE

galtg on October 1, 2008 at 8:09 AM

The last few days have been especially difficult as I watch this slow train wreck.

Then Ace linked this and it really bummed me out. I have always thought the left was wacko with their crazy convoluted conspiracy theories.

Unfortunately, this seems to hold some water.

It’s long. It’s worth printing and reading.

But, it’s damn depressing.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/09/barack_obama_and_the_strategy.html

keebs on October 1, 2008 at 8:09 AM

Somebody. Fight. Back. Hard. Please.

horatio on October 1, 2008 at 8:00 AM

At this point, what’s the use? McCain lost this on his own during the past two weeks. If McCain is looking to Palin to salvage this thing for him, he’s more stupid than I thought. Morning Joe just mentioned that Ifil’s conflict of interest, and Bob Shrum is shrugging his shoulders and saying that Republicans are doing this to bully Ifil. Barnacle is actually agreeing with Scarborough.

All the same. McCain is sinking faster than the Titanic here in Ohio. He hasn’t been able (or won’t) tie the credit crisis to Obama and Democrats. I just can’t get over what a meathead McCain is.

BuckeyeSam on October 1, 2008 at 8:09 AM

All of the debate ‘moderators’ are liberals. So why did the McCain campaign accept them? Timidity? Incompetence?

Given this latest revelation, the McCain campaign should insist on a substitute, or pull out. I suggest: Brit Hume.

MrLynn on October 1, 2008 at 8:09 AM

Morning Joe just mentioned that Ifil’s conflict of interest, and Bob Shrum is shrugging his shoulders and saying that Republicans are doing this to bully Ifil. Barnacle is actually agreeing with Scarborough.

Barnacle is about as partisan as one can get. For him to admit that is something.

CanadianGuy on October 1, 2008 at 8:12 AM

What? Biden had no cousins available to serve as moderator?

whitetop on October 1, 2008 at 8:12 AM

McCain can win this election, but he must fight fire with fire. Obama is thumbing his nose at McCain “this is how we play the game Senator McCain, nothing you can do about it either, as I own the media and therefore own the news cycle”.

The Democrats and the Liberal media are organized and on message. McCain, the GOP, and all members of the new media have just a few weeks left to fire back at this train wreck a-coming. These scumbags have a full head of steam and are using every illegal & dirty trick in the play book.

ABOVE THE LAW as long as we sit back and simply shake our heads at how criminal these people are.

Keemo on October 1, 2008 at 8:12 AM

All of the debate ‘moderators’ are liberals. So why did the McCain campaign accept them? Timidity? Incompetence?

Yes indeed. That’s why I wanted to see the debate contract they signed.

JiangxiDad on October 1, 2008 at 8:14 AM

Michele’s children must be very happy. Aunty Gwen is helping daddy after having dinner with family.

I’m sure Maverick would be called a racist is he pulled the plug.

Hening on October 1, 2008 at 8:14 AM

Unacceptable!

mindhacker on October 1, 2008 at 8:15 AM

Maybe Bill O will do a piece on it. He reaches a lot of indies.

Judging from the amount of adult diaper commercials on Fox news and O’Reily in particular, the quote should have read “he reaches allot of undies”…Sorry I couldn’t resist.

repvoter on October 1, 2008 at 8:15 AM

Ifill as moderator makes a mockery of the entire process.

They’d best yank her quick to avoid the backlash.

petefrt on October 1, 2008 at 8:15 AM

We should concentrate on the financial conflict of interest.

If we whine about bias, we look like whiners. It is unrealistic to expect that there will ever be a debate moderator that is not biased. But it is quite reasonable to require that debate moderators not have a financial interest in one or the other candidate winning the election.

gridlock2 on October 1, 2008 at 8:15 AM

I would love to have Sarah start the debate by first asking Ifill about her book, then slipping in a question how many extra books she expects to sell if Obama wins the election.

