VP Debate "Moderator" has conflict of interest

fossten

Dedicated LVC Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
11,817
Reaction score
6
Location
Louisville
Just a heads-up for those of you who watch the debate. The moderator is in the tank for Obama. So watch for the bias.

Defining “moderator”

posted at 7:51 am on October 1, 2008 by Ed Morrissey

Perhaps the Commission on Presidential Debates doesn’t understand the term “moderator”. According to Websters Dictionary, the word refers to a mediator, someone unaffiliated or neutral between two or more positions to facilitate discussion and negotiation. Jim Lehrer moderated the first presidential debate between Barack Obama and John McCain, and did a fine job, mostly because he gave the appearance of fairness and objectivity. Lehrer hasn’t written books or magazine articles praising one of these men, nor does he have a financial interest in the outcome of the election.

Instead, as Michelle Malkin notes, the CPD has chosen Gwen Ifill, the PBS host and author of an upcoming book on Barack Obama scheduled for publication on Inauguration Day, to moderate the debate between Sarah Palin and Joe Biden:

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.

Let’s say for the sake of argument that Ifill doesn’t show any particular bias in this book towards Obama, even though Michelle documents both an Essence flack job and complaints about her coverage of the Republican convention that make her bias clear. Instead, let’s just focus on the financial interest Ifill has in an Obama victory in five weeks. If Obama loses, how will her book sell? Not nearly as well as if Obama wins, and everyone knows that.

Moderators should not have a financial stake in the election. That should be exceedingly obvious, and is to most people outside of the mainstream media and the Commission. Her pending book publication should alone disqualify her to moderate any of the debates this cycle. If Ifill had any sense of journalistic ethics, she would have turned them down herself.

Of course, the CPD could make this a habit. Let’s have Brent Bozell and Glenn Beck moderate the final two presidential debates. After all, that fits perfectly in the new Ifill tradition.
 
Palin should start by exposing Ifill by saying something like:

Gwenn, I understand you are coming out with a new book praising Obama in January. I certainly hope you can contain your bias while moderating tonight so all Americans can participate in a fair and substantive, not partisan debate.
 
During the Democratic National Convention, Ifill offered her neutral analysis on NBC News before Michelle Obama’s speech:
“A lot of people have never seen anything that looks like a Michelle Obama before. She’s educated, she’s beautiful, she’s tall, she tells you what she thinks and they hope that she can tell a story about Barack Obama and about herself.”
 
Heck, quit crying in your soup - she was chosen the first week in August - the McCain campaign had 2 months to contest. And it wasn't like she wasn't a "known" entity - she moderated the 2004 v.p. debates between Cheney and Edwards.

Once again, I think it is a case of the McCain campaign staff not doing their homework. You can blame Washington University for choosing her - but, the McCain campaign has to shoulder a lot of the current blame, they could have contested, easily. But not a peep out of them. If Hume had been chosen you bet the Obama campaign would have been all over it.

McCain's campaign machine is just lacking - I can see it all the time.
 
Heck, quit crying in your soup - she was chosen the first week in August - the McCain campaign had 2 months to contest. And it wasn't like she wasn't a "known" entity - she moderated the 2004 v.p. debates between Cheney and Edwards.

Once again, I think it is a case of the McCain campaign staff not doing their homework. You can blame Washington University for choosing her - but, the McCain campaign has to shoulder a lot of the current blame, they could have contested, easily. But not a peep out of them. If Hume had been chosen you bet the Obama campaign would have been all over it.

McCain's campaign machine is just lacking - I can see it all the time.
WRONG!

It's the CPD's responsibility to vet their moderators, and to disclose any potential or real conflicts of interest. Classic liberal tactic - defend those who tried to bury the truth, and blame McCain for not digging it up.

And comparing Ifill to Hume is like comparing apples to oranges. Ifill is a shill, Hume is a news anchor.

Furthermore: If McCain knew about this and complained, cue the cries of "Racist!"

If this were a legal issue, it would be a mistrial.

Oh, and another thing!

If it's Ifill or Hume, WHY IS IT ALWAYS IFILL?

We'd need Coulter or Rush to do one of the debates just to balance it out.
 
And if it's supposed to be between Ifill or Hume, WHY IS IT ALWAYS IFILL?

We'd need Glenn Beck or Karl Rove to moderate just to balance it out.
 
Don't blame this on the Dems if McCain's campaign dropped the ball - that is what they did - they can't vet their way out of a paper bag.

His campaign committee is one of the worse I have seen - now they are complaining about the FEC deadline for ad buys - duh, it happens the same time every campaign...

