VP debate moderator Ifill releasing pro-Obama book

[calidem411]

This smells fishy to me already....

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

<embed src="http://www.metacafe.com/fplayer/1755855/the_breakthrough_gwen_ifill.swf" width="400" height="345" wmode="transparent" pluginspage="http://www.macromedia.com/go/getflashplayer" type="application/x-shockwave-flash"> </embed><br><font size = 1><a href="http://www.metacafe.com/watch/1755855/the_breakthrough_gwen_ifill/">The Breakthrough: Gwen Ifill</a> - <a href="http://www.metacafe.com/">Watch more funny videos here</a></font>

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 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."

(Story continues below)





"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.

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

[calidem411]

Here's the video of her promoting her book and speaking about Barack Hussein Obama...


<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/lKjzQGRIsvA&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/lKjzQGRIsvA&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Do you believe that there will be a bias on this debate???

[Bunz]

Well who do you suggest be the moderator otherwise?

It is hardly the case that she forms most of the questions herself anyways. I think she learned her lesson from the 2004 flub. But otherwise, Ifill is generally professional and I dont think you will notice any difference.

[calidem411]

Well who do you suggest be the moderator otherwise?

It is hardly the case that she forms most of the questions herself anyways. I think she learned her lesson from the 2004 flub. But otherwise, Ifill is generally professional and I dont think you will notice any difference.

I don't know, but if someone will be moderating an un-bias debate they should be forthcoming with their political views. Don't you think?

[Bunz]

I don't know, but if someone will be moderating an un-bias debate they should be forthcoming with their political views. Don't you think?

Well see that is the problem, everyone has some percieved political view, and the otherside is always going to complain about it. Fact of the matter is that this moderator was agreed on some time ago. Her lengthy time as the moderator on Washington week seemed good enough at the time. Washington Week is one of the shows I try to actually catch when it is on. I think the best roundtable out there many times.

[NO Obamanation]

What a joke. Obama worshipers pretend the mod being a follower of obama isnt a problem.

I wish I had the power to change who the mod will be. Its all ok right now because the person doing it is a follower of your messiah.

If I could change it and have someone who is in the pocket of the GOP. The crying from the obama worshipers would be heard around the world.

[pocketfullofshells]

already crying before she losses , setting up your excuses?

Simple fact is basically all they do is ask the questions . normally of both people and its how they respond that wins, not what questions are asked.

Its not like they will be, Biden do you like kittens?

Palin, explain in detail the Bail out plan, and tell me why we should or should not do it. Also in detail some of the tax cuts now being added to is , why do we need to add tax cuts here. is it not just republicans playing politics with a bill that could have such a great impact on our Economy?

I am sorry Gov palin that was dumb, why could you not give a yes or no responce like about the kittens?

Just say it, you know she will get wiped off the floor and your setting up the loss with excuses now already.

[pocketfullofshells]

What a joke. Obama worshipers pretend the mod being a follower of obama isnt a problem.

I wish I had the power to change who the mod will be. Its all ok right now because the person doing it is a follower of your messiah.

If I could change it and have someone who is in the pocket of the GOP. The crying from the obama worshipers would be heard around the world.

attacks people for not caring about this if it was Obama, then states she wants a moderator that would be on her side....lame

I want to know where you find the person on earth to do the debates that does not lean one way or the other. I cant wait to hear what questions you think where bias when its over.

[calidem411]

already crying before she losses , setting up your excuses?

Simple fact is basically all they do is ask the questions . normally of both people and its how they respond that wins, not what questions are asked.

Its not like they will be, Biden do you like kittens?

Palin, explain in detail the Bail out plan, and tell me why we should or should not do it. Also in detail some of the tax cuts now being added to is , why do we need to add tax cuts here. is it not just republicans playing politics with a bill that could have such a great impact on our Economy?

I am sorry Gov palin that was dumb, why could you not give a yes or no responce like about the kittens?

Just say it, you know she will get wiped off the floor and your setting up the loss with excuses now already.

You may see it that way, because you can't see beyond your candidate. If you remember in the primaries, you'd recall Hillary crying foul because of the way she was given the questions. They would ask the questions first and then Obama would follow and he would almost repeat the same thing that Hillary had just responded and everyone would say; Obama was on top....:mad:
There's a big media conspiracy here and you know it....

