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

If the moderator was Hannity,the Libs
would have a fit,and boycott the debate,
they would have a can-ip-tion fit till
they got their way!!!!!!!!!!!

canopfor on October 1, 2008 at 9:43 AM

Keemo on October 1, 2008 at 8:47 AM

Subscribers only, Knucklehead.

Jaibones on October 1, 2008 at 9:44 AM

Should she recuse herself from the debate because of a conflict of interest?

Tommy_G on October 1, 2008 at 9:44 AM

Anybody happen to see the hit piece the NewsHour did on McCain week or so ago? They talked to a very nice rumpled-professor sort of…professor who helpfully pointed out that McCain’s dashing back to Washington proved how unstable the man was.

And they went back to this guy, like, 3 times.

tree hugging sister on October 1, 2008 at 9:44 AM

No wonder OBambi was too chicken to agree to Town Hall meetings. Why would he when he has multi-tasking moderators who can give him a tongue bath while kicking McCain’s and Palin’s teeth in.

I know that makes little or no sense, but since I don’t have a blog, I need to vent somehow.

AubieJon on October 1, 2008 at 9:44 AM

When does the msm every get called for their COI? At most, you can get a measly mouthed statement from an ombudsman months after the latests outrage in response to an avalanche of complaints. Conflicts,passing off commentary as news, creative editing, not allowing the target to respond, is th norm these days for the msm.

Blake on October 1, 2008 at 9:45 AM

What do you think the drive bys are going to be fair about all aspecks of this election? Ye when (Pigs fly)!

thmcbb on October 1, 2008 at 9:46 AM

THIS!!!????????????

and another thing:

WHAT CAN BE DONE TO STOP THIS??

Michelle? Please help???

moonlighter on October 1, 2008 at 8:44 AM

In the English language, multiple question marks as a grammatical device has no meaning.

Jaibones on October 1, 2008 at 9:46 AM

Drudge has the wrong photo up for Ifill. He should take a still shot of her from her reporting of Palin’s convention speech. The gal looks like she’s having a bout of diarrhea at the time. Unbelievable.

justincase on October 1, 2008 at 9:46 AM

I expect Ifill will promise to be “impartial.” Just like Jamie Gorelick was supposed to be impartial on the 9/11 commission, even though her “Gorelick wall” between the FBI and CIA on sharing terrorist information was a significant factor in failing to foresee 9/11.

The Dems got Kissinger and George Mitchell off the 9/11 Commission on flimsy conflict of interest charges because of some business relations. They knew Kissinger and Mitchell were smart enough to know where the bodies were buried. And RINO wimp Tom Kean went along.

Wethal on October 1, 2008 at 9:47 AM

Drudge has the wrong photo up for Ifill. He should take a still shot of her from her reporting of Palin’s convention speech. The gal looks like she’s having a bout of diarrhea at the time. Unbelievable.

I thought like she looked like she was being held hostage in Fallujah.

CanadianGuy on October 1, 2008 at 9:47 AM

whose the other two moderators.

Clintonista, Stephanopolis(though maybe they want to get Obama).

and Brokaw?

jp on October 1, 2008 at 9:49 AM

No, let’s not. Typical b.s. from NRO. It is the duty of the holder of the conflict of interest to disclose it — not for someone else to discover it. That Katherine Lopez tries to pass of this crap as commentary shows how ethically challenges she is, too.

Blake on October 1, 2008 at 9:01 AM

I want to agree with you, but I can’t. One thing I’ve learned in life is that I always get in trouble when I lose the nerve to be skeptical and to ask more questions.

Whatever the case, Ifil’s conflict of interest is extraordinary. But with five weeks until the election, this is a welcome distraction for Obama’s campaign. Really, it’s a gift. Swing voters don’t care about this stuff. They are on the edge of their seats about the economy. They hate Bush. They blame Republicans. And McCain appears to be asleep at best or comatose at worst. What the heck? They’ll give Obama a try.

BuckeyeSam on October 1, 2008 at 9:52 AM

I expect Ifill will promise to be “impartial.” Just like Jamie Gorelick was supposed to be impartial on the 9/11 commission,…
Wethal on October 1, 2008 at 9:47 AM

As you well know, that doesn’t cure a COI. Usually the person discloses it and the other party may waive it if they wish. The fact that Ifill never disclosed it on her own, tells me that any promise of impartiality is laughable at best. As to Gorelick, have you noticed any time her name comes up, disaster follows? Man, talk about a bad omen!

