View Full Version : A Debate Moderator in the Tank: What Bullsh@T This is
JustRalph
10-01-2008, 04:30 AM
How does this shit happen? From the Article:
Ifill and her publisher are banking on an Obama/Biden win to buoy her book sales. The moderator expected to treat both sides fairly has grandiosely declared this the “Age of Obama.” Can you imagine a right-leaning journalist writing a book about the “stunning” McCain campaign and its “bold” path to reform timed for release on Inauguration Day – and then expecting a slot as a moderator for the nation’s sole vice presidential debate?
Yeah, I just registered 6.4 on the Snicker Richter Scale, too.
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NDFhMWUxZTZmMmE5MzkzYWVhMTU5NDYyNWRhNTQyM2M=
A debate “moderator” in the tank for Obama
by Michelle Malkin
Creators Syndicate
Copyright 2008
My dictionary defines “moderator” as “the nonpartisan presiding officer of a town meeting.” On Thursday, PBS anchor Gwen Ifill will serve as moderator for the first and only vice presidential debate. The stakes are high. The Commission on Presidential Debates, with the assent of the two campaigns, decided not to impose any guidelines on her duties or questions.
But there is nothing “moderate” about where Ifill stands on Barack Obama. She’s so far in the tank for the Democrat presidential candidate, her oxygen delivery line is running out.
In an imaginary world where liberal journalists are held to the same standards as everyone else, Ifill would be required to make a full disclosure at the start of the debate. She would be required to turn to the cameras and tell the national audience that she has a book coming out on January 20, 2009 – a date that just happens to coincide with the inauguration of the next president of the United States.
The title of Ifill’s book? “Breakthrough: Politics and Race in the Age of Obama.” Nonpartisan my foot.
Ifill’s publisher, Random House, is already busy hyping the book with YouTube clips of Ifill heaping praise on her subjects, including Obama and Obama-endorsing Mass. Governor Deval Patrick. The official promo for the book gushes:
“In The Breakthrough, veteran journalist Gwen Ifill surveys the American political landscape, shedding new light on the impact of Barack Obama’s stunning presidential campaign and introducing the emerging young African American politicians forging a bold new path to political power…Drawing on interviews with power brokers like Senator Obama, former Secretary of State Colin Powell, Vernon Jordan, the Reverend Jesse Jackson, and many others, as well as her own razor-sharp observations and analysis of such issues as generational conflict and the ‘black enough’ conundrum, Ifill shows why this is a pivotal moment in American history.”
Despite the protestations of her colleagues that she will be fair, Ifill has appeared on numerous radio and TV talk shows over the past several months to cash in on her access to the Obama campaign. She recently penned a fawning cover story on the Obamas for Essence magazine that earned much buzz. The title? “The Obamas: Portrait of an American Family.” A sample of Ifill’s hard-hitting investigative journalism, illustrated with Kennedyesque photos of the Obamas and children posing at home on the backporch and by the piano:
http://michellemalkin.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/1aessence.jpg
During the Republican National Convention, the PBS ombudsman fielded numerous complaints about Ifill’s coverage of Sarah Palin’s speech. Wrote Brian Meyers of Granby, Ct.:
“I was appalled by Gwen Ifill’s commentary directly following Gov. Sarah Palin’s speech. Her attitude was dismissive and the look on her face was one of disgust. Clearly, she was agitated by what most critics view as a well-delivered speech. It is quite obvious that Ms. Ifill supports Obama as she struggled to say anything redemptive about Gov. Palin’s performance. I am disappointed in Ms. Ifill’s complete disregard for journalistic objectivity.”
Like Obama, Ifill, who is black, is quick to play the race card at the first sign of criticism. In an interview with the Washington Post a few weeks ago, she carped: “[N]o one’s ever assumed a white reporter can’t cover a white candidate.”
It’s not the color of your skin, sweetie. It’s the color of your politics. Perhaps Ifill will be able to conceal it this week. But if the “stunning” “Breakthrough” she’s rooting for comes to pass on January 20, 2009, nobody will be fooled.
***
Here’s the video clip of Ifill’s reaction to Palin’s RNC speech:
4zafLsAtp_Q
~much more at the link~
www.michellemalkin.com
so, the "debate" , what a crock, has not even come off yet and allready we are making excuses.
everyone is "in the tank", only a child would think that is not true.
Where is Brian Meyers "full disclosure" by the way.
A VP candidate , either one that can't debate with Ifill as the moderator(?) well now sweetie how will that candidate handle the dreaded Putin or god forbid the anti-christ achmadinerjacket.
They may be in the tank as well.
where's my cryng towel :D
Oh, yeah, it seems Mr Meyers needed(?) to "point out" that both are BLACK??
:lol: :eek:
Perhaps he is dealing the race cards himself???
As to the "well delivered speech", isn't that what most on the nutso right downplay, so why should that be (it seems) good enough for Mr meyers?
Should all moderators have to reveal who they voted for in every election?
How about their personally controlled investment portfolio?
How about any charities or boards they served on?
lamboguy
10-01-2008, 06:42 AM
if you can't trust the moderator, how can you trust the debate?
ArlJim78
10-01-2008, 07:12 AM
why Ifill, wasn't Keith Olberman available?
/nothing to see here, move along people.
I am just saying I want a tough minded sob in these jobs, I have debated a good deal, moderator never scared me.
If Ifill , who will be on pins and needles during the thing is enough to make one or the other of them look bad or break out in tears then that person is not worthy of the office they are seeking.
Simple.
Would Reagan or TR , be reduced to cowering behid the lecturn, i don't think so.
