RECENT POSTS
- White House State Dinner Party Crashers
- Obama to Lay Out Emissions Goals in Copenhagen
- Free Bird
- The "Good" War
- The Presidential Planner
- Under the Stars, Obama Toasts India’s Prime Minister
- White House State Dinner – Who Made the Exclusive Guest List?
- Admiral Mike Mullen To Geneva for START Talks
- VP Biden to Indian Prime Minister: “You’re the Hottest Ticket in Town”
- FLOTUS on the State Dinner: Like a Swan, "Calm and Serene Above Water, But We're Paddling Like Mad, Going Crazy Underneath"
MONTHLY ARCHIVES
« Previous | Main | Next »
McCain Campaign Insinuates Bias by Moderator of VP Debate
October 01, 2008 8:54 PM
As covered over at our Political Radar Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., told Fox News' Carl Cameron on Wednesday that Ifill "will do a totally objective job because she is a highly respected professional."
But he added, as is his new media-bashing wont, "Does this help that she has written a book that is favorable to Sen. Obama? Probably not."
It was unclear how McCain definitively knew that the book, which is still being written, "is favorable to Sen. Obama."
Ifill said today in an interview with the Associated Press, that Obama's story will be only a small part of the book, which is focused on how politics in the African-American community have changed. Other black public figures, including Gen. Colin Powell (Ret.) will be profiled as well.
She has yet to write the chapter on Obama, Ifill said, and she wondered why anyone would assume the book will be favorable to Obama.
"Do you think they made the same assumptions about Lou Cannon when he wrote his book about Reagan?" asked Ifill, host of PBS' "Washington Week" and senior correspondent on "The NewsHour."
Asked by AP's David Bauder is she thought there were racial motives at play, Ifill said, "I don't know what it is. I find it curious."
"I've got a pretty long track record covering politics and news," she said. "so I'm not particularly worried that one-day blog chatter is going to destroy my reputation. 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."
Others in the McCain-Palin nexus sowed seeds of doubt about Ifill.
Asked by Sean Hannity if she was worried about Ifill, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin said, "I am not going to let it be a concern," adding "that just makes us work harder. It makes us want to communicate even clearer and more profoundly with the electorate, letting them know what the contrasts are between these two tickets."
In addition, on a conference call set up by the McCain-Palin campaign, former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani -- while calling Ifill a "very honest, decent journalist" and saying there is "no question that she will be perfectly fair in the way she asks the questions" -- also raised that very question.
"If the moderator of this debate were someone who was writing a book that basically was 'The Age of McCain,' I have a feeling that a lot more of these publications would be saying that the person should not be doing it," said Giuliani. "Now it might be totally unfair to do that. Just as I think it's totally unfair to do this. But it's just one more indication of how there is a double-standard in the way this campaign is treated."
Conservative talk radio giant Rush Limbaugh said Wednesday that Ifill "has a financial stake in Obama winning the race in addition to whatever other stakes that she has invested in Obama winning the presidential race."
And then there's Jay Nordlinger at The Corner, who writes "Years ago, some Bolshi Democrat — I think it was Ron Dellums — was rising to some important committee position. And Henry Hyde was asked, by some righty (no doubt), 'Don’t you think he’s a security risk?' And Hyde answered blithely, 'No more than any other Democrat.' (I am paraphrasing —but am very close.) Anyway . . . I’ve thought of Hyde’s remark this morning. People say, 'Well, isn’t Gwen Ifill pro-Obama?' And the answer is: 'If she is, is she more so than any other suitable MSM big?'"
the McCain campaign is raising doubts about PBS anchor Gwen Ifill's ability to be fair as the moderator of tomorrow night's Vice Presidential debate after learning that she is working on a book about a new generation of black leaders called, "Breakthrough: Politics and Race in the Age of Obama."
October 1, 2008 | Permalink | Share | User Comments (166)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
Have the wing nuts succeeded in completely lying to themselves that Palin is a serious candidate? She is a national farce! 25 years ago the republican conservatives were the MORAL majority, now it just seems that they are itnent on living in a fantasy world. Bush has destroyed the brand and it will take years for a leader to be found. But actually lying to yourselves and saying Palin is legitimate is very sad. Sometimes power corrupts and a good purging is needed to strengthen a party. The louder you scream the more pathetic you are. Breathe,accept , and try again in 4 years with a decent candidate.
Posted by: Maurice | Oct 2, 2008 7:12:00 PM
One of many of McBush's problems is that it is not hard to find an excuse to bash anyone or anything when it comes to his poor judgement throughout the years in the Senate, in addition to his terrible chose in choosing Palin. He thought she was the shining star. Her shining light is out. There is nothing she can do between now and November to make herself an acceptable VP except go back to being the so called governer of Alaska.
Posted by: octobersun | Oct 2, 2008 7:11:04 PM
"If the moderator of this debate were someone who was writing a book that basically was 'The Age of McCain,' I have a feeling that a lot more of these publications would be saying that the person should not be doing it," said Giuliani.
-----
And he's right, you know.
Posted by: Belle Starr | Oct 2, 2008 3:53:59 PM
I hate that phrase, "The proof is in the pudding." Mainly because the actual saying is, "The proof of the pudding is in the taste."
-----
Is this the politically-corrected version? :^)
The actual saying USED to be:
"The proof of the pudding is in the eating."
Posted by: Belle Starr | Oct 2, 2008 3:35:41 PM
"And how FoxNews is preferable to MSNBC because MSNBC is too liberal"
-----
All I've ever said about FoxNews is that it's improved a lot -- something learned by watching it for the first time since the 2000 election.
