VP debate moderator releasing pro-Obama book

[Potemkin]

t is from World "Nut" Daily but it is interesting.

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=76645

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


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.

[Michael]

Reminds of that debate with a minister as moderator who was definitely a McCain supporter.

[Greta]

But she has faced criticism previously for not treating candidates of both major parties the same.

Well, there has to be someone to blame if Palin starts rambling on with those crazy-ass answers on hers.

[Ter]

I think that woman is now not qualified to be a neutral moderator, level playing field and all that...

Ter

[Michael]

I would like to remove all excuses for Republicans if Palin repeats her Curic interview performance and flat out comes across as being in over her head.

[Jacksonian]

Originally Posted by Ter

I think that woman is now not qualified to be a neutral moderator, level playing field and all that...

Ter

Totally in the tank for Obama - the fix is in:

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?

Lots of video of Ifil gushing over Obama & diss'ing Palin here

[Flint]

Totally in the tank for Obama - the fix is in:

How can you say this, when you sincerely believe that Palin has clearly won this debate?

[Jacksonian]

Originally Posted by Flint

How can you say this, when you sincerely believe that Palin has clearly won this debate?

Snark, snark - is that all you are good for?

You know what happens when you assume things, don't you?

[Ramius31]

It is always amusing to see supposedly fairminded liberals ignore or otherwise defend blatantly biased media.

[Flint]

You know what happens when you assume things, don't you?

You're going to prove me wrong?

For the record, I'm of two minds about this particular issue. On the one hand, presumably every possible moderator will cast a vote for someone in November. It seems silly to pretend that anyone is truly neutral. The claim that "the fix is in" because moderators are citizens who cast votes seems rather peevish on the face of it.

On the other hand, it IS possible to do even-handed moderation. Even us mortal sinners wretched enough to hold opinions can still make a good-faith effort to do a decent job. At least telling us in advance that Ifill might try to control or structure the debate so as to favor one candidate over another, is fair warning for us to consider the actual moderation itself.

The best moderators' politics cannot be determined by their performance as moderators. The problem with announcing a presumed bias in advance is exactly what we see here - a fix is taken for granted by political opponents regardless of the actual debate. If Palin does well, it shows she's astute enough to swim upstream against biased moderation. If she does poorly, it's proof the moderation was biased.

And so we notice that this injection of presupposed bias comes from the Weird Nut Daily, a lunatic-right-wing outlet dedicated to this sort of thing - CLAIMING that the deck is stacked in the hopes of making it impossible for Palin to lose on the merits no matter what she is asked or how she answers. And who might be WND's target suckers? Anyone who supposes "the fix is in" before the debate even happens. You really CAN fool some of the people all of the time.

Hopefully, some of us can watch the debate and come to our conclusions AFTER seeing it. For the rest of us, clearly the debate itself is moot - no matter what is said by anyone, it ratifies preconceptions. Why bother to even hold it?

It is always amusing to see supposedly fairminded liberals ignore or otherwise defend blatantly biased media.

Your claim is perhaps too abstract, since the WMD is known to be the most biased medium available anywhere on the internet, and it's not the liberals defending it in this case, but the far-right. But thank you for illustrating this so very clearly.

[Jacksonian]

Bias

The vice presidential debate will be moderated by Gwen Ifill, the author of a pro-Obama book that will be released on Inauguration Day.


Matt Drudge has the goods.

From the plug on Amazon fo Ifill’s upcoming, “The Breakthrough: Politics and Race in the Age of Obama,” which yes, will be released on Jan. 20, 2009:

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.

Ifill argues that the Black political structure formed during the Civil Rights movement is giving way to a generation of men and women who are the direct beneficiaries of the struggles of the 1960s. She offers incisive, detailed profiles of such prominent leaders as Newark Mayor Cory Booker, Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick, and U.S. Congressman Artur Davis of Alabama, and also covers up-and-coming figures from across the nation. 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.