Why is it always Ifill - and not Hume? Heck the media is biased - do something about it - go out and buy a car because you watch O'Reilly and one of his sponsors is GM (I think - I don't often watch it, but AdAge lists GM as a sponsor of Factor...)
 
Your leader approves, so pipe-down you crybabies........

"Does this help if she has written a book that's favorable to Senator Obama? Probably not," McCain said. "But I have confidence Gwen Ifill will do a professional job."

http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/10/01/vp-debate-moderator-pens-pro-obama-book/

*owned*

You haven't read the book, so you can't prove that it "favors" Obama. Let the debate viewers decide if she's impartial or not, or are you favoring censorship? Afraid McPalin can't handle a little heat? I wonder why.
 
Your leader approves, so pipe-down you crybabies........
First half of that quote was him NOT approving. Second half was him being diplomatic. I happen to disagree with his diplomatic stance.

Far from "ownage," troll.
 
Don't blame this on the Dems if McCain's campaign dropped the ball - that is what they did - they can't vet their way out of a paper bag.

Besides your accusations and the accusations and misdirection in the MSM, what proof do you have that McCain actually "dropped the ball"? Fossten already showed that it wasn't his responsibility, but the responsibility CPD. It seems it would be them who dropped the ball.

Gonna need to provide more then proof by assertion.

Also, your comparison of Hume to Ifill is a false analogy (apples and oranges) in this case. Does Hume stand to somehow profit more if one candidate wins the election over the other?
 
You haven't read the book, so you can't prove that it "favors" Obama.

Don't need to. It has Obama in the title and the discription of the book is rather clear. There is no question that her profits will be higher if Obama wins then if McCain wins..

Let the debate viewers decide if she's impartial or not, or are you favoring censorship?

Censorship?! Where did that come from? Can you say "red herring"?
 
Already building a case as to why Palin is going to flop on Thursday, smart being pro-active, it's just too transparent. The Right needs to be a little more clever than this.
 
Already building a case as to why Palin is going to flop on Thursday, smart being pro-active, it's just too transparent. The Right needs to be a little more clever than this.

No, unlike you, we are not being disingenuous here.:rolleyes:
We are genuinely upset at the double standard and ignoring of the obvious conflict of interest.
 
It's the Republicans fault for not PRESUMING that the "objective" moderator wasn't an Obama cheerleader??

And, while we're at it, there's no bias in the media either.....

Am I getting this all correct?
 
I'm sure there would be no whining on the left if David Freddoso moderated the next Presidential debate, right?
 
Heck, Reagan got Rather pulled off one of his debates...

The campaigns can't veto - but they can contest.

Why didn't the McCain campaign do their homework? (Ohhh, deep dark secrets there - her book has been on pre-order status on Amazon and Random House since July)

Why did they let this slide? They seem to do this a lot. I am beginning to wonder if it is on purpose - hoist the red flag, cast a pall over the whole proceedings, and then, claim 'bias' if our girl doesn't do well (I am sort of with Dude on this one)... Maybe they are far more crafty then I imagine they are... hummmm

Shag, I was just using 'Hume' as someone the Obama campaign would protest, not as a direct comparison using monetary gain.

Oh, let's just get more old white guys to moderate, how about David Freddoso? (this is funny - I hadn't read Foss's post above before posting mine...:) great minds foss....)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
No, unlike you, we are not being disingenuous here.:rolleyes:
We are genuinely upset at the double standard and ignoring of the obvious conflict of interest.


What I see is failing confidence in Palin from the Right.

Ifel being biased would only help Palin in the debate, she's the clear underdog here; a biased moderator wouldn't be taken too kindly.
 
Are you sincerely concerned about the moderator or are you sincerely worried that you know your "barracuda" is going to be devoured by the Shark and deflecting her inevitable loss beforehand?:p

My guess? A little of the first and a whole lot of the second!
 
Are you sincerely concerned about the moderator or are you sincerely worried that you know your "barracuda" is going to be devoured by the Shark and deflecting her inevitable loss beforehand?:p

I'm going to go GOOGLE some famous statements. Maybe later on we can have a drinking game, each taking a shot when Biden uses one of the statements and claims they are his own.

After the debate, can we all stop pretending Biden knows anything about foreign policy?
 
Maybe later on we can have a drinking game, each taking a shot when Biden uses one of the statements and claims they are his own.

Now we are talking... Count me in!!!!
Can we also drink everytime Palin mentions Alaska and Russia in the same sentence?:)
Do we drink in the chat room?
 
Palin has been drinking ever since she had the witch hunter cast evil witchcraft away from her soul. What a moron.
 

Members online

No members online now.
Back
Top