Blake on October 1, 2008 at 9:53 AM

Let’s see…here’s the explanation for why this “Republican” is on the debate commission.

So, subtract John Danforth from the list of “Republican” members of the commission.

Jaibones on October 1, 2008 at 9:54 AM

I checked the CPD web site and wouldn’t you know there is no contact information for the public so you could challenge them. Their board of directors is interesting. Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton are honorary boards members…alas we are screwed royally by powers beyond us mere mortals.

wepeople on October 1, 2008 at 9:54 AM

In the English language, multiple question marks as a grammatical device has no meaning.

Jaibones on October 1, 2008 at 9:46 AM

You’re on a roll this morning… Go back to bed, and try getting out from the other side.

Keemo on October 1, 2008 at 9:55 AM

They’ll give Obama a try.

BuckeyeSam on October 1, 2008 at 9:52 AM

How nice. Obama will be an unmitigated disaster. Did you live through the Carter administration? It was a very very tough four years.

Blake on October 1, 2008 at 9:56 AM

Instead of wasting all of this money on debates, political ads and campaigning, wouldn’t the money be better spent on a suitable crown for The Most High Obama? Maybe something along the lines of His Most Holy Seal of Awesomeness?

/sheep

hillbillyjim on October 1, 2008 at 9:56 AM

Go figure…a black bimbo in the tank for a black arab american moron…who would have figured…

areseaoh on October 1, 2008 at 10:03 AM

Google Sen. Alan Simpson and PBS, and you’ll find the lib left’s favorite PBS Republican. Scratch him off the GOP side of the commission.

Now you’re down to two people I’ve never heard of, and you can probably imagine what their testicular fortitude adds up to.

Jaibones on October 1, 2008 at 10:03 AM

Here’s the email I sent to Janet Brown, as per Michelle’s request: jb@debates.org

Dear Ms. Brown,

Will you require moderator Gwen Ifill to acknowledge to the American people that she has a book about Barack Obama coming out in January? The people need to know that this will not be a debate that has an obviously unbiased moderator.

It’s not too late to change.

ORIGINAL PECHANGAS BLOG

Show your OUTRAGE, send an email

originalpechanga on October 1, 2008 at 10:04 AM

Perhaps this is all for the best. If the McCain group is to dumb to watch out for their own candidate, what makes you think they are smart enough to watch out for this country or even run it? It is a shame that we will have to go through four years of socialist/marxist hell because of this.

Old Country Boy on October 1, 2008 at 10:05 AM

Go figure…a black bimbo in the tank for a black arab american moron…who would have figured…

areseaoh on October 1, 2008 at 10:03 AM

Considering the majority of the msm are not black and are in the tank for obama, too, what’s your point?

Blake on October 1, 2008 at 10:05 AM

Gee, did anyone ask Gwen why J.C.Watts wasn’t interviewed for this book????

chief65 on October 1, 2008 at 10:05 AM

areseaoh on October 1, 2008 at 10:03 AM

She’s definitely not a bimbo. She’s an affirmative action token, from a nothing school, with no particular talent for ethical journalism. But she’d need to be attractive to be considered a bimbo.

Conservatives do that. Liberals hire ugly women, hoping that they’ll trick you into thinking they’re smart.

Jaibones on October 1, 2008 at 10:05 AM

Keemo on October 1, 2008 at 8:47 AM

Subscribers only, Knucklehead.

Jaibones on October 1, 2008 at 9:44 AM

BTW: Did it occur to you that many in the HA community are subscribers? You’re not the center of the universe.

Keemo on October 1, 2008 at 10:06 AM

The excuses from the Left are, well, I’ll let you decide. On another forum I brought up this book and the reply I got from one was,

Good thing she’s not actually doing a debate with Obama, then. Or any African Americans, for that matter.

As if that matters. I’ll bet if Michelle Malkin was the moderator they’d be throwing a HUGE hissy fit but when it’s someone in the tank for Obama well that’s a-ok.

Yakko77 on October 1, 2008 at 10:06 AM

Okay John, it’s October… we need the WHITEY TAPE!

max1 on October 1, 2008 at 10:07 AM

BTW: Did it occur to you that many in the HA community are subscribers?

Keemo on October 1, 2008 at 10:06 AM

Yes.

