McCain camp didn’t know about Ifill’s book?
posted at 11:15 am on October 1, 2008 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
I’ve been assuming that they did know and didn’t object so that they could drop this card at the eleventh hour and put Ifill on the spot. Now she either has to be scrupulously fair, almost to the point of being soft on Palin, or else she’s in the tank.
Greta says no, though. Go figure.
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.
The first mention of Ifill’s book I found through some haphazard googling was in an AP story on July 22, although it came up again in this Kurtz profile of her in WaPo on September 4. She was announced as the VP debate moderator on August 5. The two sides agreed to the Debate Commission’s proposed schedule on August 21, although wrangling over the format of each event was still going on as recently as 10 days ago. Don’t the campaigns vet and sign off on the moderators? How’d they miss this little detail? Or is this a case of Team Maverick deciding that the racial demagoguery they’d get from the left for trying to have her removed because of a pro-Obama book made it simply not worth the aggravation?
You must be logged in to post a comment.
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 Next »
So Palin should say in her opening remarks:
I hope your book on Obama does well in January.
lorien1973 on October 1, 2008 at 11:16 AM
Ding, ding, ding! We have a winner!
Wethal on October 1, 2008 at 11:16 AM
Of course the McCain camp knew about it. Frankly, I think this is one of his maneuvers that will hit pay-dirt.
p0s3r on October 1, 2008 at 11:17 AM
Again, Palin can just state that she hopes to read Gwen’s book on Obama when it comes out — while sitting next to the bargain bookshelf at the Wasilla Waldenbooks [yes, Wasilla does have a Waldenbooks].
unclesmrgol on October 1, 2008 at 11:18 AM
Yeah, let’s keep playing by the Left’s rules. That’s been working really well so far.
FiveWays on October 1, 2008 at 11:18 AM
*bangs head on desk*
DrSteve on October 1, 2008 at 11:18 AM
If McCain votes for this bill I don’t even care.
Last chance Maverick!
ctmom on October 1, 2008 at 11:18 AM
Nice. I would LOVE that. Dare I dream?
changer1701 on October 1, 2008 at 11:19 AM
Yeah I agree. I think they knew and are happy about it as well. Palin should definitely remark about it. It helps with the narrative that the media is in the tank.
lorien1973 on October 1, 2008 at 11:20 AM
Sarah can cry foul at the debate, and link Ifill’s bias with the media’s failure to investigate Ayers, ACORN, and Obama’s socialist connections.
indythinker on October 1, 2008 at 11:20 AM
Like I wrote at another blog, I don’t fault the McCain camp for not knowing about the book. Eventually, you have to trust someone and in this case they trusted the Commission on Presidential Debates to fulfill their mission fairly.
That trust was obviously misplaced, but in general this seems more the fault of the Commission than anyone else. They either missed this or didn’t care about it.
Slublog on October 1, 2008 at 11:20 AM
That is awesome. Make sure that everyone knows, not just the people who read political blogs every day. It’s an outstanding idea, and it would set the tone for the entire evening.
wise_man on October 1, 2008 at 11:22 AM
If Hussein wins, Ifill makes more money than if he loses. Who, after all, will buy a book about The Age of Obama after that age is over?
Akzed on October 1, 2008 at 11:22 AM
Ifill: Senator Biden, what is your position on Federal aid to union members in Scranton, Pennsylvania?
Biden: Blah, blah, blah.
Ifill: Mayor Palin, what is your position on community organizers set out on Page 153, paragraph 2 of my book?
Steve Z on October 1, 2008 at 11:22 AM
You give them way more credit than I.
That said, I’d let talk radio rant on about this today and tomorrow but stop short of insisting on having Ifil replaced. Then, at the debate, Palin needs to preface every answer with the following: “Now, Ms. Ifil, I don’t know if you cover this topic in your book on Senator Obama that is set to be released in January on Inauguration Day, but….”
BuckeyeSam on October 1, 2008 at 11:24 AM
It’s making lemonade from the lemons. Ifill’s anti-GOP bias is long-standing. Complaining about her would have drawn the race card and the gender card. Having the story coincidentally emerge right before the debate puts her on the spot and provides a talking point.
That being said, how in the world does a supposedly bipartisan commission pick someone with a glaring conflict of interest?