I WANT to see how they perform IF the deck IS stacked against them.
They are not(i didn't think so anyway) running for hall monitor or high school class prez.
HandyKapper
10-01-2008, 07:27 AM
When a Moderator of a debate has a financial interest in the outcome of a Presidential campaign, I now have an issue with it. How well does her book sell if McCain wins the election? Also, Ifill has been given the job of making up and deciding on which questions she will ask. Hopefully she will put her books success or failure aside and be fair during the debate. I see that as a very difficult task, especially since her book revolves around on how her three subjects have succeeded and progressed in the lives. Isn't that what she would want happen to her with a successful book release?
Obama is a high maintenance candidate. He can do NOTHING on his own. Needs a teleprompter, needs a moderator in his corner, needs the press to protect him....what a pathetic loser this bum is.
ArlJim78
10-01-2008, 07:33 AM
i don't think it matters one bit to Palin who the moderator is. she will not take her focus off of Biden/Obama. one thing i can say about her is she doesn't take the bait.
it just seems appalling that to the debate commision this is no problem, no conflict of interest when the moderator has a financial interest in one side?
barn32
10-01-2008, 09:14 AM
Obama is a high maintenance candidate. He can do NOTHING on his own. Needs a teleprompter...Did he use a teleprompter in the first debate?
Did he use a teleprompter in the first debate?Please excuse Tom. He has held this version of reality since Obama started in the primaries.
But his teleprompter fantasies may finally be realized.
By Palin, by Thursday
He was definately reading from something.
But back on topic....no comments about the obvious conflict of interest in this debate?
He was definately reading from something.
?????? Maybe his evil twin was secretly broadcasting tips to Obama from the black helicopter hovering outside the debate hall. Hope Sarah has an evil twin too. But much, much, much bigger and smarter.
This report aside; can we all agree that EVERYONE has an agenda?
Ralph, PA, Tom, Myself, My Neighbor, Brit Hume, Tokyo Rose, Baghdad Blitzer, Karl Rove, Keith Olbermann etc…
Anyone who says they aren’t playing their own angle is asking you to bend over and apply grease. :faint: It’s just part of the human condition and not necessarily a bad thing imo.
But Dan, we aren't writing books about a person in a debate we are supposed to be neutral in. "The Age of Obama" pretty much tells me she is not.
What would happen if the moderator was Newt Gingrich? Or Sean Hannity. Or Rush :eek: Limbaugh? ;):lol:
ArlJim78
10-01-2008, 11:06 AM
everyone does have an opinion or an agenda. in the past people in news organizations kinda kept that in the background and at least tried to show some semblance of fairness in the job.
nowadays? well things have changed a bit. i guess Ifill might even wear her Obama/Biden 08 campaign pin on her lapel during the debate. it would hardly create a stir. maybe she'll be autographing copies of her Obama book for the audience as well.
All true / fair points Tom & Jim;
This does sound like a poor choice, but I’m just trying to point out that anyone who either side perceives as “neutral” has not been born yet.
As far as our current sham of a debate process; I’m not a good one to comment as I would rather watch grass grow then be subjected to them in their current format.
We have become obsessed with the minutia of ‘sighs and gestures missing the substance and certainly avoiding the inevitable impact the entire party brings to the table well beyond the individuals we obsess over.
I’ve said in the past and I believe it now more then ever.
I had more substantial information about the janitors we hired at a telecommunications job then we collectively know about our candidates. Let’s see how our last 20 years of candidates would do with the ‘Wonderlic Personnel Test that some industries use. Instead; we focus on # of children, dog type, parking tickets, hair style, age, Moose meat, divorce rate and God forbid the man or women belches on national TV…
Our process has turned into reality TV where the entire focus is watching one party cannibalizing the other with there only truly unified goal to exclude a 3rd + choice. As always when two extremes clash; the majority suffer and constitutional / founding father priorities (states rights for example) become secondary. :(
ArlJim78
10-01-2008, 11:58 AM
it is all a sham now, and Ifill moderating this debate is rather inconsequential in my view. but it is yet another distraction.
dan,
we do know every banal detail of Sarah Palins life. why is that?
yet at the same the media is loathe to dig into what to many people feel are quite troubling realtionships that Obama has made during his life. the media does not provide any kind of check and balance now because it is 95% in the tank.
if this bailout deal gets rammed through, i'm up for a revolt. third parties, pitchforks, you name it. as the guy said, "i'm mad as hell, and I'm not going to take it anymore".:mad:
if this bailout deal gets rammed through, i'm up for a revolt. third parties, pitchforks, you name it. as the guy said, "i'm mad as hell, and I'm not going to take it anymore".:mad:
No “ifs ans or buts” needed here Jim; I’ve been ready for many years…where do I sign up! :jump:
i don't think it matters one bit to Palin who the moderator is. she will not take her focus off of Biden/Obama. one thing i can say about her is she doesn't take the bait.
it just seems appalling that to the debate commision this is no problem, no conflict of interest when the moderator has a financial interest in one side?
Again, name one person that you KNOW DOES not have a financial interest in the sham they call debates??
Just one live person will do.
If that's the problem , then I don't think anyone alive could moderate.
Someone made the point about Hannity, I am fine with that, but he doesn't write books and advocate a position, are YOU BLIND???
I would even be for Coulter, at least she would be on the same banality scale as either of the four of them.
I want to know where people stand , I do not want them to hide behind fair and balanced or objective, make your case , marshall your facts and let it rip.
WHich of course brings me back to some among many of my "issues" with these campaign events, do you know the "rules" in depth that are agreed to going in , WHY DO grownups( I mean no disrespect to those of you who are) NEED a moderator to have a debate?