Jaibones on October 1, 2008 at 10:08 AM

Barack Obama – Democrat
Deval Patrick – Democrat
Cory Booker- Democrat
Artur Davis – Democrat

…oh how objective.

regal on October 1, 2008 at 10:10 AM

She’s definitely not a bimbo. She’s an affirmative action token, from a nothing school, with no particular talent for ethical journalism. But she’d need to be attractive to be considered a bimbo.

Conservatives do that. Liberals hire ugly women, hoping that they’ll trick you into thinking they’re smart.

Jaibones on October 1, 2008 at 10:05 AM

You know what you have if you put lipstick on Ifil?
(porcus politicus)

max1 on October 1, 2008 at 10:11 AM

Go figure…a black bimbo in the tank for a black arab american moron…who would have figured…

areseaoh on October 1, 2008 at 10:03 AM

I don’t think Ifill’s race is behind this. She wouldn’t support Clarence Thomas if he ran would she?

CanadianGuy on October 1, 2008 at 10:12 AM

Well, I just sent an e-mail. Tried to call, but the line is busy. Wonder why. Keep the pressure on. Maybe something will happen.

lsbblack on October 1, 2008 at 10:15 AM

Maybe they will replace her with the 21st Century Edward R. Murrow.

cntrlfrk on October 1, 2008 at 10:16 AM

Juan Williams on Fox, who is a friend of Ifill, admits there is a “perception problem” with her moderating this debate.

“It seems like she’s invested in debate success for Obama.”

CanadianGuy on October 1, 2008 at 10:16 AM

Look, Ifill is no more in the tank than many white members of the MSM.

At least now we have her bias flying at full mast before the debate. It’s fortunate that Drudge (properly) has made it a big story. It shines a bright light on some gross media bias, reminds everyone how Ifill turned her nose up at Palin from the start, and forces Ifill to be scrupulously fair during the debate.

JudetheFossil on October 1, 2008 at 10:17 AM

The answer is obvious if you think it all the way through. The McCain campaign needs to threaten to withdraw Palin from the debate based on this obvious appearance of improper behavior on the part the the Presidential Commission on Debates. Tell them there will be no debate with someone that has an obvious financial interest in the outcome of the election.

There will then be a big stink… lots of words saying how they are really trying to “protect” Palin. However, at the end of the day, it will get the obvious bias of this situation into the public eye. It would open a door for discussion of the “politics” of those moderating the debates and the subsequent answers we all know. All those “independents” will agree with the appearance of an improper and biased selection. I suspect the Commission would have to change their moderator and, as a result of all the focus on bias that would result, the new moderator would be under some pressure to be just a bit more even handed….

CC

CapedConservative on October 1, 2008 at 10:19 AM

Reverse the roles?
Yeah, bring in the Great One!

abinitioadinfinitum on October 1, 2008 at 10:19 AM

I just called the Commission on Presidential Debates, (202) 872-1020, and left a message. I gave my name, city and state and said either Ifill is pulled or she announces a disclaimer about her book and several articles she wrote for various magazines. Had to redial several times before i got through.

conservativedan on October 1, 2008 at 10:19 AM

How nice. Obama will be an unmitigated disaster. Did you live through the Carter administration? It was a very very tough four years.

Blake on October 1, 2008 at 9:56 AM

I agree. I was in a Midwestern college waiting for my draft notice because Carter allowed Iran to make us look pathetic. My point is that McCain is making no effective effort to emphasize the stark difference between him and Obama on domestic issues. For example, I haven’t heard a word on energy in weeks. At this point, all Obama needs to do is show up for the two debates and run out the clock. Heck, I bet he could skip one or both debates and still win given the way McCain has conducted himself in the past two weeks.

BuckeyeSam on October 1, 2008 at 10:20 AM

the politically incorrect point to make, is that this is an easy sell to Joe Blow. i.e. the Media in the tank and effecting debates. All they have to know is about her book then look at her and realize she’s a black woman(natural Obama worshiper).