Karl on October 1, 2008 at 11:24 AM
Sarah will smile and “……oh by the way, I read the excerpts from your new book on BHO……”
Starlink on October 1, 2008 at 11:24 AM
Of course, it’s not like we DON’T KNOW that Ifill is in the TANK for OBAMA.
What we didn’t know was that she now stands to be RICH if he’s elected.
It should be mentioned by her, if she’s even the slightest bit ethical.
originalpechanga on October 1, 2008 at 11:24 AM
Sarah should offer to buy 100 of the books in order to autograph them, and put them on EBAY!
RushBaby on October 1, 2008 at 11:25 AM
“Or is this a case of Team Maverick deciding that the racial demagoguery they’d get from the left for trying to have her removed because of a pro-Obama book made it simply not worth the aggravation?”
Mac, Mac, Mac….YOUR AREN’T GOING TO GET the black vote. Don’t worry about offending them!
Star20 on October 1, 2008 at 11:25 AM
LOL, I feel your pain.
*jumps up and lands on his back*
TheHat on October 1, 2008 at 11:25 AM
Watched McC’s speech just a few minutes ago and it was a good one.
Wasn’t really directed at Conservatives or the GOP, but it was dead on target to connect with the voters we will need to keep the marxist Obambi out of the Presidency.
He needs to be relentless from this point forward. This is for all the marbles.
techno_barbarian on October 1, 2008 at 11:25 AM
That’s my theory. Besides, I know she’s moderated at least one Veep debate before (maybe a few), and if they objected now, the narrative would be, “Oh, now all the sudden Ifill’s not fair for the GOP?”
Pasalubong on October 1, 2008 at 11:26 AM
I am just getting so sick and tired of the MSM’s attempts to stack the deck in B.O.’s favor here. I honestly do not recall the last time I saw the combined forces of the MSM so deep in the tank for a candidate who was so completely unqualified for the office he seeked, like I am seeing happen here right now in this election.
pilamaye on October 1, 2008 at 11:26 AM
The Age of Obama….
you mean The Stoned Age?
max1 on October 1, 2008 at 11:27 AM
That being said, how in the world does a supposedly bipartisan commission pick someone with a glaring conflict of interest?
It’s called “In the Tank” for the 0ne.
CSMBigBird on October 1, 2008 at 11:27 AM
…meh… like it makes any difference. ALL the *cough* “moderators” (with the exception of Lehrer) are so blatantly bias and in the tank for Obama that they might as well have used Axlerod and Michelle O as moderators in the first place. Well, they would be better for the next Presidential debate. Perhaps for the VP Debate, they could get Rev. Wright and Fr. Phlager.
Damiano on October 1, 2008 at 11:28 AM
Ahhh, just the kind of news I like to wake up to on a pleasant morning.
Lincoln on October 1, 2008 at 11:28 AM
Allah, I linked a Fox News story from the 11th of July last night that mentioned the book including the title. Here it is again.
http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2008Jul21/0,4670,APonTVTavisSmiley,00.html
muyoso on October 1, 2008 at 11:29 AM
This is very much the saul alinsky plan coming to ultimate fruition. Take a good hard look and listen to this 1985 soviet KGB propaganda defector and pay very close attention to what he says and the names he names. We’re seeing the things he said play out this very day.
If this video doesn’t stun you, you can’t be stunned.
techno_barbarian on October 1, 2008 at 11:30 AM
They are starting to worry me. If they didn’t know abuot this, maybe they don’t know about Franklin Raines, Chris Dodd, Barney Frank anything. How do we know they have the right ammo?
promachus on October 1, 2008 at 11:31 AM
Flashback to the “Raines Lynching”….
I think it’s far better to have her be the moderator, but she has to disclose it at the beginning of the debate, and just for the people who tune in too late to hear it, she has to
have the book standing on her desk, with the cover showing the title in the camera frame every time they cut to her asking a question.
Either that, or show under her picture the caption
Gwen Ifill, PBS, Author of Breakthrough: Politics and Race in the Age of Obama
The Monster on October 1, 2008 at 11:33 AM
I’m opting for what’s behind door #2.