It was pathetic in the 10 minutes I watched of the osama/grumpy "debate" that they wanted , NO needed ,to talk to the moderator and not to each other.
You see, most all of these clowns are afraid to actually engage each other one on one, they know they are not up to it.
Without their script(talking points from their handlers) they are nothing.
All evidence points to a sad willfully ignorant soft-headed lot most of this country has become, if these are the "leaders" put forward over and over.
ArlJim78
10-01-2008, 01:30 PM
Again, name one person that you KNOW DOES not have a financial interest in the sham they call debates??
Just one live person will do.
I know of no other moderator that had a particular financial interest that specifically depended on the outcome of the debate. none, not one. maybe you can point out the ones that did.
I know of no other debate moderator in the presidential contest cycle that had already gone on record and taken a side and extolled the virtues of one side in the form of a book, and then was also asked to moderate a debate in that same contest.
please name one, just one, other situation even remotely close to this.
I'm sure she can do an adequate job and don't think that she will be able to inject enough of her personal bias to effect the debate in any great way.
My point is that the debate commission could have avoided this controversy by choosing a different person that hadn't already taken a position. It doesn't look or smell good and it may end up contaminating the analysis of the debate outcome with everyone looking for a particular bias.
i'm sure there are any number of other people that could have been chosen. frankly I wish they would chose people with lower profiles, that aren't as well known. perhaps they should have their own person who maintains a neutral public stance whose only interest is in conducting good debates. when they use well known people that are on TV all the time they can become the story which is not desireable.
ddog, this one has a book coming on inauguration day.
You don't call that a special interest that is Obama who is inaugurated????
Come on, man, get real.
NJ Stinks
10-01-2008, 04:21 PM
everyone does have an opinion or an agenda. in the past people in news organizations kinda kept that in the background and at least tried to show some semblance of fairness in the job.
nowadays? well things have changed a bit. i guess Ifill might even wear her Obama/Biden 08 campaign pin on her lapel during the debate. it would hardly create a stir. maybe she'll be autographing copies of her Obama book for the audience as well.
Who is more slanted than Michelle Malkin? :ThmbDown: She makes Keith Olbermann look like an undecided voter! :D
Secretariat
10-01-2008, 04:34 PM
JR,
Quit the whining! My God some Republicans are whiners.
Brokaw's has had a lovesfest for McSame for years, and he's moderating the 2nd presidential debate. Get over it.
ArlJim78
10-01-2008, 04:36 PM
Who is more slanted than Michelle Malkin? :ThmbDown: She makes Keith Olbermann look like an undecided voter! :D
which debate is Michelle Malkin moderating?
bigmack
10-01-2008, 04:56 PM
Brokaw's has had a lovesfest for McSame for years, and he's moderating the 2nd presidential debate. Get over it.
Where can one see evidence of this "lovefest"
From TalkLeft
"Despite the McCain campaign's assertion that it did not know Gwen Ifill, moderator of tomorrow's VP debate, was writing a book on politics, race and Sen. Barack Obama, as Judd Legum points out, it was in the Washington Times two weeks before McCain agreed on August 6 to Ifill as a moderator. A simple Lexis search would have found it.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/jul/23/smiley-faces-blog-anger/
"We have an awkward history about how to talk about race in the nation and in newsrooms," says Gwen Ifill, senior correspondent for PBS' "The NewsHour With Jim Lehrer" and author of "The Breakthrough: Politics and Race in the Age of Obama," slated for publication early next year.
The takeaway here is only the incompetence of the McCain campaign to do its homework."
.................................................. ............
What else is new? McCain didn't vet Sarah Palin either.
If they really didn't know, they need to learn how to use the computer and the "internets".
A fall back position in case Palin either does not do well or receives "gotcha" questions from Gwen. Or maybe they can indefinably postpone the debate until say---after November? :D
wonatthewire1
10-01-2008, 06:31 PM
Who is more slanted than Michelle Malkin? :ThmbDown: She makes Keith Olbermann look like an undecided voter! :D
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
for a guy from jersey, that was a good one :D
Rookies
10-01-2008, 06:59 PM
"we do know every banal detail of Sarah Palins life. why is that?
yet at the same the media is loathe to dig into what to many people feel are quite troubling realtionships that Obama has made during his life. "
Come on ! Are you a shill for the "unfair and off balanced " network ?
That nutty "prelate" of Obama's was on a 24 hour loop on the media for weeks ! Hell, Flushed oxycotin Winbag and the rest of the neocon yakkers (Hannity, Coulter) has hammered that point almost every day- ad nauseum, ad infinitum.
Nothwithstanding Tom's usual snide anti Obama remark, just to show I AM FAIR AND BALANCED, I don't believe a mod, who's publishing a book on one of the candidates on Inauguration day, can be viwed as objective.
She should be replaced.
Ahhh, where's my homie Russert, when we need him ?
Perhaps, he can mod from heaven. GO BILLS !
I know of no other moderator that had a particular financial interest that specifically depended on the outcome of the debate. none, not one. maybe you can point out the ones that did.
I know of no other debate moderator in the presidential contest cycle that had already gone on record and taken a side and extolled the virtues of one side in the form of a book, and then was also asked to moderate a debate in that same contest.
please name one, just one, other situation even remotely close to this.
I'm sure she can do an adequate job and don't think that she will be able to inject enough of her personal bias to effect the debate in any great way.