There is no reasonable doubt to worry with on this one, its obvious and an easy sale. We need a backlash against the media, this could help

jp on October 1, 2008 at 10:20 AM

ARLINGTON, VA — Today, Chief Warrant Officer 4 Michael J. Durant (Ret.) issued the following statement on Joe Biden’s apparently false accounts of near-misses on the battlefields of Afghanistan and Iraq:’Senator Biden claimed at a debate last year that he’d been ’shot at’ while visiting Iraq. And he has claimed repeatedly, most recently last week, that his helicopter was ‘forced down’ in Afghanistan — leaving his audience with the impression that it was fire from the Taliban which had grounded the aircraft. Neither of these stories appears to be true, and Senator Biden has never accounted for the discrepancies. ‘I’ve been on a helicopter that was ‘forced down’ by enemy fire, and I’ve been ’shot at.’ Neither is easily confused with being caught in a snow storm or awakened by a loud bang in the night. Senator Biden has a responsibility to come clean on what actually happened, and explain why he would ever say such things to the American people. And with the Vice Presidential Debate coming up on Thursday, it is incumbent on the news media to ask Senator Biden the tough questions — as they have so far failed to do — and examine his responses closely for inconsistencies of the kind we’ve witnessed in recent months. ‘The American people expect and deserve leaders who tell the truth about their record and their experiences, and a news media that holds all candidates — no matter their party — to the same standard.’

CanadianGuy on October 1, 2008 at 10:21 AM

I have never been a Gwen Ifill fan. She’s always been a 2nd rate tool of her elitist managers who took her on as their minority-pet project to cast THEIR black female.

Whatever “new light” she claims to shed on Obama is flea infested dander. Rodents carry the plague.

I have yet to see Gwen Ifill do a brilliant job of anything.

Portfolio.com
Gwen Ifill’s Obama Debate Problem
Wednesday October 1, 9:19 am ET

It’s not often Michelle Malkin has anything worthwhile to add to discussion, but she makes a valid point about Thursday’s vice-presidential debate: As moderator, PBS’s Gwen Ifill comes in bearing a pretty substantial conflict of interest. Ifill is the author of an upcoming book, The Breakthrough: Politics and Race in the Age of Obama.

maverick muse on October 1, 2008 at 10:22 AM

The answer is obvious if you think it all the way through. The McCain campaign needs to threaten to withdraw Palin from the debate based on this obvious appearance of improper behavior on the part the the Presidential Commission on Debates. Tell them there will be no debate with someone that has an obvious financial interest in the outcome of the election.

this is exactly what the Dems would do, and get away with.

if McCain does this the spin would kill him and Palin. Media would be ‘outraged’, claim they are scared of letting Palin debate, downplay the book deal and claim Racism

jp on October 1, 2008 at 10:23 AM

What were they thinking when they signed off on Ifill?

Probably that they would be called “racist” if the opposed her.

Troy Rasmussen on October 1, 2008 at 10:23 AM

Moderators should not have a financial stake in the election.

Exactly.

So what’s to be done, really, before tomorrow night? How to force Lehrer to moderate the VP Debate tomorrow?

maverick muse on October 1, 2008 at 10:25 AM

if McCain does this the spin would kill him and Palin. Media would be ‘outraged’, claim they are scared of letting Palin debate, downplay the book deal and claim Racism

jp on October 1, 2008 at 10:23 AM

Exactly my point. Even though this is on Drudge and other places, most people know nothing about it. Make it an issue. Make it a BIG issue. When the issue of withdrawing Palin gets addressed, it WILL reach people that the reason is the Ifill-Obama book. That is the ONLY message that needs to get out. Regardless of spin, people will see that single fact and side with McCain. Watch. If they do that, there will be a stink but the moderator will be changed.

CC

CapedConservative on October 1, 2008 at 10:26 AM

Palin needs to bring this up at the beginning of the debate.

I’m so sick of Republicans always being “above” controversies like these and then letting the MSM get away with its bias. It gives at least a 10% advantage to Dems every election.

If they want to keep running a Dole campaign, then just be “above” this, have Palin never mention it. The MSM won’t either.

Gabe on October 1, 2008 at 10:31 AM

Her book isn’t necessarily pro-Obama, it just talks about the changing political landscape in America in regards to race…something Obama obviously has a huge role in. She also writes about and interviews Colin Powell in the book. The other examples Malkin gives of her bias are laughably weak. Quit the whining.

crr6 on October 1, 2008 at 10:31 AM

Ifill’s reputation for integrity is such that most people familiar with her work would be inclined to give her the benefit of the doubt. But a disclosure to viewers at the start of the debate is in order.–Portfolio.com

So Portfolio.com is endorsing the endorsement that Ifill is giving Obama, plus advising the use of free advertisement by announcing the book on national televised debate with an expected huge world-wide audience.