THE BREAKTHROUGH is a remarkable look at contemporary politics and an essential foundation for understanding the future of American democracy.

She has a financial stake in the outcome of this election. Some conservatives say Ifill has shown a bias against Republicans in past debates that she moderated.

What should the campaign of Republican John McCain doo about Ifill’s financial bet on the election of Democrat Barack Obama?

Nothing.

For once it should allow this card to be played by the media.

There are two major news cycles before this debate.

Ifill should resign, but McCain should not give her the satisfaction of blaming a McCain protest for her total lack of any common sense or judgment in signing this book deal and apparently writing this book before the election is even held.

If Ifill insists on hosting this — and she shouldn’t — then fine. Republican Sarah Palin should be prepared to turn it around and ask Ifill about the book, the deal and why she decided to moderate even though she has a financial interest in Obama’s election.

And then it should not be mentioned again by the McCain campaign.

That’s being presidential — by being above the petty stuff. The worst thing the campaign can do is whine and play the victim. We don’t elect victims to be president.

We’ll see how McCain plays this.

Greta Van Susteren said full disclosure about the book should be enough. She wrote: “Otherwise? it is a conflict of interest and the offended ticket should pull out of the debate… or she should. By the way, it could be a book about an important issue …but that does not take away the issue of conflict.”

[Greta]

Originally Posted by Ramius31

It is always amusing to see supposedly fairminded liberals ignore or otherwise defend blatantly biased media.

I do not consider myself a "Liberal", although I do watch PBS a good bit, mainly because I do not have cable TV. Perhaps PBS has been a bad influence of me.

[nmp]

Listen, if Todd Palin was the moderator and the questions were limited to hunting, fishing and God you would still complain of liberal media bias. She was a poor choice for VP given the other choices.

[Flint]

Since most if not all potential moderators for this debate have in fact taken a public position on this election, should the debates be moderated at all? Should they instead simply answer questions from the public (presuming anyone asking any question has been screened to be sure THEY don't have any opinions either)?

Perhaps someone from Fox news should be co-moderator, and some equitable format be worked out so that the biases cancel out?

(Incidentally, the book reviews don't make it sound much like straight political cheerleading. The book seems to be discussing changes to American political landscapes due to more inclusiveness of representatives. Just from the reviews, I don't get any sense of preference, much less disqualifying bias. It's possible Ifill isn't going to "fix" anything, although this hardly matters to those who "know better" in advance.)

[Flint]

Originally Posted by nmp

Listen, if Todd Palin was the moderator and the questions were limited to hunting, fishing and God you would still complain of liberal media bias.

Ah, but probably not until after the debate. Beforehand, Todd Palin as moderator would be considered objective and proper. Todd would only be considered to have been made a puppet of the liberals AFTER his wife opened her mouth.

[Michael]

We could find one of those Japanese robots to moderate the debate, but I suppose the next question would be about who programmed the robot computer.

[Renegade]

This thread is kinda funny at the sheer hypocrisy. If Rush was to be the moderator, the Obamasan's camp would be awash in ranting and wailing, but in this case, why it's ok...nobody's really neutral anyway...

[Flint]

nobody's really neutral anyway...

You're right, nobody is neutral. The question is, can ANYONE moderate this debate competently, or is everyone so biased it's basically impossible? Has moderator bias been an issue in the first debate?

The real issue here isn't that the moderator is biased. Anything like that would be jumped on instantly, and maybe discredit the entire affiar. This case is much more subtle - WMD is making the claim of bias, even before the debate. Is Ifill generally regarded (as Rush is for conservatives) to being a shill for the liberals? Well, no. Is it in Ifill's self-interest to try to make Palin look bad or Biden look good? No, it's not. Has Ifill generally done the sort of even-handed moderation we're looking for? Yes, she has.

So why start claiming bias in advance? Seems pretty obvious to me - to create a climate where Palin can't lose. If she does well, it's because she's qualified. If she does poorly, it's because Ifill is biased. And sure enough, on WMD's word alone, we have a cheerleader saying "the fix is in" based on sheer wishful thinking. WMD succeeded in suckering at least one enthusiastically willing victim.