[calidem411]

attacks people for not caring about this if it was Obama, then states she wants a moderator that would be on her side....lame

I want to know where you find the person on earth to do the debates that does not lean one way or the other. I cant wait to hear what questions you think where bias when its over.


How many people do you know who are about to moderate a debate that could be pivotal to electing the president of the U.S and who's about to publish a book favoring one of the candidates.... That is bull ****!!!:mad:

[Andy]

already crying before she losses , setting up your excuses?

Simple fact is basically all they do is ask the questions . normally of both people and its how they respond that wins, not what questions are asked.

Its not like they will be, Biden do you like kittens?

At least you are not trying to claim that the media is unbaised. The moderator is practically campaigning for Obama, so that unbaised media claim is pretty laughable, as it always has been.

But as for Biden being asked if he likes kittens, yes actually that is exactly what I expect.

Maybe you were not paying attention in the last few elections, but Bush got reamed with attacking questions, while his opponet rarely did. One laughable example was Al Gore and Bush. Bush was asked questions about his qualifications to be President, and his failed business venture. Meanwhile Al Gore was litterally asked "Some people have questioned your qualifications. How does that make you feel?"

How does that make you feel? No questions about his ties to oil companies? No questions about his flunking out of school? No questions about his claims about no controlling legal authority? No questions about millions collected at a Budist temple fronting for the Chinese military.... nope none of that... instead it was "How does this make you feel?". That's about on par with "do you like kittens?"

So yes, Pocket, that is exactly the type of lame questions I expect Biden to get. It was the same in 2004, when this same lady laughed and joked with Kerry, but was litterally aggressive to Bush.

Not worried about it. I expect it. I hope she's even more slanted than before. Last time it energized the republican base to see how baised the media obviously is.

[TruthAboveAll]

Well see that is the problem, everyone has some percieved political view, and the otherside is always going to complain about it. Fact of the matter is that this moderator was agreed on some time ago. Her lengthy time as the moderator on Washington week seemed good enough at the time. Washington Week is one of the shows I try to actually catch when it is on. I think the best roundtable out there many times.

There are plenty of moderators that would be much more acceptable. I heard no complaints about Jim Lehrer, although he is known to be on the Liberal side of center. This is comparable to Rush Limbaugh being the moderator. Only SHE is supposed to be a true JOURNALIST and maintain neutrality.

That simply is not going to happen. Between her self-professed agendas, her patently obvious devotion to Obama and her openly ridicule of Palin (and to some extent all Conservative/Republicans) there is absolutely no way that she should participate in this debate.

Washington Week is markedly slanted left. The problem I have with that is that it's supposed to be non-partisan, and a venue of objective journalism. As it parades as such, that is the image many people develop AS objective journalism, when it is neither. Her longevity is no stand-alone qualification.

She may have been acceptable at some point, though I consider it an over-generous, let's play nice stretch of credulity. With her performance after the Palin nomination and her unvarnished disdain for her, along with the news breaking about her pending book publication and release, the standards have burst at the seams.

[Andy]

After watching a clip of her commenting on Palin's speech, it is more than obvious she is completely bias. The disgusted look, the slanted remarks, the shaking of her head like she couldn't believe it. It will be interesting to see how one sided this debate will be.

[NO Obamanation]

After watching a clip of her commenting on Palin's speech, it is more than obvious she is completely bias. The disgusted look, the slanted remarks, the shaking of her head like she couldn't believe it. It will be interesting to see how one sided this debate will be.

I talked to a couple obama worshipers today; they felt it was a perfectly reasonable pick. They just couldn’t see what the fuss was about. I am officially disgusted with liberal obama worshipers who can not be honest about the most simple things like this.

The woman admits she never informed the committee that she has written this book on Obama and the book will be published on inauguration day when they were considering her for the mod pick. If it is Obama who is inaugurated, her book is worth a whole lot of $$$ If its McCain…… her book is not worth the price of toilet paper.

She has openly said cruel and rude things about Palin, McCain and Republicans in general.

I Listened to Sarah Palin talk today about tomorrow’s debate, she said she didn’t mind the mod, and things will be fine. McCain said about the same thing. I guess its nice that they are accepting of the joke of a pick, but I reserve the right to think it’s a joke.

[Andy]

The woman admits she never informed the committee that she has written this book on Obama and the book will be published on inauguration day when they were considering her for the mod pick. If it is Obama who is inaugurated, her book is worth a whole lot of $$$ If its McCain…… her book is not worth the price of toilet paper.