Asinus asinum fricat. The donkey scratches the donkey.

Nulla avarita sine poena est. There is no avarice without penalty.–I wish.

maverick muse on October 1, 2008 at 10:32 AM

If I had to guess on today’s events, I would guess that the Commission will make a change before McCain gets to make points from it. If they don’t, they leave a very juicy hanging curve ball out there for Palin to use during the debate and the point of her choosing. There will be no spinning or controlling the release of the information in that format.

CC

CapedConservative on October 1, 2008 at 10:32 AM

Her book isn’t necessarily pro-Obama, it just talks about the changing political landscape in America in regards to race…something Obama obviously has a huge role in. She also writes about and interviews Colin Powell in the book. The other examples Malkin gives of her bias are laughably weak. Quit the whining.

crr6 on October 1, 2008 at 10:31 AM

Pro, con or straight down the middle, SHE HAS A VESTED FINANCIAL INTEREST in Obama’s success.

CC

CapedConservative on October 1, 2008 at 10:33 AM

Quit the whining.

She has a financial stake in Obama winning the election. Do you not understand that? Her book does not come out until January.

If Obama loses her book will sell about as much as someone writng about Michael Dukakis and Greeks in U.S. politics.

CanadianGuy on October 1, 2008 at 10:34 AM

Palin’s only chance of being heard is in her willingness to talk over both of her opponents, as there is no moderator, just the opposing team’s cheer-leader wearing an ear-piece taking the puppet-master’s cues at all times.

maverick muse on October 1, 2008 at 10:34 AM

The answer is obvious if you think it all the way through. The McCain campaign needs to threaten to withdraw Palin from the debate based on this obvious appearance of improper behavior on the part the the Presidential Commission on Debates. let Palin kick Joe’s ass and then sit back and laugh at Sen. Gaffaday for losing against all odds.

To threaten to pull out of the debate now would send the worst kind of message at the worst possible time.

Ifill’s presence could very well benefit the Republican ticket if Sarah performs adequately. If Gwen appears biased, the undecided folks will surely be more likely to lean toward the underdog. Conversely, if she is fair in her role as moderator, then so much the better–we get a fair debate, which is as it should be.

hillbillyjim on October 1, 2008 at 10:36 AM

if McCain does this the spin would kill him and Palin. Media would be ‘outraged’, claim they are scared of letting Palin debate, downplay the book deal and claim Racism

jp on October 1, 2008 at 10:23 AM

I agree. We all want Sarah to be Sarah, so I doubt she’d even make any real snide remarks during the debate… BUT..
if Sarah IS Sarah, she’ll beat the living crap outta Biden even WITH Ifill at the helm. Now THAT will be impressive to everyone.

pambi on October 1, 2008 at 10:38 AM

If Obama loses her book will sell about as much as someone writng about Michael Dukakis and Greeks in U.S. politics.

CanadianGuy on October 1, 2008 at 10:34 AM

If Obama wins her book will sell about as much as someone writng about Michael Dukakis and Greeks in U.S. politics. The conflict of interest is still there, regardless.

Mark1971 on October 1, 2008 at 10:39 AM

by Greta Van Susteren
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.

(read two blog entries before this one to understand the content of this one.)

Share

CanadianGuy on October 1, 2008 at 10:40 AM

Palin can do it! “Gwen — about your book pimping Barack — I look forward to reading it off the bargain rack at the Wasilla Waldenbooks.”

unclesmrgol on October 1, 2008 at 10:43 AM

What were they thinking when they signed off on Ifill?

I disagree with the presumption the CPD was “thinking”.

Tom Blogical on October 1, 2008 at 10:48 AM

She should not be the moderator.

Dave Rywall on October 1, 2008 at 10:51 AM

She has a financial stake in Obama winning the election. Do you not understand that? Her book does not come out until January.

If Obama loses her book will sell about as much as someone writng about Michael Dukakis and Greeks in U.S. politics.

CanadianGuy on October 1, 2008 at 10:34 AM

It’ll probably sell that little regardless. If anything it’ll sell more from the publicity she’s gaining through this manufactured controversy.

