Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Just one day before the debates, it has been "revealed" that Gwen Ifill penned a book about how Obama's candidacy is a breakthrough in the racial narrative of our country. McCain supporters are inconsolable.
However, it had been known for quite some before the McCain campaign agreed on Ifill as a moderator. There are only two explanations for this controversy:
1. This was a deliberate ploy to either get Palin out of the debate or downplay a poor performance afterwards.
2. This was another poor vetting decision by McCain, a la the Palin pick. No research was done by him, and he went into it headlong without considering the consequences.
I chose the first one, although a choice you didn't offer would have been:
C. Another opportunity to bash the "liberal" media.
With the campaign down to Obama on "the economy" and "security" they have no where to go to get the numbers up. By next week, have to let the dust from the VP debate settle, you can expect to see lots of ads of Obama morphing into Osama, Obama kicking in your door to (a) confiscate your Mac-10 and your Bazooka, or (b) forcing you to divorce your wife and marry another man, or (c) force you to have a third trimester divorce.
From next Monday all ads will be on this theme or guns, gays and God. With a little Reverend Wright thrown in for good measure.
She was under no obligation to notify the PDC! The book has been common knowledge to anyone who watches "Washington Week", or reads LEGITIMATE NEWSMAGAZINES, since about July of '08. Oh, that's right, no one on the McCain campaign gets any news from "reality based" sources.
OTOH, anyone who claims to have read the book is LYING. Obama is NOT the subject of the book. Re-read the title, he's not the subject, but is (for obvious reasons-best known Black politician in the US) mentioned in the title.
From what I can gather it's more a re-cap of the "post Martin Luther King Jr." generation of Black political figures. Probably make good reading for many on this site who probably can't name a Black public figure other than Obama and Reverend Wright.
Blacks have come a long way baby, and people of Gwen Ifill's (and my) generation probably never thought they'd see the day that a Black man, or woman would be on a national ticket.
If you've ever watched Gwen Ifill you'd know that, short of Tim Russert, she is one of the most even handed "news figures"/moderators in the business.
Relax, if Michelle Malkin and Drudge brought it up you can bet it's nothing more than BS and Republican talking points. Particulary Malkin, since Drudge is often right about things, but neither ever grinds an axe about Rs.
Ifill has said she did not tell the PDC that she was writing a book.
Ethically, she should recuse herself. She has a financial incentive to see obama elected.
As greta said, if this were a trial, it would be a mistrial.
You are misinformed. Unfortunately, it's because you watch Fox.
Also, you have no idea what she will be writing, since she hasn't written anything about Obama yet. Anyway, as Keith Olbermann said tonight, the Republicans would have to be "morons" not to know about it, since all you need to do is Google her name. Her book is listed on Amazon and on RandomHouse.com for $24.95, available Jan 2009. So please tell me, what was she hiding? There was an article in the Associated Press in July about this book too. That was 2 weeks before the Republicans approved Ifill as the moderator. She also discussed her book in a Washington Post interview in August.
BTW Colin Powell is also in the book. So are a lot of other Blacks in politics, not just Democrats. So if a White man writes about White politicians, does that means he should be disqualified? I just want to know why this is being brought up the day before the debate! (Actually, it's obvious to me.)
What totally amazes me is that you think she shouldn't be the moderator and John McCain disagrees with you! I guess you have some inside information you'd like to share?
The only person who should drop out is Palin. She wouldn't even bring up the Supreme Court decision on Exxon during her interview with Katie Couric. This proves she is a phony and dishonest. After all, she even went on TV to tell the people of Alaska how disappointed she was in its decision and suddenly she can't think of a single ruling she disagrees with now that she's a VP candidate? Why is the media the bad guy everytime Palin screws up or gets caught in a lie? Yet when Biden makes a gaffe, they're just doing their job! I've always been impartial and objective, but I can't wait until this election is over since I've never been as disgusted by a campaign as I am with McCain and his stunts. (and it's far from over)
Ifill Controversy: Deliberate ploy or another case of bad vetting?
The McCain campaign reeks of desperation. They know that only an unlikely sequence of events beyond their control can swing things back in their favor.
They've devolved into whining about details. Does anyone know what their central message is? Beyond "more of the same", that is.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Ifill Controversy: Deliberate ploy or another case of bad vetting?