Physics Geek on October 1, 2008 at 11:33 AM
Obambi talking from his teleprompter now.
rockmom on October 1, 2008 at 11:33 AM
An ethical journalist would have recused herself or told the McCain campaign up front about the book. Sadly, Ifill was not being ethical. Call it the audacity of hoping Obama will win.
charlesbird on October 1, 2008 at 11:33 AM
Ahhhh, the Obambi camp is up and joining us.
techno_barbarian on October 1, 2008 at 11:33 AM
YES!
petefrt on October 1, 2008 at 11:33 AM
The libs are going crazy now, cause it’s damned if we do and damned if we don’t (well that would credit most libs with more thinking than they are capable of). Talk about an October surprise. I agree that Gov Palin should compliment Gwen on the book and her article in Essence Magazine showing Obama’s little Chicago Camelot scenes. And I wonder if PBS will put out something, since they always carp about ‘lack of transparency’ (well only with respect to repub administrations, but the meme is on their books), so how about a statement from them and the Presidential Debates Commission about this stunning turn of events.
Once again the mav gets behind the enemy and shots the tail off the plane.
eaglewingz08 on October 1, 2008 at 11:33 AM
She should congratulate Ifill on her Free Market Capitalism endevors, wish her to make as much money as possible.
Then tie her being in the tank to the Media not reporting on the Obama dirt.
jp on October 1, 2008 at 11:35 AM
Dole 06 is off the hook.
Dumbest. Campaign. Ever.
Fletch54 on October 1, 2008 at 11:35 AM
Oh for God’s sake. Is anyone watching this speech by Obambi? Does he really think anyone believes that a Democratic Congress will allow him to cut spending? And he is tripping over his words again, even with the freaking teleprompter! What a douchebag.
rockmom on October 1, 2008 at 11:35 AM
BTW, if this is true that McCain didn’t know about this moderator, than McCain is running a completely disorganized campaign. I mean, an intern could have googled the moderators name, and the first link mentions her upcoming book. I cannot believe that McCain didnt know.
muyoso on October 1, 2008 at 11:35 AM
Have you seen the crap sandwich redux?
Another jewel in the days’ crown.
You’ll want to go back to bed.
tru2tx on October 1, 2008 at 11:35 AM
why the hell can’t the Repubs, get atleast one conservative Moderator for one of the 4 debates????
jp on October 1, 2008 at 11:35 AM
” Or is this a case of Team Maverick deciding that the racial demagoguery they’d get from the left for trying to have her removed because of a pro-Obama book made it simply not worth the aggravation?”
DUH!
Buckaroo on October 1, 2008 at 11:36 AM
honestly though, why would they think about something this blatant being a possibility?
jp on October 1, 2008 at 11:37 AM
If Ifill were an ethical person she would recuse herself, as any person in a position of responsibility and public trust would do if there were a conflict of interest.
Kenrod on October 1, 2008 at 11:37 AM
Fixed.
fossten on October 1, 2008 at 11:37 AM
Personally, I think the easiest way for the media to finish destroying Palin at this point is to only give her easy debate questions.
They’ve already put the narrative out that she’s a dumb lightweight. But, they haven’t quite killed the narrative that the media is out to get her.
Now, if the debate goes like this:
“Governor Palin, what is your proudest accomplishment as a parent?”
followed by
“Senator Biden, what is your stance on negotiating with regimes, such as Iran and North Korea, that are nearing nuclear weapons capabilities?”
It would make her look like a lightweight because the questions she would be answering would be laughable. No matter how well she does, it would be impossible to declare her the winner because the questions would be ridiculously easy. In contrast, it would allow Biden to shine as the experienced politician. And, what would we do on the right? Yell that they purposely asked her softball questions to make her look like a fool? All they’d have to say is, “Last week you were complaining that the questions we asked were too hard. Now you think the questions are too easy. Is she Goldilocks looking for a set of questions that are ‘just right’?”
Thankfully though, the MSM doesn’t strike me as being smart enough to have any tactic beyond, “Ask really hard questions and hope that she messes up” so I doubt that will be a problem.
JadeNYU on October 1, 2008 at 11:37 AM
Palin opening remarks: I”d just like to wish Ms. Ifill the best of luck in her book Profiteering. Profits are a good thing and help our struggling economy.
jp on October 1, 2008 at 11:38 AM
Very nice.
BuckeyeSam on October 1, 2008 at 11:38 AM
@ jp on October 1, 2008 at 11:37 AM
Because its politics? Of COURSE you research the moderator of the debates. You want to see what kind of questions she typically asks, how hard she is on the debaters, etc. You do research on the moderator just like you would on your opponent. I can guarantee some research was done on Gibson and Couric before the interviews.
muyoso on October 1, 2008 at 11:39 AM
another question, PBS is tax-payer funded “non-profit”, though Ifill is Profiting from her position and undermining their supposed “objectivity”
jp on October 1, 2008 at 11:40 AM
Nah, the implication is already there. Just make a mention of it; especially if you are stuck on a question and need a second to think.