My point is that the debate commission could have avoided this controversy by choosing a different person that hadn't already taken a position. It doesn't look or smell good and it may end up contaminating the analysis of the debate outcome with everyone looking for a particular bias.
i'm sure there are any number of other people that could have been chosen. frankly I wish they would chose people with lower profiles, that aren't as well known. perhaps they should have their own person who maintains a neutral public stance whose only interest is in conducting good debates. when they use well known people that are on TV all the time they can become the story which is not desireable.
Leherer has financial interests and write books and needs the people in the debates to "like" him so that they will come on his news show.
I can go back and find others , didn't Matthews moderate one of those things, he is a shill for dems.
I know I could find others, but I take your point.
I am too lazy to go back and look up who the moderators were in the past.
Everyone has a bias, i don't mind as long as they put it out front.
Just like commentators on anything, I can take the bias just don't try to con me into thinking you don't have one.
I still say no moderator should be required for adults who aspire to be leader of the free world.
bigmack
10-01-2008, 07:20 PM
:ThmbDown: She makes Keith Olbermann look like an undecided voter! :D
Olbermann uses a debilitating brand of smugness & ridicule. His snide sneers have appeared likewise on some of the most bothersome people I've ever met.
Could you imagine climbing inside his brain for even a day and feeling that amount of a constant need for hatred and condescention?
He's like a big queen, continually mocking all in his path.
KO: Jesus, can you believe the wallpaper in this place? These people are fools.
Same view on life as you see in much of San Francisco. Olbermann may not be a swish, but he sure acts like one.
riskman
10-01-2008, 07:22 PM
I still say no moderator should be required for adults who aspire to be leader of the free world.
How about a Truth Meter as a substitute.
ArlJim78
10-01-2008, 07:44 PM
I still say no moderator should be required for adults who aspire to be leader of the free world.
in a perfect world, yes I would agree with you, just have the two people go at it. Although I don't think the current structure is bad either, having someone that keeps things moving along and makes sure time and content is respected.
I do prefer that the moderator kind of blend in, and not become the story.
bettheoverlay
10-01-2008, 08:22 PM
Here's McCain's comments today
"I think that Gwen Ifill is a professional and I think she will do a totally objective job," said McCain, "because she is a highly respected professional. Does this help that if she has written a book that's favorable to Sen. Obama? Probably not. But I have confidence that Gwen Ifill will do a professional job."
JustRalph
10-01-2008, 11:05 PM
The host of PBS’ “Washington Week” and senior correspondent on “The NewsHour” said she did not tell the Commission on Presidential Debates about the book. The commission had no immediate comment when contacted by The Associated Press. A spokeswoman for John McCain’s campaign did not immediately return phone and e-mail messages.
JustRalph
10-01-2008, 11:12 PM
"we do know every banal detail of Sarah Palins life. why is that?
yet at the same the media is loathe to dig into what to many people feel are quite troubling realtionships that Obama has made during his life. "
Come on ! Are you a shill for the "unfair and off balanced " network ?
Ask yourself one question? How much do you know about Joe Biden's kids? His wife? There sexual habits? Have any of their friends had their divorce papers pulled from the local courthouse "just in case" there was some mention of Biden in them? Has Biden been called a whore or a Cu*t (http://www.myspace.com/pattonoswalt) by television personalities? Treated with the same disdain by those on the Repub side?
What this women has gone through is beyond the pale. This treatment will live long and fester in the minds of many.
The major obstacle to obtaining an impartial qualified moderator is anyone that is qualified is, by default, Pro-Obama.
There's a very small pond of suitable knuckleheads available.
highnote
10-02-2008, 12:03 AM
Has Biden been called a whore or a Cu*t (http://www.myspace.com/pattonoswalt) by television personalities? Treated with the same disdain by those on the Repub side?
What this women has gone through is beyond the pale. This treatment will live long and fester in the minds of many.
Since Biden likes to borrow from other people's speeches, he could make debate history if he borrowed Chevy Chase's line and responded to Palin's first debate answer with, "Sarah, you ignorant slut." :D
Joking aside, I hear what you're saying, Ralph. That kind of talk is revolting to me.
Hillary has been called the "c" word. I could tell you a joke a retired Navy friend told me about Hillary where the "c" word was the punch line.
I can only imagine how many times people have used the "n" word about Obama.
That's just the way some Americans are toward their politicians. Politicians know this. If they want to play in the big league of national politics then they better get a thick skin.
I find those words offensive and classless, but if presidential contenders can't take being called names then why the hell should they be trusted to run the most powerful country in the world?
If anything, name calling should make them a stronger person, IMVHO.
HUSKER55
10-02-2008, 12:44 AM
In fact, it might help. Think about it. The whole world knows the debate is rigged. If Sarah comes across better than Bidden, the Obama camp is in trouble.
But the media will never yield. But we all know that. No body can trust the journalist.
The only way Obama will come out ahead is if Sarah destroys Bidden. Because then the contest shifts from McCain to Palin, which in the long haul would benefit Obama.
I think there is going to be more people voting than ever this year and they are going to vote for McCain because of the shoddy campaign Obama ran and the shoddy journalism by the media.
Obama has to prove the media isn't biased to keep his repubility in contact. I know how to rig a poll and if I do then so do you. Are you that sure he covered his bases?
Obam might have slit his own throat.
Tomorrow night is going to tell the story one way or the other.
grab your popcorn
JUST MY HUMBLE OPINION
chickenhead
10-02-2008, 12:56 AM
Has Biden been called a whore or a Cu*t (http://www.myspace.com/pattonoswalt) by television personalities? Treated with the same disdain by those on the Repub side?
What this women has gone through is beyond the pale. This treatment will live long and fester in the minds of many.
for giggles, I looked to Google for the truth, and yes, Palin has more negative mentions. More positives generally, too. I threw Hillary in the mix, for giggles again.