MarkTheGreat on October 1, 2008 at 8:16 AM

Palin should challenge every false premise, every slant to the left, every assumption. She should make this debate about Ifill’s bias every chance she gets.

What has she got to lose at this point?

fossten on October 1, 2008 at 8:16 AM

Keemo on October 1, 2008 at 8:05 AM

Why is this not out there? Some way some how? How can this country be going so far down the rabbit hole?

red131 on October 1, 2008 at 8:17 AM

MarkTheGreat on October 1, 2008 at 8:16 AM

Yeah.

Opening statement:

I’d like to first of all thank the CPD blah blah blah…And I’d like to congratulate Gwen Ifill, our moderator, on the upcoming release of her book about Barack Obama. If he’s elected president, you should sell many copies. Good luck with the success of your book.

fossten on October 1, 2008 at 8:18 AM

Instead of everyone coming on here and griping and moaning about this, what about taking a moment and dropping a couple hundred lines to the Commission on Presidential Debates and letting them know we are not going to tolerate this kind of nonsense anymore. We should demand that this gal be pulled from moderating the debates and put Jim Lehrer in there instead.

I’m serious. We shouldn’ allow this to happen.

I’m writing this guys right now.

Join me!

pilamaye on October 1, 2008 at 8:00 AM

I agree with you and the other poster who thinks that it is an abrogation of Ifill’s journalistic ethics and a conflict of interest for her to moderate this debate.

However, after going to the CPD’s homepage I was unable to find a contact e-mail address. Perhaps it is due to low caffeine levels in my bloodstream.

If someone should find a contact address, please post it.

turfmann on October 1, 2008 at 8:20 AM

Above the law…

Keemo om Oct 1,2008 at 8:12AM.

Keemo: Your right, Atlas Shrugs has uncovered a
wealth of in the tank with Obama connections!

Even,NBC’s David Gregory’s wife connection
to Fannie Mae,in which she resigned her position
early in September!:)

Everybody is on the bandwagon to elect Hopey!:)

canopfor on October 1, 2008 at 8:21 AM

Well, I guess Obama won’t have a problem with Coulter moderating the next Pres debates, right;)?

marklmail on October 1, 2008 at 8:21 AM

I would love to have Sarah start the debate by first asking Ifill about her book, then slipping in a question how many extra books she expects to sell if Obama wins the election.

MarkTheGreat on October 1, 2008 at 8:16 AM

I think it might be better is Sarah just comes across as nicely complimenting Ifill about the forthcoming book. (”I know you want to sell lots of copies.”) More keeping with Sarah’s personality. You can stick it to someone nicely.

It is probably too late to replace Ifill. But this could rattle Ifill (who, when she doesn’t have her script, “uh’s” almost as much as Obama) and maybe force Ifill to be fair.

If the commission thought Ifill should make a disclosure statement, that would be hilarious, but I don’t think it’s going to go that far.

Wethal on October 1, 2008 at 8:21 AM

If she starts giving Palin an unreasonably hard time compared with Biden, Palin should say “Look, I know you have a book to sell, but…”

I’m sick of watching the McCain campaign trying to play nice with the media. He and Palin should call them on their bias every time, preferably when they’re in live interviews or debates where their remarks can’t be edited out. They might lose a few people by appearing to ‘whine’, but they’ll win a lot more by reminding Americans that they’re being lied to, and having their intelligence insulted, by the MSM every day.

In this case they should say “We’re not doing this debate with this moderator”, and explain why.

EnglishMike on October 1, 2008 at 8:22 AM

turfmann, here you are from Michelle’s column:

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

Wethal on October 1, 2008 at 8:22 AM

McCain is sinking faster than the Titanic here in Ohio. He hasn’t been able (or won’t) tie the credit crisis to Obama and Democrats. I just can’t get over what a meathead McCain is.

BuckeyeSam on October 1, 2008 at 8:09 AM

McCain wants to get a bailout bill of some kind passed first. Then he’ll hammer Obama and the Dems. I hope.