Need a minute? Grab a
twixmedia bias.lorien1973 on October 1, 2008 at 11:40 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
reshas1 on October 1, 2008 at 11:41 AM
rockmom on October 1, 2008 at 11:35 AM
The woman behind his right shoulder looks like she is having an orgasm.
tru2tx on October 1, 2008 at 11:41 AM
Either way, if they DID know, and decided to play ignorant, (LOL! pun intended!), or if they did NOT know, and now can play it to an advantage, (McCain camp playing anything to an advantage! RIGHT!), it still highlights what we are up against. Between the early voting in OH, ACORN in every state, the dead voting, being out spent 4:1 in 527 ads, Pelosi injecting the economy into the election in such a scary way, GOP lunacy in not fighting, the media, and those creepy kiddies, we are really fighting an uphill battle. As that person wrote about the media, the deck is stacked against us intentionally and it is working.
Gwen has long been a loony Democrat. This is not news to me. Just like McCain says he looked and Putin and saw K G B, I have looked at Gwen and seen P B S, which in my household translates to Probably Bull Shit. Now we can scream “unfair” all we want, and that is not going to change one single thing. We can call and email and that is okay, but what I think we need to look at is what are we going to do about the election as a whole. And what I mean is making sure Conservatives are elected in local and national positions.
This deal in MO struck me in a most terrifying manner in that those people like the sheriff, prosecutors and Attorney General are usually elected. I think we need to help see to it that those people are not re-elected. We need to think of this event in MO as not just being in another state, but also a local event unfolding even if we do not live in MO. I guess what I am suggesting is that grassroot movements need to go national in ways that can combat this type of thing so that Conservatives nation wide feel like all of Conservative America supports their moves to get rid of people like these in MO that want to silence free speech. This is not just an isolated incident, and it could come to a town where you live soon if we do not mobilize to stop these people. Many local areas just do not have the man power or money to fight back and we all have read at times where the RNC does not always support the candidate most worthy of being supported.
freeus on October 1, 2008 at 11:41 AM
“Kenrod on October 1, 2008 at 11:37 AM”
but she ISN’T and she WON’T, so it is up to saracuda [along with everything else already on her shoulders] to somehow work it into her remarks EARLY to gain any sort of positive sway from it …
Buckaroo on October 1, 2008 at 11:42 AM
Maybe this is why she is doing the VP debate and not a Presidential debate.
zmdavid on October 1, 2008 at 11:42 AM
My predictions on Ifill’s questions to Gov. Palin:
1. Rape kits
2. Abortion
3. Bridge to Nowhere
4. Troopergate
5. Pakistan
rockmom on October 1, 2008 at 11:44 AM
Well, obviously that’s because Ifill lied about it.
Why the heck does the McCain campaigned get blamed for this? Why is it automatically assumed that Ms. Ifill cannot be held responsible for anything?
Is it because she’s black?
logis on October 1, 2008 at 11:44 AM
So this Obama hack gets to moderate, but the guys who asked Obama about Ayers in the last debates GLARINGLY didn’t get renewed? Duuuuuuude.
marklmail on October 1, 2008 at 11:46 AM
McCain screwed up big time on this. Ifill will be more than willing to take one for the team and try to take out Palin if it helps Obama. This is just unbelievable.
WisCon on October 1, 2008 at 11:46 AM
Now that it’s an issue, Ifill will probably go out of her way to be fair to Palin. It may turn out to be a good thing that Ifill is the moderator, and she’ll also be under a fairness microscope.
RBMN on October 1, 2008 at 11:46 AM
Bingo. It’s not McCain’s fault for not digging it up! It’s Ifill’s fault for hiding it!
fossten on October 1, 2008 at 11:46 AM
If McCain camp should be blamed here, this is just another example of a GOP handicap.
the Dems never have to worry about stuff like this, Gotcha Journalism questions, saying stupid things and media reporting. All the bases are covered for them.
GOP candidates have to think through what they say and how they say it because the MSM will edit it to say things they didn’t, not report or misreport. Things Palin isn’t use to and struggeling with a little.
jp on October 1, 2008 at 11:47 AM
Nobody has even mentioned the fact that Ifill’s book includes a glowing look at Deval Patrick, who may be the most unpopular governor and incompetnt politician in America today. That alone should disqualify her from being a moderator in any debate. If she believes Deval Patrick is a role model for people of any race, she is not only biased, she is stupid.
