Post by: longeyes on September 30, 2008, 07:38:35 PM
ELECTION 2008
VP debate moderator Ifill releasing pro-Obama book
Focuses on blacks who are 'forging a bold new path to political power'
Posted: September 30, 2008
8:35 pm Eastern
By Bob Unruh
? 2008 WorldNetDaily
Gwen Ifill
The moderator of Thursday's vice-presidential debate is writing a book to come out about the time the next president takes the oath of office that aims to "shed new light" on Democratic candidate Barack Obama and other "emerging young African American politicians" who are "forging a bold new path to political power."
Gwen Ifill, of the Public Broadcasting Service program "Washington Week," is promoting "The Breakthrough," in which she argues the "black political structure" of the civil rights movement is giving way to men and women who have benefited from the struggles over racial equality.
Ifill declined to return a WND telephone message asking for a comment about her book project and whether its success would be expected should Obama lose. But she has faced criticism previously for not treating candidates of both major parties the same.
During a a vice-presidential candidate debate she moderated in 2004, when Democrat John Edwards attacked Dick Cheney's former employer, Halliburton, the vice president said, "I can respond, Gwen, but it's going to take more than 30 seconds."
"Well, that's all you've got," she told him.
Ifill told the Associated Press Democrats were delighted with her answer, because they "thought I was being snippy to Cheney." She explained that wasn't her intent.
But she also was cited in complaints PBS Ombudsman Michael Getler said he received after Palin delivered her nomination acceptance speech at the Republican National Convention in St. Paul, Minn., this year.
Some viewers complained of a "dismissive" look by Ifill during her report on Palin's speech. According to Getler, some also said she wore a look of "disgust" while reporting on Palin.
At that time she said, "I assume there will always be critics and just shut out the noise. It is surprisingly easy."
Ifill, who also works with her network's "NewsHour," is making preparations to moderate this week's debate between the two candidates for vice president, Democratic Sen. Joe Biden and Republican Gov. Sarah Palin.. She told BlackAmericaWeb.com she thinks debates "are the best opportunity most voters have to see the candidates speaking to issues."
She said she is concerned only about getting straight answers from candidates.
"You do your best to get candidates to answer your question. But I also trust the viewers to understand when questions are not answered and reach their own conclusions," Ifill told BlackAmericaWeb.
"Four years ago, when neither John Edwards nor Dick Cheney proved capable of answering a question about the domestic epidemic of AIDS among African-American women, viewers flooded me with reaction," she said.
She said she will make her own decisions about what questions to ask, adding "the big questions matter."
In the Amazon.com promotion for her book, Ifill is described as "drawing on interviews with power brokers," such as Obama and former Secretary of State Colin Powell.
In an online video promoting her book, she is enthusiastic about "taking the story of Barack Obama and extending it."
It focuses on four people, "one of them Barack Obama of course," she said.
"They are changing our politics and changing our nation," she said.
On Amazon.com, Ifill is praised for her "incisive, detailed profiles of such prominent leaders as Newark Mayor Cory booker, Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick, and U.S. Congressman Artur Davis of Alabama."
"Ifill shows why this is a pivotal moment in American history," the review says.
She told AP her view of Obama: "I still don't know if he'll be a good president."
She also describes how she met him at the 2004 Democratic convention and since then has interviewed the Illinois senator and his family.
She also boasted that by the time of the debate, "I'll be a complete expert on both" Palin and Biden.
The debate will be held at Washington University in St. Louis, which has posted information about the evening's events online.
Ifill's profile there describes her as a longtime correspondent and moderator for national news programs and includes her service as moderator of the 2004 debate between Edwards and Cheney.
However, there's no mention of her upcoming book. Nor does the website for the Commission on Presidential Debates, which is organizing the meetings of the candidates, mention her book.
Post by: Desertdog on September 30, 2008, 08:47:20 PM
VP debate moderator Ifill releasing pro-Obama book
Focuses on blacks who are 'forging a bold new path to political power'
By Bob Unruh
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=76645
The moderator of Thursday's vice-presidential debate is writing a book to come out about the time the next president takes the oath of office that aims to "shed new light" on Democratic candidate Barack Obama and other "emerging young African American politicians" who are "forging a bold new path to political power."