And prove to me she has a financial interest. Her book is about the changing racial-political landscape in America, it is not just focused on Obama, she interviews several prominent black leaders. It’s not as if Obama’s election would validate her points or something, I think it’s already clear the landscape is changing considering a black man has won a major political parties nomination for the presidency and is leading by more than 5 points in the polls. If he loses a book on the changing racial landscape will still be very relevant.
The whining about the media tactic is old and has a history of failure (remember “annoy the media, vote bush” from H.W.’s 92′ campaign?). Why keep at it anyway?

And I don’t see how Obama winning would vastly increase her book sales. Her book is a commentary on race and politics in America and was written before the election. I

crr6 on October 1, 2008 at 10:52 AM

She certainly enjoys the sound of her own voice.

Gunner105 on October 1, 2008 at 10:52 AM

hillbillyjim on October 1, 2008 at 10:36 AM

That’s exactly what I was thinking. This could actually end up being her best shot at a fair debate.

thevastlane on October 1, 2008 at 10:54 AM

No snarky remarks about a Wasilla Waldenbooks. Just lay it out matter-of-factly, looking directly at her.
One thing y’all have to have noticed — the left can’t play defense. All they can do is attack. Put them on the defensive and they become Obama without a teleprompter. And, thanks to Iowahawk, we know what that’s like

either orr on October 1, 2008 at 10:57 AM

Replace Ifill with Olby!

As an aside, Adm. James Stockdale’s son wrote a moving piece about his father and the difficulty of getting a sense of people through a debate.

moxie_neanderthal on October 1, 2008 at 10:58 AM

Holy Cow!
Snowballs are forming in Satan’s back yard!

She should not be the moderator.
Dave Rywall on October 1, 2008 at 10:51 AM

Dave, you shouldn’t be hanging around here any more. Some logic has crept into your Canuckistani brain. Congratulations!

either orr on October 1, 2008 at 10:59 AM

Really and truly, the whining from some of our fellow conservatives is starting to become unseemly.

Yes, it’s outrageous that Ifill has a conflict of interest by reason of her book. And yes, even without the book, she adores Obama & has contempt for Palin.

Do you think a substitute moderator would be better? Someone with the same biases, but with them hidden away more neatly?

Of course not. So let’s just suck it up and let the debate go on and let Sarah take care of herself.

The outpouring of hateful venom against Ifill is unseemly. Almost as bad as the outpouring of venom against Kathleen Parker. Really, folks, if we can’t be civil about this, then we’ve become as bad as the far left. We might as well get a blog spot on the Daily Kos site.

JudetheFossil on October 1, 2008 at 10:59 AM

Bad idea having her moderate, she may in fact be a good moderater but there’s too much of an appearance of a conflict of interest. As a democrat, I personally would like to see a different moderater just for the fact that if Palin gets her clocked clean in the debate, I don’t want to have the right blaming the moderater instead of the candidate.

Ric on October 1, 2008 at 11:01 AM

Yes, it’s outrageous that Ifill has a conflict of interest by reason of her book. And yes, even without the book, she adores Obama & has contempt for Palin.

Do you think a substitute moderator would be better? Someone with the same biases, but with them hidden away more neatly?

Of course not. So let’s just suck it up and let the debate go on and let Sarah take care of herself.
JudetheFossil on October 1, 2008 at 10:59 AM

I’d rather see Ifill twist herself around to try to be “impartial” than some sneaky liberal jounalist who will claim to be unbiased.

Wethal on October 1, 2008 at 11:03 AM

We’re doomed.

Second presidential debate:
Charles Gibson
Co-Anchor, ABC News Good Morning America

Third presidential debate:
Bob Schieffer
CBS News Chief Washington Correspondent, and Moderator, Face the Nation

gordo on October 1, 2008 at 11:03 AM

As an aside, Adm. James Stockdale’s son wrote a moving piece about his father and the difficulty of getting a sense of people through a debate.
moxie_neanderthal on October 1, 2008 at 10:58 AM

Thanks for that. I enjoyed reading it.

wise_man on October 1, 2008 at 11:08 AM

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

gordo on October 1, 2008 at 11:09 AM

She should not be the moderator.

Dave Rywall on October 1, 2008 at 10:51 AM

Clearly you see the risk here to your side. If Ifill moderates the debate, either she will have to disclose her book before asking any questions, or Sarah will slip in her thanks to Gwen for taking time out from her work on the Lehrer show and putting the finishing touches on her book that’s scheduled to go on sale Inauguration Day… “What was the title of that book again, Gwen?”

That way, no matter how she does in the debate, everyone watching will know she was treated unfairly by the press.