Biden/Palin/Hillary is a....
D*ck: 8 vs. 86 vs. 6
Idiot: 743 vs. 18,400 vs. 25,400
Ass: 274 vs 28 vs. 8
Whore: 6 vs. 909 vs 2,590
C*nt: 1 vs. 1650 vs. 1,320
------
Biden/Palin/Hillary is...
My Hero: 95 vs. 1490 vs 1210
Great: 6,630 vs. 8320 vs 3390
Smart: 2480 vs. 4200 vs 926
PaceAdvantage
10-02-2008, 03:17 AM
He's like a big queen, continually mocking all in his path.Wow, I can not imagine a more appropriate description of KO....congrats!
Here's McCain's comments today
"I think that Gwen Ifill is a professional and I think she will do a totally objective job," said McCain, "because she is a highly respected professional. Does this help that if she has written a book that's favorable to Sen. Obama? Probably not. But I have confidence that Gwen Ifill will do a professional job."
This is the problem with McCan't - no backbone, he's a wet rag. If he can't stand up to he dems, I don't want him as CNC. He has shown me nothing but a strong desire to give up. How many times has he said he would suspend his campaign this week? The guy is a loser. Bottom line. How did his people not know about this....it's on AMAZON.COM for heaven's sake!!! IS this the diligence we want in the Oval Office?
HUSKER55
10-02-2008, 10:15 AM
Which one will hurt you the least and which one will help you the most where it counts.
It sure ain't Obama, is it?
boxcar
10-02-2008, 10:53 AM
Again, name one person that you KNOW DOES not have a financial interest in the sham they call debates??
Just one live person will do.
If that's the problem , then I don't think anyone alive could moderate.
Someone made the point about Hannity, I am fine with that, but he doesn't write books and advocate a position, are YOU BLIND???
I would even be for Coulter, at least she would be on the same banality scale as either of the four of them.
I want to know where people stand , I do not want them to hide behind fair and balanced or objective, make your case , marshall your facts and let it rip.
WHich of course brings me back to some among many of my "issues" with these campaign events, do you know the "rules" in depth that are agreed to going in , WHY DO grownups( I mean no disrespect to those of you who are) NEED a moderator to have a debate?
It was pathetic in the 10 minutes I watched of the osama/grumpy "debate" that they wanted , NO needed ,to talk to the moderator and not to each other.
You see, most all of these clowns are afraid to actually engage each other one on one, they know they are not up to it.
Without their script(talking points from their handlers) they are nothing.
All evidence points to a sad willfully ignorant soft-headed lot most of this country has become, if these are the "leaders" put forward over and over.
Why am I not surprised that you're okay with this arrangement? (Of course, it's understandable in one sense because Biden will need all the help he can get.) But aside from this, it's one thing for outsiders to have a vested interest in the outcome, but it's quite another for a participant to have one. And a moderator does participate because this person gets to pick and choose the questions and how the questions will be asked. I suppose you'd be perfectly fine with someone refereeing a big, important fight who also had a big bet down on the outcome? And even more at ease with the arrangement when you have a bet down going the opposite way, right?
Boxcar
boxcar
10-02-2008, 11:04 AM
In fact, it might help. Think about it. The whole world knows the debate is rigged. If Sarah comes across better than Bidden, the Obama camp is in trouble.
Well, not really. You'd be amazed at how many willfully bury their heads in the sand. But what I would do if I were Palin is that I would fix this problem coming right out of the chute, while at the same time rattling the moderator's cage in no small way. In my opening remarks -- or with the first question asked of Palin -- if I were her I would turn to the moderator in a very cordial, friendly manner to tell her how much she's looking forward to the next 60 minutes or whatever it is and that she will work hard in ensuring that the debate contributes little or nothing to her book sales on the book she wrote about NoBam. That kind of opening volley would so unsettle the moderator and even Biden -- it could well keep both of them off balance for the entire time. And, of course, such a tactic would ensure that the whole world would know the debate is rigged!
Boxcar
DRIVEWAY
10-02-2008, 11:32 AM
People aren't asking one another "If they are going to watch the debate".
The question is "So, where are you going to watch the debate".
In 1980 Reagan-Carter was watched by 80 Million. This debate could easily break that record.
Ifill will try to undermine Palin. Once she has compromised Palin, she will back off. She needs only one sound bite to fuel the liberal loones. However, if Palin hangs in there, then Ifill will be relentless until she gets her GOTTCHA moment.
Ninety minutes is a long time and Ifill is an experienced journalist. Palin is definitely a big undergog(at least 13 points in football vernacular). Let's hope the Polar Bears are blocking, the Moose are running and the Caribou are tackling.
Let's go Palin.
Why am I not surprised that you're okay with this arrangement? (Of course, it's understandable in one sense because Biden will need all the help he can get.) But aside from this, it's one thing for outsiders to have a vested interest in the outcome, but it's quite another for a participant to have one. And a moderator does participate because this person gets to pick and choose the questions and how the questions will be asked. I suppose you'd be perfectly fine with someone refereeing a big, important fight who also had a big bet down on the outcome? And even more at ease with the arrangement when you have a bet down going the opposite way, right?
Boxcar
I don't care who moderates the thing.
It's pointless, you have a clown with a big mouth (biden) and a clown with a 60s hairdoo(you know who).
They are both minor minor players and as I said long ago, once they "arive" at this stage, whatever was "them" is washed out to a bland spin spouting zero.