Tuning Spork on October 1, 2008 at 8:22 AM

Just wait until the affirmative action PRESIDENT is selected!

SouthernGent on October 1, 2008 at 8:23 AM

turfmann on October 1, 2008 at 8:20 AM

you can send an email to:
jb@debates,org

red131 on October 1, 2008 at 8:23 AM

“he reaches allot of undies”…Sorry I couldn’t resist.

repvoter on October 1, 2008 at 8:15 AM

lol

csdeven on October 1, 2008 at 8:23 AM

sorry that should be: jd@debates.org

red131 on October 1, 2008 at 8:23 AM

She’ll be removed as moderator due to all this media attention.

Then she’ll claim racism, and relate to B Obama even more.

ballz2wallz on October 1, 2008 at 8:24 AM

This is insane; truly we live in Bizaro World.

Alden Pyle on October 1, 2008 at 8:24 AM

McCain wants to get a bailout bill of some kind passed first. Then he’ll hammer Obama and the Dems. I hope.

Tuning Spork on October 1, 2008 at 8:22 AM

Agreed. (I hope)

csdeven on October 1, 2008 at 8:24 AM

Palin should challenge every false premise, every slant to the left, every assumption. She should make this debate about Ifill’s bias every chance she gets.

fossten on October 1, 2008 at 8:16 AM

Brilliant! :)

Tuning Spork on October 1, 2008 at 8:24 AM

I’m not watching and I didn’t watch the Presidential debate, either.

First of all, I have no interest in listening to a word that Joe Biden says. He’s a corrupt, traitorous, unqualified liar.

Second of all, I have no interest in any debate “moderated” by a woman who is completely biased in favor of Joe Biden.

I’ve given the MSM enough chances over the years and I’m tired of watching them fail.

No credibility, no ethics, no values, no morals – our media.

NoDonkey on October 1, 2008 at 8:25 AM

Well, once again we get the same ’stuff’ and accept it as grown-up man and women but, would the Demorates accept it if we say, had Rush being the moderator? Would they?

foxone on October 1, 2008 at 8:25 AM

She’ll be removed as moderator due to all this media attention.

Then she’ll claim racism, and relate to B Obama even more.

ballz2wallz on October 1, 2008 at 8:24 AM

Who cares . . . just get her left wing, biased butt out of there.

rplat on October 1, 2008 at 8:26 AM

Palin should challenge every false premise, every slant to the left, every assumption. She should make this debate about Ifill’s bias every chance she gets.

What has she got to lose at this point?

fossten on October 1, 2008 at 8:16 AM

Reagan did that in a cheerful funny way that made you want to be on his side, while simultaneously demolishing the credibility of the questioner.

JiangxiDad on October 1, 2008 at 8:26 AM

Sarah can flip this around on the moderator by talking past her to the American people and exposing the bias on live TV.

Nope … if Ifill GIVES the questions and the order of the questions to Joe Biden before the debate … he can then craft “sound bite” answers and choreograph the tempo of the debate to produce a 90-Minute Obama ad in prime time. You may think I’m paranoid for suggesting that Ifill would even give the questions to him … but she stands to make hundreds of thousands … even millions off an Obama win.

Giving Biden the questions would be incredibly easy without getting caught – we’d never be able to prove it. Welcome to Zimbabwe … VOTE ROBERT MUGABE! I’m pretty sick of this – it’s the death of democracy.

HondaV65 on October 1, 2008 at 8:27 AM

She may moderate fairly. But with today’s political environment, couldn’t PBS find someone who hasn’t written a book and articles that are clearly positive to ultra-positive towards Senator Obama?

Juan Williams comes immediately to mind.

Pablo on October 1, 2008 at 8:27 AM

Interesting item from Jonah Goldberg at NRO on Ifil, Andrea Mitchell (Greenspan’s wife, I believe), and David Gregory’s wife (just stepped down as an exec at Fannie Mae).