The Monster on October 1, 2008 at 11:11 AM

Wasn’t Gwen Ifill the one of no hand shows debate with Fred!

ConservativePartyNow on October 1, 2008 at 11:12 AM

…And prove to me she has a financial interest….And I don’t see how Obama winning would vastly increase her book sales. Her book is a commentary on race and politics in America and was written before the election. I

crr6 on October 1, 2008 at 10:52 AM

You can’t possibly be serious.

hillbillyjim on October 1, 2008 at 11:15 AM

It is also past time to combat the media. I think Republicans need to be challenging to them more… Link the media directly with the Democrats as you answer the question…The Republicans need to reinforce in the peoples minds at every opportunity the illegitimacy of the media…When conservatives continue to sit with the media without responding to them as they really are, an arm of the Democrat party, they continue to legitimize the media…
That is another reason why no conservative should sit on The View. It is a worthless show and legitimizes The View as newsworthy.

Very true, but the problem for the Republicans is that criticizing the media plays into their script that Palin is afraid of answering questions because she is such a hillbilly. However the democrats are able to discredit the media with ease, look at their refusal to appear on Fox because of their “bias” and the demonization of talk radio.
On the other hand, the public is already very suspicious of the media so an all out attack on their fairness day in and day out might work.

neuquenguy on October 1, 2008 at 11:15 AM

Second presidential debate:
Charles Gibson
Co-Anchor, ABC News Good Morning America

Third presidential debate:
Bob Schieffer
CBS News Chief Washington Correspondent, and Moderator, Face the Nation

gordo on October 1, 2008 at 11:03 AM

McCain should get a dig in on Gibson.

“Charlie, this is a Live TV debate, you want be able to edit this to make me appear to say things i didn’t say”

jp on October 1, 2008 at 11:15 AM

Did anyone else see the story on NBC Nightly News last night about McCain’s time in the Hanoi Hilton? They went to N. Vietnam and interviewed people about McCain’s time in the prison and showed what the prison looks like now.

The most important thing I got from this piece was when they interviewed a gaurd and tried to make it seem like Mac’s claim of torture and hardship might not have been all that hard.

Goodeye_Closed on October 1, 2008 at 11:18 AM

We’re doomed.

Second presidential debate:
Charles Gibson
Co-Anchor, ABC News Good Morning America

Third presidential debate:
Bob Schieffer
CBS News Chief Washington Correspondent, and Moderator, Face the Nation

gordo on October 1, 2008 at 11:03 AM

The right really needs to find a way of discrediting these people. If midwifes where as professional as these guys we would all be dead.

neuquenguy on October 1, 2008 at 11:19 AM

The outpouring of hateful venom against Ifill is unseemly

The point is professionalism. She has an obvious conflict of interest and had an obligation to recuse herself. Period.

The media is no longer just in the tank for the Democrats but are so brazen as to not care that you know.

We should all be angry that people and organizations which have been entrusted to be watchdogs for the Republic have abdicated their duties and are trying to rig the system.

moxie_neanderthal on October 1, 2008 at 11:19 AM

“The outpouring of hateful venom against Ifill is unseemly.”

Screw Gwen and the horse she rode in on.

What does “being nice” to these jackasses ever get us? They’ve done nothing but lie and undermine our President for eight years – and now they’re winning.

Media members like Gwen Ifill shamelessly shill for Democrats in order to get them elected, then when Democrats screw up (Frank/Dodds in the current crisis), they cover for them and blame Republicans.

So-called “journalists” like Ifill are lucky all they get is verbal abuse. For what she and her ilk are doing to our country, they deserve far worse.

NoDonkey on October 1, 2008 at 11:20 AM

“Moderators should not have a financial stake in the election.”

That sums it up.

How can this be allowed to happen? It’s like having a referee of a football game who places a bet on one of the teams in the contest!

If the campaign thinks Palin might not be ready for this debate and needs more time, here is a built in excuse to GET more time. Boycott until Leher is assigned to the moderator position.

Goodeye_Closed on October 1, 2008 at 11:22 AM

No snarky remarks about a Wasilla Waldenbooks

But Palin is at her best when she’s being snarky — particularly because her snarkiness has a definite humor component. The philly cheesesteak outing is illustrative.