Gwen Ifill of the Public Broadcasting Service program "Washington Week" is promoting "The Breakthrough," in which she argues the "black political structure" of the civil rights movement is giving way to men and women who have benefited from the struggles over racial equality.
Ifill declined to return a WND telephone message asking for a comment about her book project and whether its success would be expected should Obama lose. But she has faced criticism previously for not treating candidates of both major parties the same.
During a vice-presidential candidate debate she moderated in 2004 when Democrat John Edwards attacked Republican Dick Cheney's former employer, Halliburton the vice president said, "I can respond, Gwen, but it's going to take more than 30 seconds."
"Well, that's all you've got," she told Cheney.
Ifill told the Associated Press Democrats were delighted with her answer, because they "thought I was being snippy to Cheney." She explained that wasn't her intent.
But she also was cited in complaints PBS Ombudsman Michael Getler said he received after Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin delivered her nomination acceptance speech at the Republican National Convention in St. Paul, Minn., earlier this month.
Some viewers complained of a "dismissive" look by Ifill during her report on Palin's speech. According to Getler, some also said she wore a look of "disgust" while reporting on the Republican candidate.
At that time she said, "I assume there will always be critics and just shut out the noise. It is surprisingly easy."
Ifill, who also works with her network's "NewsHour," is making preparations to moderate this week's debate between the two candidates for vice president, Palin and Democratic Sen. Joe Biden.. She told BlackAmericaWeb.com she thinks debates "are the best opportunity most voters have to see the candidates speaking to issues."
She said she is concerned only about getting straight answers from candidates.
"You do your best to get candidates to answer your question. But I also trust the viewers to understand when questions are not answered and reach their own conclusions," Ifill told BlackAmericaWeb.
"Four years ago, when neither John Edwards nor Dick Cheney proved capable of answering a question about the domestic epidemic of AIDS among African-American women, viewers flooded me with reaction," she said.
She said she will make her own decisions about what questions to ask, adding "the big questions matter."
In the Amazon.com promotion for her book, Ifill is described as "drawing on interviews with power brokers," such as Obama and former Secretary of State Colin Powell.
In an online video promoting her book, she is enthusiastic about "taking the story of Barack Obama and extending it."
It focuses on four people, "one of them Barack Obama of course," she said.
"They are changing our politics and changing our nation," she said.
On Amazon.com, Ifill is praised for her "incisive, detailed profiles of such prominent leaders as Newark Mayor Cory Booker, Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick, and U.S. Congressman Artur Davis of Alabama."
"Ifill shows why this is a pivotal moment in American history," the review says.
She told AP her view of Obama: "I still don't know if he'll be a good president."
She also describes how she met him at the 2004 Democratic convention and since then has interviewed the Illinois senator and his family.
She also boasted that by the time of the debate, "I'll be a complete expert on both" Palin and Biden.
The debate will be held at Washington University in St. Louis, which has posted information about the evening's events online.
Ifill's profile there describes her as a longtime correspondent and moderator for national news programs and includes her service as moderator of the 2004 debate between Edwards and Cheney.
However, there's no mention of her upcoming book. Nor does the website for the Commission on Presidential Debates, which is organizing the meetings of the candidates, mention her book.
Post by: longeyes on September 30, 2008, 08:49:43 PM
Post by: Desertdog on September 30, 2008, 08:57:57 PM
Post by: longeyes on September 30, 2008, 09:12:51 PM
Anyway, what matters is that people read about and understand the gravity of it.
Post by: Waitone on September 30, 2008, 11:15:24 PM
Longeyes I just don't see the problem. A conflict of interest simply can not arise since we're talkin' a "professional journalist".
In case you haven't figgered out, this is a another set up which the republicans have evidently contracted with democrats to accept. I can think of no other reason for their repeated stupidity. You don't get that stupid by accident or genetics. They have to be paid for it.
Post by: Standing Wolf on October 01, 2008, 03:03:59 AM
Quote
I can think of no other reason for their repeated stupidity. You don't get that stupid by accident or genetics. They have to be paid for it.
The last refuge of a scoundrel is... uh... Well, heck. New Jersey, maybe?