Hopefully the republicans are wise enough by now to realize, the media will never be on their side.

That said. This is an amazing point. The moderator has invested monetary interest in Obama winning.

So where are all you anti-capitalist, anti-money motive, liberals now? Where is all that evil corrupting power of cash talk now? Is the influence of greed only wrong if a republican does it? Why don't you apply it to your cheezy moderator girl?

[NO Obamanation]

I forgot to add this for anyone who wants it

1-202-872-1020
this is the number for the committee that is in charge of setting up the debates. If you want to call and complain or if you’re an obama worshiper who wants to say good pick.

I think the woman not disclosing to the committee about her book and its release date is sufficient reason to disqualify her.

I have tried a few times to get through but am only getting a busy signal.

[calidem411]

The woman admits she never informed the committee that she has written this book on Obama and the book will be published on inauguration day when they were considering her for the mod pick. If it is Obama who is inaugurated, her book is worth a whole lot of $$$ If its McCain…… her book is not worth the price of toilet paper.

She has openly said cruel and rude things about Palin, McCain and Republicans in general.

.

She's expected to make up to a million if Obama is elected president from the sale of her book.

Don't you think that she has lots of vested interest that Palin looks bad tomorrow?

[NO Obamanation]

attacks people for not caring about this if it was Obama, then states she wants a moderator that would be on her side....lame

I want to know where you find the person on earth to do the debates that does not lean one way or the other. I cant wait to hear what questions you think where bias when its over.

look outside the clouded box of Obama for a moment. I wish I could turn the tables TO SHOW OBAMA WORSHIPERS THAT THEY WOULD CRY AND GET THEIR PANTIES IN A BUNCH.

I would never want a mod bias TO the McCain Palin ticket. Id rather have one fair, if that is not possible one openly bias to Obama but not one who can make or break millions in book sales depending on who is elected.

I would like to turn the tables just to show Obama worshipers what hypocrates they are then get an unbias as possible mod.

[NO Obamanation]

She's expected to make up to a million if Obama is elected president from the sale of her book.

Don't you think that she has lots of vested interest that Palin looks bad tomorrow?

Yes of course she does. but people who have blinders on cant see that. or just dont want to see that.

[pocketfullofshells]

You may see it that way, because you can't see beyond your candidate. If you remember in the primaries, you'd recall Hillary crying foul because of the way she was given the questions. They would ask the questions first and then Obama would follow and he would almost repeat the same thing that Hillary had just responded and everyone would say; Obama was on top....:mad:
There's a big media conspiracy here and you know it....

umm well they do have the same basic ideas...if you did not notice, most of the Dems did. And what makes you think going 2nd is best? obama got attacked ab it in the last debate for agreeing with McCain to often...becuse he responded 2nd to questions they both agreed on in some way...had he been first McCain could have been attacked for the same thing.

[pocketfullofshells]

There are plenty of moderators that would be much more acceptable. I heard no complaints about Jim Lehrer, although he is known to be on the Liberal side of center. This is comparable to Rush Limbaugh being the moderator. Only SHE is supposed to be a true JOURNALIST and maintain neutrality.

That simply is not going to happen. Between her self-professed agendas, her patently obvious devotion to Obama and her openly ridicule of Palin (and to some extent all Conservative/Republicans) there is absolutely no way that she should participate in this debate.

Washington Week is markedly slanted left. The problem I have with that is that it's supposed to be non-partisan, and a venue of objective journalism. As it parades as such, that is the image many people develop AS objective journalism, when it is neither. Her longevity is no stand-alone qualification.

She may have been acceptable at some point, though I consider it an over-generous, let's play nice stretch of credulity. With her performance after the Palin nomination and her unvarnished disdain for her, along with the news breaking about her pending book publication and release, the standards have burst at the seams.

Jim L is great, but I think has health issues... and I belive I have seen her do many debates and never felt any where bias.

[pocketfullofshells]

At least you are not trying to claim that the media is unbaised. The moderator is practically campaigning for Obama, so that unbaised media claim is pretty laughable, as it always has been.

But as for Biden being asked if he likes kittens, yes actually that is exactly what I expect.

Maybe you were not paying attention in the last few elections, but Bush got reamed with attacking questions, while his opponet rarely did. One laughable example was Al Gore and Bush. Bush was asked questions about his qualifications to be President, and his failed business venture. Meanwhile Al Gore was litterally asked "Some people have questioned your qualifications. How does that make you feel?"