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YWZiOTZkMjY5YTBhNDEzNTk0M2FjZmM2MjkyN2YyY2Q=

McCain’s research team sucks.

BuckeyeSam on October 1, 2008 at 8:27 AM

Best would be for lots of publicity, and then to have Ifill continue as moderator.

JiangxiDad on October 1, 2008 at 8:28 AM

Why did McCain sign on? Why do Reps let the left walk all over them? Because in general we Reps believe in the Queensberry rules and fight to protect those who disagree with us. Too simple an answer? Not from where I sit. We want the world of common sense to rule. Fair play makes sense to us. We would never dream that Darwin has it out for us.

We need to just throw Sarah out there into the debate despite this obvious fixing, only give her a green light to take a Winchester with her.

Limerick on October 1, 2008 at 8:29 AM

I say get Jim Lehrer back in as moderator for this debate.

jencab on October 1, 2008 at 8:30 AM

‘Boo-hoo. The media is biased.’ This is the excuse that both liberals and conservatives use when their candidate is losing. If McCain/Palin were beating Obama/Biden, this post would never have made it up… except over at DKos.

It’s just an excuse. And a lame one at that.

http://thepajamapundit.com/

thePajamaPundit on October 1, 2008 at 8:30 AM

A question and a comment.

Question: Is the CPD taxpayer-funded?

Comment: Why couldn’t (or shouldn’t) the CPD have it’s own stable of moderators instead of using “journalists” in the public sphere? Seems to me if the Commission wants to appear non-partisan, they shouldn’t be hiring partisans to moderate their debates.

JohnTant on October 1, 2008 at 8:31 AM

Interesting item from Jonah Goldberg at NRO on Ifil, Andrea Mitchell (Greenspan’s wife, I believe), and David Gregory’s wife (just stepped down as an exec at Fannie Mae).

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YWZiOTZkMjY5YTBhNDEzNTk0M2FjZmM2MjkyN2YyY2Q=

BuckeyeSam on October 1, 2008 at 8:27 AM

Andrea Mitchell was not on the board of Fannie Mae. Goldberg mentioned that she is reporting on the crisis likely with inside info from her husband.

Tuning Spork on October 1, 2008 at 8:31 AM

…and opens the door to “the fix” talk. – T-Steel

Gosh – really, you think so?! What was your first clue?!

Son, that door was opened years ago, and the horse has left the barn, run over the horizon, and the dust has settled.

Breaking news here T-Steel: Democrats cheat. It is an institutionalized behavior pattern that is justified by their belief that they are “progressive”, and so their ends justify any means that are convenient.

I repeat: Democrats cheat. Go purchase a clue someplace, fool.

drunyan8315 on October 1, 2008 at 8:32 AM

Just shining the light on these cockroaches should be enough to put Ifill on notice.

Also, everyone should email and call the CPD.

csdeven on October 1, 2008 at 8:32 AM

She may moderate fairly. But with today’s political environment, couldn’t PBS find someone who hasn’t written a book and articles that are clearly positive to ultra-positive towards Senator Obama?

There’ll be no fairness in this debate . . . the woman is deep in the tank for Obama and she’ll do everything in her power to assist him.

rplat on October 1, 2008 at 8:32 AM

The GOP needs to grow a pair.

bill30097 on October 1, 2008 at 8:33 AM

Who IS the CPD? I mean, who are the indivuduals who made this decision, and to whom are they accountable? How did they become members of the CPD? By this blatently biased selection I think it should be a matter of some investigation as to if or not the people in this process has been bought off.

MikeA on October 1, 2008 at 8:33 AM

This garbage makes me nuts!
This has been going on since 1992 at least when Carol Effing Simpson sandbagged BushI constantly during his debate.
My party- the STUPID party, is so afraid to offend they get screwed by the MSM by agreeing to have these obviously biased “moderators”.
At least have a panel so you might get 1 “objective” journalist.

jjshaka on October 1, 2008 at 8:34 AM

pilamaye on October 1, 2008 at 8:00 AM
I’ve already written this morning.