So it will be interesting to see this "fix" documented after we've all seen it in action. Here's my prediction: Jacksonian will "hear" Palin win the debate, and the "fix is in" accusation will vanish down the black hole uber-partisans refer to as their "memory".

[MomCares]

Originally Posted by Flint

The real issue here isn't that the moderator is biased. Anything like that would be jumped on instantly, and maybe discredit the entire affiar. This case is much more subtle - WMD is making the claim of bias, even before the debate. Is Ifill generally regarded (as Rush is for conservatives) to being a shill for the liberals? Well, no. Is it in Ifill's self-interest to try to make Palin look bad or Biden look good? No, it's not. Has Ifill generally done the sort of even-handed moderation we're looking for? Yes, she has.

So why start claiming bias in advance? Seems pretty obvious to me - to create a climate where Palin can't lose.

This pre-debate spin is typical.

Hey -- did anyone notice Ifill's book talks about COLIN POWELL???

She CLEARLY has a conservative bias, and can in no way be fair.

Sheeesh.


MomCares

[Fattail]

Question: How many copies of that book get bought if Obama loses?
Answer: Not near as many as if he wins.

McCain would be foolish to complain about this before the debate,, even if Palin was supposed to win. If there is the appearance of bias, which there is when someone monetarily benefits in a contest, let Gwen Ifill moderate and if Palin performs poorly they have a built in excuse. If she does well, they can still complain about the bias.

[Flint]

Fattail:

If there is the appearance of bias, which there is when someone monetarily benefits in a contest, let Gwen Ifill moderate and if Palin performs poorly they have a built in excuse. If she does well, they can still complain about the bias.

But I hope you notice that this is the case ONLY if WMD can create the appearance of bias. If they fail, the chances are very small that those watching the debate will ever notice this "appearance". It's something for which expectations must be created in advance. People can only see what they expect to see (whether or not it's there) if they expect to see it. So WMD is trying to manage expectations.

[free ranger]

A partial list of Gwen Ifill’s questions for the VP debate:


Mayor Palin, Barack Obama is a handsome, charismatic demigod. How many boxes of Kleenex will you need after your crushing loss?

Mayor, which is your preferred method of stifling dissent, banning books or burning them? Since it's both, please explain how you can deny the accusation that you're a fascist, which I am making now.

And:


Senator, could you please sign my book?

Heh.

[caonacl]

Originally Posted by free ranger

A partial list of Gwen Ifill’s questions for the VP debate:

Mayor Palin, Barack Obama is a handsome, charismatic.....

at which time Joe Biden blurts out, "That's what I've been saying all along! He's a once in a million years candidate!"

[preppiechick]

Originally Posted by Renegade

This thread is kinda funny at the sheer hypocrisy. If Rush was to be the moderator, the Obamasan's camp would be awash in ranting and wailing, but in this case, why it's ok...nobody's really neutral anyway...

Ren (and congrats, on your new status!!) Why is it that there isn't ONE dem that will ever appear on a debate, with a conservative mod...they ALWAYS INSIST on one of theirs???? And I don't mean that it has to be Rush, but ANYONE who is less left wing!!

Everyone is missing the main point to ifill...we know we are going to get an obama maniac supporter moderator, whoever the msm puts in, but the BIG problem is that she stands to FINANCIALLY PROFIT. That is a HUGE conflict of interest, and you can't convince me otherwise.

Ifill Must be Removed

Posted by: Jed Babbin

Wednesday, October 1, 2008 at 12:58PM

28 Comments

Whether or not this proves to be the “Age of Obama,” no one who has a financial interest in the outcome of the election -- as does PBS’ Gwen Ifill -- should be permitted to moderate any debate in the campaign season.