How does that make you feel? No questions about his ties to oil companies? No questions about his flunking out of school? No questions about his claims about no controlling legal authority? No questions about millions collected at a Budist temple fronting for the Chinese military.... nope none of that... instead it was "How does this make you feel?". That's about on par with "do you like kittens?"

So yes, Pocket, that is exactly the type of lame questions I expect Biden to get. It was the same in 2004, when this same lady laughed and joked with Kerry, but was litterally aggressive to Bush.

Not worried about it. I expect it. I hope she's even more slanted than before. Last time it energized the republican base to see how baised the media obviously is.

The republican base will cry bias anytime they lose or dont do well, they always do, its a Joke realy.

[pocketfullofshells]

look outside the clouded box of Obama for a moment. I wish I could turn the tables TO SHOW OBAMA WORSHIPERS THAT THEY WOULD CRY AND GET THEIR PANTIES IN A BUNCH.

I would never want a mod bias TO the McCain Palin ticket. Id rather have one fair, if that is not possible one openly bias to Obama but not one who can make or break millions in book sales depending on who is elected.

I would like to turn the tables just to show Obama worshipers what hypocrates they are then get an unbias as possible mod.


after the Debate I want to see what questions you think are so unfair. Lets see how big of a impact is , I bet none.

[NO Obamanation]

after the Debate I want to see what questions you think are so unfair. Lets see how big of a impact is , I bet none.

fair enough

She has gotten a huge backlash, she might try extra hard not to go over the top.

It is clear she doesnt like her, she had some pretty nasty things to say about her and republicans in general after the republican convention.

I hope one of the questions for her is what did she mean by she would be an advocate to those with special needs kids? and if Palin come back with $$ then ask where will it come from seeing there is no money in the budget.
that could slip her up in spending and find out if those were just words or has she really thought about it.

[calidem411]

There are plenty of moderators that would be much more acceptable. I heard no complaints about Jim Lehrer, although he is known to be on the Liberal side of center. This is comparable to Rush Limbaugh being the moderator. Only SHE is supposed to be a true JOURNALIST and maintain neutrality.

.

I thought that Jim did a great job. I would had enjoyed the format much more if both candidates would had engaged each other the way Jim kept asking them to do...

They should bring him back....

[calidem411]

Jim L is great, but I think has health issues... and I belive I have seen her do many debates and never felt any where bias.

She never published a book during the presidential elections in which she's spreading propaganda on behalf of one of the presidential candidates...

She was not up front with the debate committee. She should had disclosed this little issue in which she may end up making a lot of money if Obama gets elected....:mad:

[pocketfullofshells]

so I just read more, the book is not even about Obama...its about race in Politics, and has a section on Powell as well, and she has not even written the obama part yet...So she cant right a book on race and politics now? Or she can she just needs to ignore Obama in it? Or maybe she is Bias to the Republican since she wrote about Powell?

"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. "

""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."

http:
//www.twincities.com/politics/ci_10617882 (http://www.twincities.com/politics/ci_10617882)

I do agree she should have told the Debate board about it though.

[calidem411]

so I just read more, the book is not even about Obama...its about race in Politics, and has a section on Powell as well, and she has not even written the obama part yet...So she cant right a book on race and politics now? Or she can she just needs to ignore Obama in it? Or maybe she is Bias to the Republican since she wrote about Powell?

"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. "

""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."

http:
//www.twincities.com/politics/ci_10617882 (http://www.twincities.com/politics/ci_10617882)

I do agree she should have told the Debate board about it though.

OK, the title of the book is: "Breakthrough: Politics and Race in the Age of Obama

It's supposed to be realeased on innaguration day.... C'mon! :mad:

[GenSeneca]

I'm partial to the saddle back forum style... where both got the exact same questions. I think that helps to keep it about the issues and policy rather than childish sniping at the competition.

I have a prediction:

No matter what happens.... Popeye, Top Gun, and the rest of the Obamaphiles, will claim a Biden victory and nit-pick at Palin's answers.

[pocketfullofshells]

OK, the title of the book is: "Breakthrough: Politics and Race in the Age of Obama

It's supposed to be realeased on innaguration day.... C'mon! :mad:

Al Frankin wrote, Rush Limbaugh is a big fat idiot...it has his name in it, so is he Pro Rush now?