Keemo on October 1, 2008 at 8:05 AM

If they can get away with breaking the laws just during the campaign – heaven help us if he gets elected.

tru2tx on October 1, 2008 at 8:34 AM

DEMANDING A SARAH PALIN PRESS CONFERENCE: Sure, bring it on — right after Obama takes questions from Bob Owens, Stanley Kurtz, David Freddoso, the Powerline guys, and Hugh Hewitt on the Bill Ayers/Annenberg business.

Oh, and maybe a discussion of his Columbia and Harvard transcripts. Only one candidate is being sheltered from tough press questions with the active complicity of the press.

Accountability folks… Remember the old American way; Accountability. The only way this ends is when the people boycott those responsible; hurt them in the wallet and put them in bankruptcy before they put every one of us in bankruptcy or jail. I’ve been waiting for several decades now, watching and hoping to see these criminals locked up and put away, or at least frog marched and publicly humiliated; no, they get rewarded and actually receive huge bonuses. Why is Sandy Berger a free man? Why is William Jefferson a free man? Why is Al Gore able to make himself rich behind a fraudulent scam on the world, and walk free?

So many questions with no answers other than ABOVE THE LAW.

Keemo on October 1, 2008 at 8:34 AM

The only saving grace here is that all this press is coming out the day before, and not the morning after. As I pointed out on the other thread above, it is not as if anyone in the McCain camp not watching “Dancing With The Stars” or ESPN 24 hours a day should not have known weeks or months ago. Gwen Ifil’s bias is well documented.

Marcus on October 1, 2008 at 8:35 AM

If this woman had an ounce of class, she would excuse herself on the ground of the screaming conflict of interest.
I know, I know, nevermind.

Geronimo on October 1, 2008 at 8:35 AM

The suggestions to have Palin mention Ifill’s book are truly priceless. In one fell swoop, she rocks Ifill back on her heels, and exposes bias for those voters who don’t clue in on it like we do…

hippie_chucker on October 1, 2008 at 8:35 AM

The mask is off. The left is perpetrating a shameless fraud. Any self respecting journalist would have recused themself.

The media would be all over this story if the perp were from the other side.

moxie_neanderthal on October 1, 2008 at 8:36 AM

This is the excuse that both liberals and conservatives use when their candidate is losing.

thePajamaPundit on October 1, 2008 at 8:30 AM

What alternate universe are you living in?

csdeven on October 1, 2008 at 8:36 AM

According to NRO, Greta Van Susteren is now on this, too.

Could publicizing this info at this time be some strategy by McCain campaign manager Schimidt (disciple of Master Rove) to get inside Biden and Ifill’s OODA loop?

Wethal on October 1, 2008 at 8:36 AM

We should concentrate on the financial conflict of interest.

You are absolutely right. This is the argument to concentrate on. Also, it would help to know if she disclosed this to the republicans.

Blake on October 1, 2008 at 8:37 AM

thePajamaPundit on October 1, 2008 at 8:30 AM

And that statement is exactly why you need to come to places like this and pimp out your blog.

Keemo on October 1, 2008 at 8:38 AM

I’d love to have Limbaugh ‘moderate’ Biden.

snickelfritz on October 1, 2008 at 8:38 AM

In her introductory remarks, Gov. Palin should cheerfully congratulate Ms. Ifill on her upcoming book and ask her to tell the worldwide audience the name of it: “Breakthrough: Politics and Race in the Age of Obama.” Which title, of course, assumes Obama will win. That might be a way to have Ms. Ifill at least behave for one night.

Bill Dupray on October 1, 2008 at 8:07 AM

If Ifill isn’t pulled, as moderator, your idea is fantastic!!

sinsing on October 1, 2008 at 8:38 AM

Drudge now has a link up to Michelle’s NYPost column.

Wethal on October 1, 2008 at 8:38 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4


You must be logged in to post a comment.