When I hear one of them say , this country has serious issues and outside of the nutso class on both sides we need to have a serious debate(just you and I) about what we are and want to be and how to get there , then I may revise my opinion.
Until that happens , you can fanatsize that what they are feeding you isn't the same crap you willfully ingest over and over.
If you don't think the refs have a vested opinion in every event, you need therapy.
Sorry, that's the way it works.
As to your childish bet analogy , the only "bet" I would make is that neither of these two bit hustlers will make the slightest difference on the ground.
The kool-aid clowns may CHOOSE to believe otherwise, that's their American right to do so.
have you seen the rules of the debate?????
In fact, it might help. Think about it. The whole world knows the debate is rigged. If Sarah comes across better than Bidden, the Obama camp is in trouble.
But the media will never yield. But we all know that. No body can trust the journalist.
The only way Obama will come out ahead is if Sarah destroys Bidden. Because then the contest shifts from McCain to Palin, which in the long haul would benefit Obama.
I think there is going to be more people voting than ever this year and they are going to vote for McCain because of the shoddy campaign Obama ran and the shoddy journalism by the media.
Obama has to prove the media isn't biased to keep his repubility in contact. I know how to rig a poll and if I do then so do you. Are you that sure he covered his bases?
Obam might have slit his own throat.
Tomorrow night is going to tell the story one way or the other.
grab your popcorn
JUST MY HUMBLE OPINION
The debate "WAS" rigged , they all are , at least the ones I have seen.
You get a better class of debate in any cabride in this country.
boxcar
10-02-2008, 12:29 PM
If you don't think the refs have a vested opinion in every event, you need therapy. Sorry, that's the way it works.
Hey, meathead, no one said anything about an "opinion". Having an opinion is one thing. Having a vested interest in the outcome is something else. Learn the difference quickly, lest you you be on shrink therapy for the rest of your days.
As to your childish bet analogy , the only "bet" I would make is that neither of these two bit hustlers will make the slightest difference on the ground.
The kool-aid clowns may CHOOSE to believe otherwise, that's their American right to do so.
Evidently, your brand of kool aid has seriously impaired your ability to think straight. This thread isn't about who will win or whether or not one ticket or the other will make the "slightest difference". The thread is about fundamental fairness. But you missed the mark, as usual, because in this case "fairness" isn't a term in your vocabulary, is it? You can't even begin to understand what it means, can you?
Boxcar
The major obstacle to obtaining an impartial qualified moderator is anyone that is qualified is, by default, Pro-Obama.
There's a very small pond of suitable knuckleheads available.
Bingo...Also a well informed tough debater can easily expose a biased moderator.Palin is a knucklehead ....period ..point blank end of conversation.and the R's should be furious at the implications inherent in her selection,the puppeteers know that most R's are not bright enough to get it because after all they elected Bush twice.:lol::lol:
OTM Al
10-02-2008, 05:30 PM
I don't think it is fair, but take a step back here. One would think that one of the first things the party should do when setting up a debate would be to agree on a moderator. If there was a Post article about her that said she was writing an Obama book, then a simple web search would have revealed that info and she could have been rejected. To me this makes them look more the fool than any biased moderator ever could. Who in their right mind would have agreed to this? I was interested in McCain a couple months ago, but he is bungling his way right out of this thing which he could have won. Simply amazing.
ArlJim78
10-02-2008, 05:42 PM
what people seem to be missing is neither McCain nor Palin have made Ifill an issue, even after the book deal was known. They both said they're fine with it, McCain said he thought she'd do a professional job.
they're not whining about it.
Secretariat
10-02-2008, 05:43 PM
Where can one see evidence of this "lovefest"
http://www.democrats.org/page/community/post/mceades/CGc9/commentary
It's a blogger with links to examples. I mean if you're going to criticize Ifil, (who is a woman and should have more empathy with Palin if anything) than Brokaw who likes Grampa McCain.
"NBC news anchor Tom Brokaw's behind-the-scenes relationship with the McCain campaign, as well as evidence of bias toward McCain in Brokaw's recent reporting on the presidential race, have brought into question his fitness to moderate the next presidential debate Oct. 7.
As the New York Times reports today, Brokaw has lately played the role of a liaison between NBC and the McCain campaign and even acted as an advocate for McCain within NBC. In an interview with the Times on Sunday, Brokaw said that he had "advocated" with NBC executives "to modify the anchor duties of the MSNBC hosts Keith Olbermann and Chris Matthews on election night and on nights when there were presidential debates" owing to their perceived unfriendliness toward McCain, in effect dumping Olbermann and Matthews as anchors and using them only as commentators. Brokaw told the Times also that he had "conducted some shuttle diplomacy in recent weeks between NBC and the McCain campaign," aimed at assuring the campaign that "McCain could still get a fair shake from NBC News." Brokaw said that he had been told by a senior McCain aide that the campaign had been reluctant to accept an NBC representative as one of the moderators of the three presidential debates until his name was invoked. "One of the things I was told by this person was that they were so irritated, they said, 'If it’s an NBC moderator, for any of these debates, we won't go'...," Brokaw said, "...My name came up, and they said, 'Oh, hell, we have to do it, because it’s going to be Brokaw'."