Fact is simple, Politics and race have been never been a bigger issue in regards to non whites getting power, and to just ignore Obama would be retarded. Also you do know that the Author is not always the one who makes the title right? If she had written about Politics and race and not talked about Obama that would be kinda sad, and the fact that Obama is on the title, does not make the book about him.

[pocketfullofshells]

I'm partial to the saddle back forum style... where both got the exact same questions. I think that helps to keep it about the issues and policy rather than childish sniping at the competition.

I have a prediction:

No matter what happens.... Popeye, Top Gun, and the rest of the Obamaphiles, will claim a Biden victory and nit-pick at Palin's answers.

You say that like Libs, noObama and otehrs will not do the same for Palin saying she won and cry Bias if the media does not agree...even if she came out and said damn these questions are hard, can I go ask someone for help? they would claim victory.

I stated that Obama won the last one because it was at best light leaning his way at worse a tie, but for McCain to tie in that debate was in fact a loss for him. Much like if Obama ties on the Economy that's a loss for him as well as he should beat McCain in that area. The town hall is a toss up, I think better suited to McCain, but both should be on even footing for it.
Unlike some on here I can sit back and actually say I think my guy lost or did not do what was needed. I have called Elections to the 1% in a three way race in favor of the Republican who I hated. I may have my pick now, but unlike some I dont run around with a huge bias against Mccain, where as Libs and NoObama are clearly bias.

[Andy]

The republican base will cry bias anytime they lose or dont do well, they always do, its a Joke realy.

Not so. I remember when Bob Dole lost, and quite frankly, he was awful. The difference is, we point to specific reasons when we point out media bias. When one person is asked difficult pointed questions, and the other is asked "how does that make you feel?"... that is clear and obvious bias. It's only a joke to those who have their heads stuck so far up their politics, that they can't see straight. Claims of bias are not false just because we point it out continually.

[Andy]

Al Frankin wrote, Rush Limbaugh is a big fat idiot...it has his name in it, so is he Pro Rush now?

Fact is simple, Politics and race have been never been a bigger issue in regards to non whites getting power, and to just ignore Obama would be retarded. Also you do know that the Author is not always the one who makes the title right? If she had written about Politics and race and not talked about Obama that would be kinda sad, and the fact that Obama is on the title, does not make the book about him.

You must be joking... Is the title of her book "Breakthrough: How an idiot named Obama won by skin color"? Of course not.

Clearly title of the book directly indicates a positive review. Clearly calling Rush a big fat idiot, is a negative review. Why does basic logic have to be explained to you? Are you biased in favor of this moderator?

Not to mention she has had positive reviews of Obama external to anything book related.

[Andy]

You say that like Libs, noObama and otehrs will not do the same for Palin saying she won and cry Bias if the media does not agree...even if she came out and said damn these questions are hard, can I go ask someone for help? they would claim victory.

I stated that Obama won the last one because it was at best light leaning his way at worse a tie, but for McCain to tie in that debate was in fact a loss for him. Much like if Obama ties on the Economy that's a loss for him as well as he should beat McCain in that area. The town hall is a toss up, I think better suited to McCain, but both should be on even footing for it.
Unlike some on here I can sit back and actually say I think my guy lost or did not do what was needed. I have called Elections to the 1% in a three way race in favor of the Republican who I hated. I may have my pick now, but unlike some I dont run around with a huge bias against Mccain, where as Libs and NoObama are clearly bias.

That's so not true lol. The reviews of the last debate were neutral nearly everywhere but in media polls. Most of the liberals at my work even said it was a tie, while here, Poppy listed a dozen polls saying Obama won (as if it mattered). I've seen three different McCain supporters indicate the last debate was a tie. No Obamanation said it was a tie, so you are not even right on that account.

So no I don't think that everyone is going to claim Palin won, if she goes down in flames to simple questions. If she fails she fails. But I'm also not going to ignore the moderators if Biden gets questions about puppy chow or 'how do you feel about XXXX?', and Palin get's questions like "name the last 50 supreme court rulings, the date they happened, recite the majority opinions for each, and what color pants did each justice ware under their robes?"

[calidem411]

Al Frankin wrote, Rush Limbaugh is a big fat idiot...it has his name in it, so is he Pro Rush now?