Ifill, who is scheduled to moderate the important debate tomorrow night between Republican Sarah Palin and Democrat Joe Biden, has a conflict of interest that, by even the most rudimentary ethical standards of journalism, must preclude her from moderating or even reporting on the debate.

Ifill is the author of The Breakthrough: Politics and Race in the Age of Obama, a new book scheduled for release on Inauguration Day. Its Amazon.com promotional statement says, “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.”

We are used to liberal bias in the media, and it’s questionable if PBS can even find among its journalists someone who approaches an unbiased point of view. Nevertheless, Ifill has a financial interest in the outcome of the election. If Obama loses, her book will be DOA. If Obama wins, she wins greater book sales and thus far greater income from royalties. This, by any standard, is a disqualifying conflict of interest.

Ifill must be removed from the moderator’s slot -- today -- and replaced by someone who at the very least does not have a financial interest in the outcome of tomorrow night’s debate.

http://www.redstate.com/diaries/reds...st-be-removed/

Oh, and it isn't just wnd...mainstream has picked it up, all night. Here's one:

VP debate moderator's impartiality questioned

By DAVID BAUDER, AP Television Writer 1 hour, 14 minutes ago

NEW YORK - PBS journalist Gwen Ifill, moderator of the upcoming vice presidential debate, dismissed conservative questions about her impartiality because she is writing a book that includes material on Barack Obama.
ADVERTISEMENT

Ifill said Wednesday that she hasn't even written her chapter on Obama for the book "The Breakthrough: Politics and Race in the Age of Obama," which is to be published by Doubleday on Jan. 20, 2009, the day a new president is inaugurated.

"I've got a pretty long track record covering politics and news, so I'm not particularly worried that one-day blog chatter is going to destroy my reputation," Ifill said. "The proof is in the pudding. They can watch the debate tomorrow night and make their own decisions about whether or not I've done my job."

The day before the Joe Biden-Sarah Palin debate, columnist Michelle Malkin wrote in the New York Post about Ifill's book, saying "she's so far in the tank for the Democratic presidential candidate, her oxygen delivery line is running out."

In its online description of the book, Doubleday says that 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."

The McCain campaign found out about Ifill's book in the last day or so, a spokesman said.

Ifill said Obama's story, which she has yet to write, is only a small part of the book, which discusses how politics in the black community have changed since the civil rights era. Among those subjects is Colin Powell, secretary of state in the Bush administration.

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.

Ifill's resume includes jobs at The New York Times, the Washington Post and NBC News. She moderated the 2004 vice presidential debate between Dick Cheney and John Edwards.

She said it was the publisher, not herself, who set the Inauguration Day release date. It will be released then whether Obama wins or loses.

Although Malkin raised the topic of Ifill's impartiality the day before the debate, the PBS journalist said that Time magazine noted she was writing a book in August, and that it has been available for pre-sale on Amazon.com. The book also is mentioned in a Sept. 4 interview she gave the Washington Post.

Ifill questions why people assume that her book will be favorable toward Obama.

"Do you think they made the same assumptions about Lou Cannon (who is white) when he wrote his book about Reagan?" said Ifill, who is black. Asked if there were racial motives at play, she said, "I don't know what it is. I find it curious."("that's right, pull the race card, now"-preppiechick)
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081002/...6yZQVh6zys0NUE

This is a really good article, but it too long in length, and i know the only ones who will read it, already know most of this (just preaching to the choir) !!!

http://michellemalkin.com/2008/09/30...ank-for-obama/

[preppiechick]

Originally Posted by nmp

... She was a poor choice for VP given the other choices.

When are you guys going to remember, that you are running against MCCAIN???? Edwards was ever more unknown/ unvetted. This is the PRESIDENTIAL campaign. Obama is seriously underqualifed, and all this attention that is being drawn to Palin just underscores the lack of self esteem, on BO's part. You always can tell who has "issues" on the playground...they are always the ones calling names, whipering insinuations, and deflecting their faults onto others. Oh, right...it's called "Chicago politics"