Brokaw has also drawn criticism for evidence of bias toward McCain in his recent reporting on the presidential race. On Sunday's "Meet the Press," Brokaw ended a debate between Steve Schmidt of the McCain campaign and David Axelrod of the Obama campaign by stating the following: "...We continue to poll on who's best equipped to be Commander in Chief, and John McCain continues to lead in that category despite the criticism from Barack Obama by a factor of 53 to 42 percent in our latest NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll." In fact, as MoveOn.org observes, the latest NBC poll has no question about Commander in Chief, and Brokaw appears to have been referring to a poll taken weeks ago. In each of NBC's last two polls, Americans chose Obama over McCain. MoveOn has called on its members to write to Brokaw at NBC and demand responsible journalism. On the same edition of "Meet the Press," Media Matters observes, Brokaw allowed Schmidt to falsely claim that McCain had "called for the firing of Don Rumsfeld" (McCain never called for Rumseld to be fired or to resign). Brokaw has also been observed suggesting that McCain's POW status means Democrats ought to lay off criticizing him (see FAIR, The Raw Story). "
bigmack
10-02-2008, 05:51 PM
MoveOn has called on its members to write to Brokaw at NBC and demand responsible journalism.
:lol: :lol: Thanks for the hoot. MoveOn asking its members to demand responsible journalism from NBC because of a McCain bias as result of a "lovefest".
Precious stuff. Thanks again. :lol:
PaceAdvantage
10-02-2008, 06:11 PM
I mean if you're going to criticize Ifil, (who is a woman and should have more empathy with Palin if anything)Or maybe because Ifill is black, she has more empathy with Obama, using your sexist, racist line of thinking....
All one has to do is rewatch that video of Ifill commenting after the Palin speech at the Repub. Nat. Conv. to see what it looks like when contempt comes spilling out of a "reporter's" mouth.
classhandicapper
10-02-2008, 07:02 PM
I've been watching Gwen Ifill for years on PBS and elsewhere.
I never really considered her a serious journalist. I considered her a left wing talking head that made appearances on various political talk shows representing the view point of the left (and especially African Americans).
There's nothing wrong with that role, but the media even attempting to paint her as an unbiased neutral journalist well suited to moderating a debate is about as funny as arguing that Joseph Goebbels would have been a suitable neutral judge at the Nuremberg trials.
What makes her an even worse choice is that her bias is also massively pro African American and that's a key issue here.
If she was a white man that was as pro white interests as Ifill is pro black interests she/he would be classified as a Klan member, racist, hate group member etc... and be totally disqualified from any role in politics at all.
The only possibility of getting a neutral outcome here is the expectation that such a wildly biased individual is incapable of being unbiased and the possibility that she will be sensitive enough to try to protect herself and her false reputation by moving to the middle for this one night.
dutchboy
10-02-2008, 07:22 PM
I just hope she can keep from laughing at both VP candidates. This may end up being the best comedy show on tv in a decade.
Biden a loud mouth non stop talking bully and Ms Palin who seems to be an excellent candidate to appear on the TV show "Are you may smarter than a fifth grader" I think she may really end up embarrasing herself.
How can anyone not be able to name a newspaper or magazine they read?
Just amazes my feeble mind.
I'm with you Class. She is a hack. You how she broke her leg?
Carrying Obama's water.
Live.....32 seconds into Biden's opening remarks and I puked.:eek::rolleyes:
Edit = after Sara's opening remarks......going good. Hit Biden's pitch back into his face.
I'll give credit where it is due....she has been fair for the first hour. I have no complaints.
chickenhead
10-02-2008, 10:29 PM
I was wondering the same thing. Apparently that is their proper name tho.
I thought he meant to say "Big-Mac attack"
witchdoctor
10-02-2008, 10:35 PM
What is a "Bosniac"?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bosniaks
Bosniaks....Barack And Joe preparing for election day. ;)
In the English-speaking world (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglosphere), Bosniaks are most commonly known as Bosnian Muslims
Are we not in the English speaking world?
Seriously, I'd have to watch again. Did he mean the specific Muslims of Bosnia? I don't think so.
PaceAdvantage
10-02-2008, 11:32 PM
By the way, did Ifill, when shaking hands with Biden at the end of the debate, tell him how great he did, or was I just hearing things?
RaceBookJoe
10-03-2008, 12:18 AM
By the way, did Ifill, when shaking hands with Biden at the end of the debate, tell him how great he did, or was I just hearing things?
Yes she did, good ears. rbj
JustRalph
10-03-2008, 01:23 AM
She got pounded in some areas of Talk Radio etc, her reputation took a hit and she knew better than to do anything untoward towards either tonight. She was in a no win situation and she knew it. If her performance was a baseball pitch it would have been right down the middle at 70mph
Sailwolf
10-03-2008, 01:35 AM
How does this shit happen? From the Article:
Ifill and her publisher are banking on an Obama/Biden win to buoy her book sales. The moderator expected to treat both sides fairly has grandiosely declared this the “Age of Obama.” Can you imagine a right-leaning journalist writing a book about the “stunning” McCain campaign and its “bold” path to reform timed for release on Inauguration Day – and then expecting a slot as a moderator for the nation’s sole vice presidential debate?
Yeah, I just registered 6.4 on the Snicker Richter Scale, too.
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NDFhMWUxZTZmMmE5MzkzYWVhMTU5NDYyNWRhNTQyM2M=
A debate “moderator” in the tank for Obama
by Michelle Malkin
Creators Syndicate
Copyright 2008
My dictionary defines “moderator” as “the nonpartisan presiding officer of a town meeting.” On Thursday, PBS anchor Gwen Ifill will serve as moderator for the first and only vice presidential debate. The stakes are high. The Commission on Presidential Debates, with the assent of the two campaigns, decided not to impose any guidelines on her duties or questions.
But there is nothing “moderate” about where Ifill stands on Barack Obama. She’s so far in the tank for the Democrat presidential candidate, her oxygen delivery line is running out.
