Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>It's what they do.<< It sure is. It's what you have to do if your candidate is lame.
Originally Posted By WorldDisney <<What else could McCain say at this point? He gets to take the "high road" (while still making sure to say that Ifill wrote a book "favorable to Sen. Obama")>> LOL, c'mon dude, we have to give McCain SOME credit here. Before that post, it was 10 posts of conspiracy theories saying McCain was going to make a big fuss, threaten the debates, blame Obama, etc. Instead, the guy basically said he knew about the book, but trusted the moderator regardless and of course that makes him MORE evil lol. I mean, maybe its just not a big deal and like I said the world is watching, if she REALLY becomes unfair, half the country will jump on her anyway, so Im guessing she will do her job, why wouldnt she?
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan I've reduced Sen. McCain's credit limit considerably in the last month.
Originally Posted By Mr X ***His campaign approved of her selection and ostensibly knew about the book before hand (it had been in the news weeks prior)*** "The McCain campaign found out about Ifill's book in the last day or so, a spokesman said" <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081001/ap_on_en_ot/debate_ifill_2" target="_blank">http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/200..._ifill_2</a>
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>if she REALLY becomes unfair<< To Palin supporters, asking her pretty much anything is unfair. Hasn't poor Sarah suffered enough? What the McCain side wants is a lot of softballs pitched up there nice and easy, so that Sarah can revert to the one liners they've been practicing. But by floating this little air biscuit about Gwen Ifill's "bias", it gives them an easy out when the wheels come off at the debate. LOL, when I think of controversial media folks, Gwen Ifill's name just doesn't make the list. By Thursday, she'll be made into the poster child of radical left wing politics and a hater of small children.
Originally Posted By WorldDisney ^^You and me both 2oony, but the end of the day if the guy says its fine, I dont see the problem? I mean, people are sort of saying here hes damn if he do, damn if he doesnt kind of thing. If ANYTHING it kind of shows he can be fair about it and not like the loudmouths like Hannity and Rush who are always shouting the sky is falling ONLY when a democrat is involved somehow.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <LOL, c'mon dude, we have to give McCain SOME credit here. Before that post, it was 10 posts of conspiracy theories saying McCain was going to make a big fuss, threaten the debates, blame Obama, etc.> Not from me. <By Thursday, she'll be made into the poster child of radical left wing politics and a hater of small children.> There will be a magazine cover of her "terror-fist-bumping" Barack AND Michelle Obama.
Originally Posted By Sport Goofy Anything to distract from the actual issues -- that's the McCain game plan. When does he start the pie eating contest again?
Originally Posted By WorldDisney Guys, Im sorry Im just not really following lol. He said the woman was fine as a moderator. We are making a big deal because hes not making a big deal now? Wow, I had no clue how much McCain hate there was on these threads lol. Im going to give the man the benefit of the doubt on this one. If he pulls some weird thing after Palin die in the debate then maybe you guys have a point, but I honestly dont see that happening just yet.
Originally Posted By Disneyland Guest This is what bothers me-from Yahoo for those that want to look the rest of it up: "To the extent she can carve out any spare time, Ifill is working on a book called "Breakthrough: Politics and Race in the Age of Obama." She focuses on the Democratic nominee and such up-and-coming black politicians as Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick and Newark Mayor Cory Booker." I have questions in regards to her choosing to moderate (maybe she is lacking in her understanding of the word). I do know if that the moderator had been a former POW (GASP!#@$#@%#$^$^) that the Dems would have been demanding someone to take his place.
Originally Posted By mawnck >>But there's another factor here too. In preparing for a debate, you are often preparing nearly as much for the "judge" or moderator as for the opponent. Both campaigns probably have a pretty good idea of what types of questions she is likely to ask, how he is likely to ask them. Palin and Biden have undoubtedly watched videotapes of Ifill moderating the 2004 debate between John Edwards and Dick Cheney. By changing the moderator, you're throwing everyone a curveball, and catering to the candidate who is better able to adapt on the fly. Which, most likely, is not going to be Sarah Palin.<< <a href="http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/10/debategate.html" target="_blank">http://www.fivethirtyeight.com...ate.html</a>
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>I have questions in regards to her choosing to moderate (maybe she is lacking in her understanding of the word).<< She moderated the debate in the 2004 election, and that didn't seem to be much of an advantage to Team Kerry.
Originally Posted By mawnck >>I have questions in regards to her choosing to moderate (maybe she is lacking in her understanding of the word).<< For one thing, she did it 4 years ago. >>I do know if that the moderator had been a former POW (GASP!#@$#@%#$^$^) that the Dems would have been demanding someone to take his place.<< You're buggin'. But you know, you're right. I bet she throws nothing but softball questions at Obama, just to make him look ... oh wait, what?
Originally Posted By hopemax >do know if that the moderator had been a former POW (GASP!#@$#@%#$^$^) that the Dems would have been demanding someone to take his place. I'm guessing that the Dems would have done their research and objected BEFORE they agreed to the debate schedule. On one hand, I can see the conflict of interest, but it's not like someone from the McCain campaign couldn't have Googled Gwen Ifill and saw what came up. And even if the campaign didn't do it before...the announcement of the debate schedule was released like August 21st. So they, or the right wing of the blogosphere had August 22, 23, 24, 25, etc. for this to come up and object. This boils up the day before the debate...like Letterman said, "something smells."
Originally Posted By alexbook >>***His campaign approved of her selection and ostensibly knew about the book before hand (it had been in the news weeks prior)*** "The McCain campaign found out about Ifill's book in the last day or so, a spokesman said" <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/200..._ifill_2<<" target="_blank">http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/200...<<</a> I just plain don't believe that. Here's a Fox News story from July (*before* McCain's campaign agreed to Ifill as moderator), which mentions the book: <a href="http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2008Jul21/0,4670,APonTVTavisSmiley,00.html" target="_blank">http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2...,00.html</a>
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan In fairness, the McCain campaign's research department has been a bit backlogged after two "suspensions" of the campaign. Well that, and they've been busy cringing at Palin's performance in interviews.
Originally Posted By chickendumpling Thanks for posting those articles Tinkerbell. I'll have to look at them later. I do think it was kinda harsh for McCain to have his guys break Ifill's ankle to try to get her to bow out of the debate though. ;-)
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <If he pulls some weird thing after Palin die in the debate then maybe you guys have a point, but I honestly dont see that happening just yet.> We're not saying he'll do it, WD. But if the noise machine sees any opening to attack Ifill as being "biased," that THEY will. That's all. They cry "liberal media bias" at the drop of a hat, so it's not exactly going out on a limb there.
Originally Posted By Mr X ***>>***His campaign approved of her selection and ostensibly knew about the book before hand (it had been in the news weeks prior)*** "The McCain campaign found out about Ifill's book in the last day or so, a spokesman said" <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/200...<<" target="_blank">http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/200...<<</a> I just plain don't believe that.*** I don't believe it either, Alex. Not for one second. But the fact is that's what they are CLAIMING. And my concern is they will use that claim to complain that they were somehow "blindsided" by this ultra liberal, elitist and arrogant woman in order to worm her way into the moderator spot as a secret weapon for Joe Biden.
Originally Posted By Disneyland Guest ^^^^and the Dems would do the exact same thing had the situation been reversed. "For one thing, she did it 4 years ago." But she did not have a vested interest in one of the people running.