Post by: HankB on October 01, 2008, 03:47:18 AM
In case you haven't figgered out, this is a another set up which the republicans have evidently contracted with democrats to accept. I can think of no other reason for their repeated stupidity. You don't get that stupid by accident or genetics. They have to be paid for it.
Ann Coulter did refer to the GOP as The Stupid Party.I think set-ups like this occur because the GOP is riddled with closet liberals whose real agenda is closer to that of the Democrats than to the "official" GOP platform.
And . . . once again, it's looking like McCain really doesn't want to win.
Post by: Antibubba on October 01, 2008, 04:19:27 AM
Quote
Longeyes I just don't see the problem. A conflict of interest simply can not arise since we're talkin' a "professional journalist".
But it isn't McCain she'll be dealing with, it'll be Palin. And while Americans might stand idly by while the Dems rain snubs snide comments on him, figuring he can take it, it'll be very different if that kind of storm hits Palin. Democratic arrogance will only harm them, not Palin.
Besides, it'll all be overshadowed by what Biden putting his foot in his mouth, I'm sure.
Post by: Ben on October 01, 2008, 05:24:43 AM
Post by: ctdonath on October 01, 2008, 05:31:37 AM
Post by: ronnyreagan on October 01, 2008, 06:12:26 AM
Post by: roo_ster on October 01, 2008, 06:24:20 AM
Post by: ronnyreagan on October 01, 2008, 06:42:37 AM
The McCain campaign supposedly did not know until the last couple days.
In my opinion that doesn't really help his cause - it just shows a lack of effort on his part. Maybe they should do some research - preferably BEFORE they agree on a moderator. The book is mentioned right on her PBS bio page, to suddenly be all up in arms over it RIGHT NOW stinks of desperation.
Post by: MicroBalrog on October 01, 2008, 06:43:58 AM
Obama is leading 4.8% on average.
We're all screwed.
There is no hope.
Post by: longeyes on October 01, 2008, 06:48:19 AM
Quote
She is a professional "journalist" and is therefore quite able to turn her prejudices on and off. She does not have to worry about injecting her opinion into her performance as a moderator because she is a "professional journalist". Ya see, "professional journalists" are not like all these buck tooth, mouth-breathing radio talk show hosts. A "professional journalist" can separate her passions from her profession at the drop of a dime (well, maybe not a dime. Maybe a couple of grand).
Longeyes I just don't see the problem. A conflict of interest simply can not arise since we're talkin' a "professional journalist".
In case you haven't figgered out, this is a another set up which the republicans have evidently contracted with democrats to accept. I can think of no other reason for their repeated stupidity. You don't get that stupid by accident or genetics. They have to be paid for it.
Longeyes I just don't see the problem. A conflict of interest simply can not arise since we're talkin' a "professional journalist".
In case you haven't figgered out, this is a another set up which the republicans have evidently contracted with democrats to accept. I can think of no other reason for their repeated stupidity. You don't get that stupid by accident or genetics. They have to be paid for it.
Waitone, I think you know I agree with you. "Parties" ceased to mean anything some time ago. Bush and McCain are essentially internatioanlist liberals, and, yes, the operative word here is...complicity (if not something worse).
Post by: MicroBalrog on October 01, 2008, 06:57:09 AM
The modus operandi of GOP leaders and many primary voters had been, for years, to nominate moderate candidates as they were seen as more electable.
McCain is the final iteration of that strategy.
Post by: ctdonath on October 01, 2008, 08:31:11 AM
Quote
There is no hope.
OMG! ONOZ1
...actually, as I recall, darn near every election turns out surprisingly differently from the polls preceeding it. If BHO is up 4%, and the alleged "ain't gonna & won't tell ya" vote is 6%, he loses by 2%. A lot of people lie (or just change their minds) about whether & how they'll vote. Most states are pretty solid in how they'll go, and it only takes a few votes in 1-2 swing states to throw it.
There's only one poll that matters, and that's in early November.
Post by: longeyes on October 01, 2008, 09:00:54 AM
He's not going to make a judgment on "that," he says. He believes she'll be scrupulously fair.