In an imaginary world where liberal journalists are held to the same standards as everyone else, Ifill would be required to make a full disclosure at the start of the debate. She would be required to turn to the cameras and tell the national audience that she has a book coming out on January 20, 2009 – a date that just happens to coincide with the inauguration of the next president of the United States.
The title of Ifill’s book? “Breakthrough: Politics and Race in the Age of Obama.” Nonpartisan my foot.
Ifill’s publisher, Random House, is already busy hyping the book with YouTube clips of Ifill heaping praise on her subjects, including Obama and Obama-endorsing Mass. Governor Deval Patrick. The official promo for the book gushes:
“In The Breakthrough, veteran journalist Gwen Ifill surveys the American political landscape, shedding new light on the impact of Barack Obama’s stunning presidential campaign and introducing the emerging young African American politicians forging a bold new path to political power…Drawing on interviews with power brokers like Senator Obama, former Secretary of State Colin Powell, Vernon Jordan, the Reverend Jesse Jackson, and many others, as well as her own razor-sharp observations and analysis of such issues as generational conflict and the ‘black enough’ conundrum, Ifill shows why this is a pivotal moment in American history.”
Despite the protestations of her colleagues that she will be fair, Ifill has appeared on numerous radio and TV talk shows over the past several months to cash in on her access to the Obama campaign. She recently penned a fawning cover story on the Obamas for Essence magazine that earned much buzz. The title? “The Obamas: Portrait of an American Family.” A sample of Ifill’s hard-hitting investigative journalism, illustrated with Kennedyesque photos of the Obamas and children posing at home on the backporch and by the piano:
http://michellemalkin.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/1aessence.jpg
During the Republican National Convention, the PBS ombudsman fielded numerous complaints about Ifill’s coverage of Sarah Palin’s speech. Wrote Brian Meyers of Granby, Ct.:
“I was appalled by Gwen Ifill’s commentary directly following Gov. Sarah Palin’s speech. Her attitude was dismissive and the look on her face was one of disgust. Clearly, she was agitated by what most critics view as a well-delivered speech. It is quite obvious that Ms. Ifill supports Obama as she struggled to say anything redemptive about Gov. Palin’s performance. I am disappointed in Ms. Ifill’s complete disregard for journalistic objectivity.”
Like Obama, Ifill, who is black, is quick to play the race card at the first sign of criticism. In an interview with the Washington Post a few weeks ago, she carped: “[N]o one’s ever assumed a white reporter can’t cover a white candidate.”
It’s not the color of your skin, sweetie. It’s the color of your politics. Perhaps Ifill will be able to conceal it this week. But if the “stunning” “Breakthrough” she’s rooting for comes to pass on January 20, 2009, nobody will be fooled.
***
Here’s the video clip of Ifill’s reaction to Palin’s RNC speech:
4zafLsAtp_Q
~much more at the link~
www.michellemalkin.com (http://www.michellemalkin.com)
http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20081001/pl_politico/22742;_ylt=AsMOfmIqwGeP3XKTq.wlffADW7oF
Sailwolf
10-03-2008, 01:37 AM
Bosniaks....Barack And Joe preparing for election day. ;)
and this is how certain people prepare for the election
http://www.cfnews13.com/News/Local/2008/9/10/obama_sign_in_yard_stirs_up_neighbors.html
Sailwolf
10-03-2008, 01:38 AM
She got pounded in some areas of Talk Radio etc, her reputation took a hit and she knew better than to do anything untoward towards either tonight. She was in a no win situation and she knew it. If her performance was a baseball pitch it would have been right down the middle at 70mph
Most people say no
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/
JustRalph
10-03-2008, 02:28 AM
CBS news, Huffington Post? you are funny.
Her book was so well known, that she forgot to tell the commission on debates about it............... :bang:
PaceAdvantage
10-03-2008, 02:40 AM
Whenever the left comes out in full force like they are right now post-VP debate, it means they are starting to worry again...what for? Obama is ahead in the polls, that's all that counts....right?
lsbets
10-03-2008, 06:37 AM
What is a "Bosniac"?
I spent 7 months in Bosnia in 98, mostly in the Tuzla area. I heard of Bosnians, Bosnian Serbs, Bosnian Muslims, Bosnian Croats. Not once did I ever hear Bosniak, so I would say it is definitely not a common term.
JustRalph
10-03-2008, 10:45 AM
I spent 7 months in Bosnia in 98, mostly in the Tuzla area. I heard of Bosnians, Bosnian Serbs, Bosnian Muslims, Bosnian Croats. Not once did I ever hear Bosniak, so I would say it is definitely not a common term.
Their first album was great though!
chickenhead
10-03-2008, 11:02 AM
I spent 7 months in Bosnia in 98, mostly in the Tuzla area. I heard of Bosnians, Bosnian Serbs, Bosnian Muslims, Bosnian Croats. Not once did I ever hear Bosniak, so I would say it is definitely not a common term.
Ever been to the Home Depot in Scranton? ;)
Ever been to the Home Depot in Scranton? ;)
or Omaha?
lsbets
10-03-2008, 01:03 PM
Ever been to the Home Depot in Scranton? ;)
Yes and I talked to a guy named Joe about how shitty my life is. But after that I got to stay in a Holiday Inn Express.
George Sands
10-03-2008, 03:39 PM
Seriously, I'd have to watch again. Did he mean the specific Muslims of Bosnia? I don't think so.
Yes, he did. Quoting Biden from the transcript:
"We took Serbs, Croats and Bosniaks, being told by everyone, I was told by everyone that this would mean that they had been killing each other for a thousand years, it would never work."
vBulletin® v3.8.9, Copyright ©2000-2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.