And there is, indeed, a Waldenbooks in Wasilla. And it has a bargain rack, too.

unclesmrgol on October 1, 2008 at 11:26 AM

Obama’s on Fox right now lying his ass off. I’m am so tired of hearing his voice … it’s becoming very monotone.

“I am the savior”

“I will fix everything”

“democrats are wonderful”

“you will like it when I shove the knife in your back”

“you will be happy to give me all your money”

“you will do with less so I can have more”

“everyone is bad except democrats”

“Blah, blah, blah, blah”

the crowd cheers like zombies, smiling all the way to the slaughter.

darwin on October 1, 2008 at 11:26 AM

We should all be angry that people and organizations which have been entrusted to be watchdogs for the Republic have abdicated their duties and are trying to rig the system.

moxie_neanderthal on October 1, 2008 at 11:19 AM

Do they teach the importance of a free and objective press in school anymore? Perhaps it is time for a massive education campaign on the danger that a dishonest, corrupt and agenda-driven media poses to our democracy. Complete with live examples of today’s MSM astonishing double standards

neuquenguy on October 1, 2008 at 11:27 AM

Calm down — Palin will do fine, Biden won’t make any major gaffes and Gwen will simply ask questions. Yeah, it sucks that she is the moderator but she knows better then most of you here that this debate is meaningless. Her friends in the media will continue to savage Palin. Biden could call her a ‘chick’ on stage and it won’t matter.

The bitter rednecks thet are going to decide this election won’t have their minds changed by whether Gwen raises an eyebrow or glares at Palin when she answers a question.

grdred944 on October 1, 2008 at 11:28 AM

…And prove to me she has a financial interest….And I don’t see how Obama winning would vastly increase her book sales. Her book is a commentary on race and politics in America and was written before the election. I

crr6 on October 1, 2008 at 10:52 AM

You can’t possibly be serious.

hillbillyjim on October 1, 2008 at 11:15 AM

That’s what gives them strength and persistence. They do believe it, and they are serious. These are the followers, the Kool-Aid drinkers. Their leaders aren’t serious–they only use lefty dribble as a path to power. (Like when conservative mid-western Hillary met liberal Bill. He told her there were two ways to the same goal.) But crr6 is dead serious.

JiangxiDad on October 1, 2008 at 11:29 AM

Do they teach the importance of a free and objective press in school anymore?

neuquenguy on October 1, 2008 at 11:27 AM

No. Palin, when asked about the Gibson and Couric interviews by Hewitt said she has a degree in journalism but was surprised to see how much has changed since she was taught journalistic ethics.

darwin on October 1, 2008 at 11:29 AM

If the campaign thinks Palin might not be ready for this debate and needs more time, here is a built in excuse to GET more time. Boycott until Leher is assigned to the moderator position.

Goodeye_Closed on October 1, 2008 at 11:22 AM

If she’s not for the debate now, she never will be. Throwing a tantrum about it will only add fuel to the democrats fire about her readiness/competence. I don’t even think that’s what Gov. Palin would want. Based on her answers to questions about how the media has treated her so far she has basically said, “yeah they suck, but oh well I’m still going to get my message out there”. I think there’s enough of a stink about this already that either Ifill will be fair, or she’ll risk a huge backlash

thevastlane on October 1, 2008 at 11:30 AM

And I don’t see how Obama winning would vastly increase her book sales. Her book is a commentary on race and politics in America and was written before the election…

crr6 on October 1, 2008 at 10:52 AM

“What was the title of that book again, Gwen?”

The Monster on October 1, 2008 at 11:11 AM

“nuf said.

unclesmrgol on October 1, 2008 at 11:30 AM

Maybe Gwen will have advance copies she can autograph after the debate.

Hopefully … “the Age of Obama” will fall flat and we can usher in the Era of Palin.

darwin on October 1, 2008 at 11:31 AM

I suppose that this is just another “distraction“?

Blaise on October 1, 2008 at 11:32 AM

There’s too many liberal trolls or astroturfers who have infiltrated the comments here.

Mike Barnicle, Juan Williams even or Dave here comments from Dems on the Politico all agree this is a conflict of interest.

IT IS A CONFLICT OF INTEREST. IF THIS ISN’T A CONFLICT OF INTEREST WHAT THE FUCK IS?

The only place where this is getting argued or spun is here in the comments. A ban stick is in order. The astroturfing is becoming too obvious.

CanadianGuy on October 1, 2008 at 11:36 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4


You must be logged in to post a comment.