Fact is simple, Politics and race have been never been a bigger issue in regards to non whites getting power, and to just ignore Obama would be retarded. Also you do know that the Author is not always the one who makes the title right? If she had written about Politics and race and not talked about Obama that would be kinda sad, and the fact that Obama is on the title, does not make the book about him.

Who cares about Limbaugh, he's a just pill popping idiot!

You obviously have refused to watch the video that I posted on this thread. In her own words "she says that the book is about the life of Obama and extending it a little more into today's politics".....

Need I say more????

[pocketfullofshells]

You must be joking... Is the title of her book "Breakthrough: How an idiot named Obama won by skin color"? Of course not.

Clearly title of the book directly indicates a positive review. Clearly calling Rush a big fat idiot, is a negative review. Why does basic logic have to be explained to you? Are you biased in favor of this moderator?

Not to mention she has had positive reviews of Obama external to anything book related.


I am not bias to or against her , all I know her for is a few pieces on News Hour I have watched and other Debates. And it thinks its silly to think there is anyone who goes in , saying gosh I just dont know what one I like more....unless they just dont have a clue what they are doing. I will wait for the Debate before I judge Bias, not cry if now before it even happens. had it been 6 months ago it would have been worth debate but a week before is a bit late.
And I have said I do agree she should have reported the book.

[pocketfullofshells]

That's so not true lol. The reviews of the last debate were neutral nearly everywhere but in media polls. Most of the liberals at my work even said it was a tie, while here, Poppy listed a dozen polls saying Obama won (as if it mattered). I've seen three different McCain supporters indicate the last debate was a tie. No Obamanation said it was a tie, so you are not even right on that account.

So no I don't think that everyone is going to claim Palin won, if she goes down in flames to simple questions. If she fails she fails. But I'm also not going to ignore the moderators if Biden gets questions about puppy chow or 'how do you feel about XXXX?', and Palin get's questions like "name the last 50 supreme court rulings, the date they happened, recite the majority opinions for each, and what color pants did each justice ware under their robes?"

evryone knows they are naked under the robes, did you not Read the Daily shows America Book?

[Vyddo]

What a joke. Obama worshipers pretend the mod being a follower of obama isnt a problem.

I wish I had the power to change who the mod will be. Its all ok right now because the person doing it is a follower of your messiah.

If I could change it and have someone who is in the pocket of the GOP. The crying from the obama worshipers would be heard around the world.

I wouldn't worry about it. Everythings out in the open and I suspect the extra scrutiny will keep things in line.

[GenSeneca]

You say that like Libs, noObama and otehrs will not do the same for Palin saying she won and cry Bias if the media does not agree...even if she came out and said damn these questions are hard, can I go ask someone for help? they would claim victory.

I think Andy has already pointed out how wrong you are on this, I just wanted to add something:

Nobama posted ONE thread which was titled: Who won the Debate?
Nobama called it a tie... Most of us agreed with that.
Nuetral thread title... both sides could post to that thread in response.

Now compare that to Top & Pop.... at least SEVEN THREADS about the same debate all with the usual template nonsense: Obama crushes McSame in debate!

Who wants to bet on how many threads those two will start over this debate? Half dozen? More? Less?

Will those thread titles be nuetral - like "Who Won?" - or will they more likely be the usual Obamaphile nonsense declaring victory? :rolleyes:

[NO Obamanation]

I wouldn't worry about it. Everythings out in the open and I suspect the extra scrutiny will keep things in line.

I am not worried. But I don’t think it’s realistic to think she can win. I am sure Biden is reading the questions as I type this and will be ready with the right answers.

I am more disgusted with myself that I ever though you could reason with an obama worshiping follower.

I just need to realize that out of the realm of possibilities

[NO Obamanation]

I think Andy has already pointed out how wrong you are on this, I just wanted to add something:

Nobama posted ONE thread which was titled: Who won the Debate?
Nobama called it a tie... Most of us agreed with that.
Nuetral thread title... both sides could post to that thread in response.

Now compare that to Top & Pop.... at least SEVEN THREADS about the same debate all with the usual template nonsense: Obama crushes McSame in debate!

Who wants to bet on how many threads those two will start over this debate? Half dozen? More? Less?

Will those thread titles be nuetral - like "Who Won?" - or will they more likely be the usual Obamaphile nonsense declaring victory? :rolleyes:

I thought the thread was fair, but I forget that the two sides can not see fair as the same thing, so this time... I will make a thread that is fair in the minds of the followers of obama