And I wonder if her book will mention the white Svengali behind both Patrick and Barack Obama, or the fact that there are no black people or women in any serious position of authority in Barack Obama’s campaign?
rockmom on October 1, 2008 at 11:48 AM
HOW IN THE HELL COULD THEY HAVE MISSED THIS?!?!?!
More damaging than the fact that this left-leaning probama nut will be asking questions is this tidbit of information that McCain did not know.
Will that make people confident in his administration?
I’m faltering.
madmonkphotog on October 1, 2008 at 11:48 AM
AP: Should McCain’s campaign done their due dilligence and be aware of Ifill’s book? Yes.
But that’s not the point.
Ifill had a duty to tell the commission and both sides that she had a book about Obama coming out after the election. This is a blatant conflict of interest and it was Ifill’s responsibility to make this information known.
CanadianGuy on October 1, 2008 at 11:49 AM
(Pasted from another thread, thought it was important to point out the other three people Iffel admired in her book)
So why aren’t all of their names in the title too Gwen?
And who are the other three?
Deval Patrick (D), Governor of Massachusetts
Artur Davis (D), Congressman from Alabama
Cory Booker (D), Mayor of Newark, NJ (In Feb ‘08 Booker declared Newark would be known as Obamatown for 3 days)
You’ve got a crowded tank full of Obama supporters there with you sweetie.
This is an outrage. Why not just let Michelle Obama moderate the debate?
She must withdraw!
fogw on October 1, 2008 at 11:49 AM
Because conservative journalists freely admit their beliefs, while the vast majority of liberal journalists constantly massively and systematically lie about theirs.
logis on October 1, 2008 at 11:49 AM
I think Al Franken disguised himself as Stuart Smalley and got a job with the McCain campaign.
“Sure the moderator has written a book on Obama…but that’s OK, John, ’cause gosh darn it, people like you.”
saint kansas on October 1, 2008 at 11:50 AM
Palin, as soon as the opportunity presents itself:
“Frankly I am concerned about Senator Obama’s judgment. Over the course of his career he’s associated with some very questionable people, and the media has not done a very good job informing the public about it.
“Say, Gwen, does your upcoming book detailing Obama’s political rise cover any of these associations? I understand it’s due to be released around Inauguration Day.”
At any rate I believe we’ll have a statement from the Commission, if not a resolution, before midday tomorrow. The news cycle is on this.
benjamin on October 1, 2008 at 11:50 AM
Obambi just said he wants our children to learn art and music.
Presumably so they can sing songs to the Dear Lightworker, I guess.
But to him, THAT’s what’s important for America to focus upon.
techno_barbarian on October 1, 2008 at 11:50 AM
Ding ding ding ding ding
LibTired on October 1, 2008 at 11:50 AM
Sic ‘em Sarah, sic ‘em.
Christine on October 1, 2008 at 11:50 AM
I can see it now…
“OK Miss Palin, you have 2 seconds to respond to Mr. Biden’s 30 minute attack”
How on earth did they miss this? Enough already…email Janet Brown at JB@debates.org and demand a new moderator!
SDarchitect on October 1, 2008 at 11:51 AM
Better yet… Palin should QUOTE from Ifill’s book. Or at least from the abstract promoting it…
Texas Rainmaker on October 1, 2008 at 11:51 AM
That’s scary. Thanks for the link.
txsurveyor on October 1, 2008 at 11:51 AM
Basically I just want to see Sarah out there field dressing the both of them.
benjamin on October 1, 2008 at 11:52 AM
Newark, NJ is a sanctuary city for illegal aliens. Last year three of them executed three black college students. But hey, Cory Booker gives a great speech!
rockmom on October 1, 2008 at 11:52 AM
Of course. But bear in mind that her definition of “fair” is wildly different from yours. So now she will simply do a whole lot more of what she originally intended to do.
logis on October 1, 2008 at 11:53 AM
There are no unfair topics, if approached in the proper way. The form that journalistic unfairness usually takes is preloading their question with false assumptions. So that by the time you correct every false premise, you have no time to answer the underlying question. Sometimes that’s what they want.