MSNBC isn't "liberal", it's been acting as a campaign outpost for the hijacked Democrats. The self-destruction of Keith Olbermann has been something sad to see, along with the annoying excess of Olbermann's protege, the formerly-funny Rachel Maddow.
Now go read John Stuart Mill or something, and leave me alone.//
Posted by: Belle Starr | Oct 2, 2008 3:23:14 PM
I hate that phrase, "The proof is in the pudding." Mainly because the actual saying is, "The proof of the pudding is in the taste."
Posted by: Apollodorus | Oct 2, 2008 3:18:07 PM
"Voting for McCain/Palin is the most direct way to deny the presidency to a Chicago mobster backed by corporate bad boys."
LOL!
Next you will tell us you voted for Bush over Gore to teach Clinton a lesson.
And how FoxNews is preferable to MSNBC because MSNBC is too liberal
All from a Jesse Jackson FDR Democrat!
Posted by: Ryan C | Oct 2, 2008 3:13:40 PM
"Ralph Nader is the third-party candidate who's most knowledgeable on the economy and corporate matters generally, as I'm sure McKinney would acknowledge."
"Which begs the question of why you so rarely invoke Nader but relish defending McCain and Palin."
-----
Voting for McCain/Palin is the most direct way to deny the presidency to a Chicago mobster backed by corporate bad boys.
Posted by: Belle Starr | Oct 2, 2008 3:03:08 PM
"Ralph Nader is the third-party candidate who's most knowledgeable on the economy and corporate matters generally, as I'm sure McKinney would acknowledge."
Which begs the question of why you so rarely invoke Nader but relish defending McCain and Palin.
Posted by: Ryan C | Oct 2, 2008 2:54:22 PM
"The truth about Biden-Palin is that Palin is the far more attractive candidate in every way. And she doesn't have that look of somebody who's been drinking a lot, for a long time."
So what makes Palin attractive to a Jesse Jackson FDR Democrat?
Posted by: Ryan C | Oct 2, 2008 2:53:19 PM
"Being a Jesse Jackson FDR Democrat I would figure you would support McKinney."
-----
Ralph Nader is the third-party candidate who's most knowledgeable on the economy and corporate matters generally, as I'm sure McKinney would acknowledge.
Posted by: Belle Starr | Oct 2, 2008 2:49:58 PM
"Not that the truth really matters much to you Belle Starr"
-----
The truth about Biden-Palin is that Palin is the far more attractive candidate in every way. And she doesn't have that look of somebody who's been drinking a lot, for a long time.
Posted by: Belle Starr | Oct 2, 2008 2:43:28 PM
"With both McCain and Obama having voted yesterday to make the illegal gift of the US Treasury to private entities, why isn't Nader's running mate Matt Gonzalez included in this outrageously-fixed "debate"?"
Ralph Nader is running?
Being a Jesse Jackson FDR Democrat I would figure you would support McKinney.
Or did you decide she got the nomination based on her skin color?
Posted by: Ryan C | Oct 2, 2008 2:35:24 PM
"McGovern's mostly interesting on Biden's baloney about the Iraq war."
Gotcha, Ray McGovern's opinion can only be used to reinforce your nonsense.
Any other opinion he may utter is to be ignored especially if it contradicts the right wing storylien.
"The difference between Palin and Biden is that Palin -- the most popular governor in the US"
Actually she is not. Her approval ratings have dropped 15 pts since becoming the VP nominee meaning there are several governors who are more popular.
Not that the truth really matters much to you Belle Starr
Posted by: Ryan C | Oct 2, 2008 2:33:33 PM
Some of these blogs here and in other places have brought to my mind some words written over 100 years ago about this great nation.
America! America!
God mend thine ev'ry flaw,
Confirm thy soul in self-control,
Thy liberty in law.
America! America!
May God thy gold refine
Till all success be nobleness,
And ev'ry gain divine.
Posted by: George | Oct 2, 2008 2:29:43 PM
With both McCain and Obama having voted yesterday to make the illegal gift of the US Treasury to private entities, why isn't Nader's running mate Matt Gonzalez included in this outrageously-fixed "debate"?
Posted by: Belle Starr | Oct 2, 2008 2:15:16 PM
"no presidential candidate in the history of this country has made a more irresponsible selection for his running mate."
-----
Nah. Biden is much, much worse.
McGovern's mostly interesting on Biden's baloney about the Iraq war.
The difference between Palin and Biden is that Palin -- the most popular governor in the US -- can learn what she doesn't know, and a quarter-century of lies and bluster demonstrate that Biden CAN'T.
Posted by: Belle Starr | Oct 2, 2008 1:52:16 PM
Puff on about the "polls", which also had "Democratic" saboteur John Kerry on top, if you remember."
When did Kerry top 50% in any poll?
When did John Kerry lead Bush by 5 points or greater across every poll in Oct?
Polls are of course a snap shot in time but Obama's poll numbers do not compare to Kerry's.
Posted by: Ryan C | Oct 2, 2008 1:50:41 PM
Since we're quoting Ray McGovern
"In the process, you will have succeeded in drawing a stark contrast between the “lies to nowhere” that she continues to tell on the one hand, and your (hopefully) terse, disarming honesty, on the other. You will be free to go ahead and demonstrate that in John McCain’s choice of Sarah Palin, no presidential candidate in the history of this country has made a more irresponsible selection for his running mate."
Posted by: Ryan C | Oct 2, 2008 1:44:05 PM
"A zillion American women are going to vote for Sarah Palin. The more the media hacks cut her up, the better she looks."
Portrait of right winger pretending to be a Democrat letting his/her mask slip.
Tell us another story about your progressive bonafides as you defend right wing ideas!
Posted by: Ryan C | Oct 2, 2008 1:41:45 PM
Post a comment