He sounded tired, weak, and, frankly, pitiable.
Post by: Desertdog on October 01, 2008, 09:46:08 AM
Quote
He sounded tired, weak, and, frankly, pitiable.
All the more reason to have a honest, tough, intelligent VP.
Post by: freedom lover on October 01, 2008, 10:25:20 AM
Post by: seeker_two on October 01, 2008, 10:29:03 AM
This is just another reason not to trust PBS or look to the News Hour for impartial news.
Yeah....we should let YouTube and CNN handle the debate....
Post by: freedom lover on October 01, 2008, 10:31:09 AM
Post by: Headless Thompson Gunner on October 01, 2008, 10:51:25 AM
Suuuuure. You should know there is no real source for impartial news.
That doesn't mean we should go out of our way to use the most biased news sources out there for debates. Yet we seem to do exactly that...
Post by: freedom lover on October 01, 2008, 11:02:57 AM
Post by: Antibubba on October 01, 2008, 06:04:05 PM
Quote
He's not going to make a judgment on "that," he says. He believes she'll be scrupulously fair.
What is he supposed to say?
Post by: MicroBalrog on October 01, 2008, 07:27:03 PM
Quote
He's not going to make a judgment on "that," he says. He believes she'll be scrupulously fair.
What is he supposed to say?
"Get a new moderator"?
Post by: Headless Thompson Gunner on October 01, 2008, 07:35:18 PM
If Palin does well, he can say somrthing like "hey, look how good she did, even a stupendously biased moderator couldn't throw her off stride."
If she doesn't do well he can say "well, whadya expect, with a moderator like that there's no way she could have won."
Post by: longeyes on October 01, 2008, 08:23:11 PM
We don't need to be clever. Obama is there to be had--by someone who isn't afraid to take him down.
Post by: S_O_Laban on October 02, 2008, 01:25:40 AM
Quote
He's not going to make a judgment on "that," he says. He believes she'll be scrupulously fair.
What is he supposed to say?
"Get a new moderator"?
Mac said what he should have said.
The problem here is not with the either party vetting the mod.... The problem is with the lack of personal ethics shown by the mod. She should have told both campaigns right out of the gate that she had a personal conflict of interest with this situation, (she stands to make several hundred K is Obama is elected, if not, much less.) Just another example of leftist ideology (she feels she is above the law) as any ethical journalist would have said something right away.
Post by: seeker_two on October 02, 2008, 01:38:33 AM
Quote
He's not going to make a judgment on "that," he says. He believes she'll be scrupulously fair.
What is he supposed to say?
"Get a new moderator"?
Post by: doncol on October 02, 2008, 12:01:32 PM
In case you haven't figgered out, this is a another set up which the republicans have evidently contracted with democrats to accept. I can think of no other reason for their repeated stupidity. You don't get that stupid by accident or genetics. They have to be paid for it.
You know, I am starting to wonder about that. There is just way too much tail tucking by the Republican party lately. I can't really come up with another excuse for the wussish behavior.
Post by: Unisaw on October 02, 2008, 05:40:36 PM
Post by: Northwoods on October 02, 2008, 05:48:00 PM
I was vehemently in favor of a change in moderator -- the appearance of a conflict was too much to overlook. That said, I actually think the moderator did a fine job. A couple of her questions could have been stated more clearly but I didn't detect any bias.
Agreed. She didn't play powder puff with Biden and full contact with Palin. She seemed to actually be reasonably even handed.
Post by: ronnyreagan on October 02, 2008, 06:09:34 PM
Post by: lacoochee on October 02, 2008, 06:35:46 PM
Sarah also passed up the opportunity given to her after Biden's partisan attempt to blame the current financial crisis on the Bush Administration. She should have pointed out the problem originated long before the Bush administration with Community Reinvestment Act etc. and that the top four recipients of Freddie Mac campaign largess are Democrats with Obama being second. She would have owned the rest of the debate and had just pointed it that out.
Why do I feel like this all a charade? And that before long all of these rich politicians (rich from selling influence) and their Wall Street cronies will be waving from their private helicopters as the fly away from the economic and moral ruin that once mankind's greatest achievement? In other words, Thanks for all of the fish!!!