RBMN on October 1, 2008 at 11:53 AM
Texas Rainmaker
That’s good.
fossten on October 1, 2008 at 11:55 AM
Ifill thought she was fair in 2004. One of her questions was about the AIDS epidemic among black women. I know everyone had that at the top of their issues list in 2004. And of course, that question had NOTHING to do wth Dick Cheney having a lesbian daughter.
Fair my ass.
rockmom on October 1, 2008 at 11:55 AM
Wow. Joseph McCarthy should be nominated for sainthood.
fogw on October 1, 2008 at 12:00 PM
She has a monetary interest, not just a politicial bias, in Obama’s success. It’s like having the author of “Sarah” being the moderator.
nyrofan on October 1, 2008 at 12:04 PM
could you imagine the outrage if a mccain supporter, who had a pro mccain book coming out was the moderator? obama fans would riot. just like they did after the abc debate. stephanopolus was a former clinton employee.
venicesurfer on October 1, 2008 at 12:05 PM
I really feel that they should let Ifill go ahead and moderate the debate. This OCTOBER SURPRISE news coming out the day before the debate will force Ifill to be at least as hard on Biden or even harder on Palin, otherwise, it will definitely look like a fix is in. And I also do think that Sarah should congratulate her on her new book on the Age of Obama, and yes Sarah should mention the title, and then Sarah can control the debate from them on
ConservativePartyNow on October 1, 2008 at 12:06 PM
KP will probably claim that Palin’s failure to have read this book indicates a lack of intellectual curiosity.
MarkTheGreat on October 1, 2008 at 12:07 PM
Thank Dorvillian. Posted it last night.
Folks we’re on a battleship that’s been steadily heading down the road to socialism for decades. That battleship needs to be turned around as quickly as possible, but it’s not possible to turn it around on a dime. It’s going to take years and years. Just like it took years and years of relentless infiltration to get us where we are today.
Go watch that video. And then let’s figure out what we can do about it right now. We can’t leave this up to anybody else.
techno_barbarian on October 1, 2008 at 12:07 PM
Yep. The part I found most interesting was the repeated comment that all these leftists will be singled out and literally eliminated once their dream comes true.
They have no idea what’s in store for them. And like that KGB guy said, no amount of factual logic will change their minds.
We gotta turn this battleship around as quick as we can.
techno_barbarian on October 1, 2008 at 12:09 PM
Look… at some point the campaign, like any large business has to look at the past. She DID moderate the last VP debate without any HUGE outcry. At some point it is up to them to disclose. They didn’t. This media bias used to be bad but now its is hard to believe.
I hope those in the media who are a little closer to the middle realize that they may really end up reaping what they sow this election.
tottoritodd on October 1, 2008 at 12:11 PM
techno_barbarian on October 1, 2008 at 11:30 AM>>
That transcript needs to make it into every newspaper in America. BEtween that and the American Thinker article on the strategy of managed crisis, my understanding of how all these billion paper cuts all fit together. How did Bill Ayers become an “educational expert”? That’s all part of the plan. Demoralization – Destabilization – Crisis – “Normalization”
We have to let people see there’s a method behind the media/political/political madness we’ve been observing, and what the great divide in America is really about.
It’s about those who love America – the true patriots – versus those who hate the free market, sanctity of life America of our Constitution.
Obama’s connections and the nagging feeling that he just doesn’t like America becomes OMINOUS in light of the revealed game plan of America’s mortal enemies.
And the “useful idiots” in media, education, Hollywood, etc who play along because they think the communist ideology is noble… need to hear that they will be the first to be lined up and executed once the real Marxists reach the “normalization” phase.
Thank you SO MUCH for this link techno_barbarian !!
justincase on October 1, 2008 at 12:11 PM
And the KGB guy had many examples of country after country where this had happened. He really knew what he was talking about.
txsurveyor on October 1, 2008 at 12:13 PM
I hope Drudge keeps this banner up for the rest of the day.
Wethal on October 1, 2008 at 12:14 PM
There is a 1/4 page article in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch concerning Ifill;
http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stories.nsf/politics/story/5A4729A61AE0FE68862574D5000CB2B7?OpenDocument
They have a little Q&A in it. Here is how the article ends;
Q: What do you hope is said about this debate afterward?
A: Just that I was fair, I guess. Even that I can’t hope for because people are so polarized.
Oddly enough, the far-left Post doesn’t mention Ifill’s book
Star20 on October 1, 2008 at 12:14 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »