PBS Moderator for VP Debate has book on McCain Due for Release on Inauguaration Day!

[amicus]

Oops...nevermind...it is a book on Obama...so...thas just fine...

heh...

(ami is back)

 

[DesertPirate]

Of course it's OK, why would the moderator having a financial interest in one side winning the election have any bearing?

 

[amicus]

Thanks, DP, not that I thought the irony was over everyone's head, I just doubted and still doubt if the left will respond that the media in general and PBS in specific is preying for Obama, the socialist, to win the election....what a disappointment I see building for the left....chuckles...


Amicus...

 

[Rumple Foreskin]

The GOP has known about Ifell's book since mid-summer and made no request to have her removed as moderator. And just FWIW, the book isn't an Obama bio, but a study of black politics and politicians in a era when a black man may become the next US President. The tentative title is:

Breakthrough Politics and Race In The Age of Obama

In the book, Ifill takes a look at the black political movement's beginnings during the Civil Rights movement that gave way "to a generation of men and women who are the direct beneficiaries of the struggles of the 1960s," according to Amazon.com.

Rumple Foreskin

 

[amicus]

All accurate, Rumple, but you miss the point. If Obama is elected and this book is published and publicized the author will make millions. If McCain is elected, she will sell four copies to relatives.

Thus the moderator has a vested financial interest in Obama winning and should have recused herself from the position.

amicus...

 

[DesertPirate]

The GOP has known about Ifell's book since mid-summer and made no request to have her removed as moderator. And just FWIW, the book isn't an Obama bio, but a study of black politics and politicians in a era when a black man may become the next US President. The tentative title is:

Breakthrough Politics and Race In The Age of Obama



Rumple Foreskin

The question is, will it sell better if Obama wins?
If it was a book about McCain the media would be screaming for a replacement.

 

[sweetness6280]

In another post (political) you made the following statement, seeming to condemn anyone who heard the pundits comments before posting, as if that "contaminated" said post.

Also, I posted my comment before I heard any commentary from the news media, so, those are my thoughts, influenced by no one else...

not that it matters...


amicus...

All accurate, Rumple, but you miss the point. If Obama is elected and this book is published and publicized the author will make millions. If McCain is elected, she will sell four copies to relatives.
Thus the moderator has a vested financial interest in Obama winning and should have recused herself from the position.

amicus...

Interestingly enough, the bold words above were spoken, almost verbatim, by Dick Morris yesterday on O'Reilly Factor.

Just saying.

not that it matters...

 

[amicus]

Yes, SPA, 'selling four books to relatives..." was such a good line I just couldn't help myself and used it...nice to know you listen to Fox.

ahem...

ami...

 

[SweetPrettyAss]

Yes, SPA, 'selling four books to relatives..." was such a good line I just couldn't help myself and used it...nice to know you listen to Fox.

ahem...

ami...

Don't put words in my mouth. Actually, I agree with you. Although I don't think all that many will watch PBS, she should have stepped down. She definitely has a financial interest in the result of the election. And I agree that if she had written a book about, for example, retired members of the armed forces entering politics, and centered on McCain, the Democrats would be screaming bloody murder at her continuing as moderator.

 

[sr71plt]

But now that the event is over, isn't the only relevant issue here whether or not she showed any bias as a moderator? I didn't see any. No other meaning to this thread now unless anyone did see bias. Anyone claim they saw it?

If not, guess she approached the responsibility professionally, right?

 

[Selena_Kitt]

But now that the event is over, isn't the only relevant issue here whether or not she showed any bias as a moderator? I didn't see any. No other meaning to this thread now unless anyone did see bias. Anyone claim they saw it?

If not, guess she approached the responsibility professionally, right?

I didn't see any. I did think she gave Biden the "last word" a lot (enjoyed that ) but I think that was just format rules, not her personally.

 

[sr71plt]

I didn't see any. I did think she gave Biden the "last word" a lot (enjoyed that ) but I think that was just format rules, not her personally.

What I noticed more was Palin abdicating the last word. Biden just zipped in a few times when I think Palin was supposed to get the last word with a nullifying disclaimer. Palin didn't seem to be doing any such last-word "correction of the record."

On a happier note, I think she solidified her ultra-Conservative status by making Civil War general George McClellan the U.S. forces commander in Afghanistan.

 

[Varian P]

But now that the event is over, isn't the only relevant issue here whether or not she showed any bias as a moderator? I didn't see any. No other meaning to this thread now unless anyone did see bias. Anyone claim they saw it?

If not, guess she approached the responsibility professionally, right?

The moderator didn't hold either candidate to answering the actual questions, and both took their liberties. Since Palin is the master of evasion and the non-answer, it was pretty amusing to see how far afield she could run with simple questions without going anywhere near a straightforward reply.

A moderator with less of a perception of 'bias' might have called both candidates--especially Palin--to the mat when she hijacked question after question to put forward her own, tangential talking points.

My favorite bit of vomit-inducing rhetoric was when the moderator specifically asked for a critique of the current/Bush administration, Biden offered one, and Palin accused Obama/Biden of dwelling on the past.

The difference between a bulldog and a hockey mom? BULLSHIT.

 

[sr71plt]

The moderator didn't hold either candidate to answering the actual questions, and both took their liberties. Since Palin is the master of evasion and the non-answer, it was pretty amusing to see how far afield she could run with simple questions without going anywhere near a straightforward reply.

A moderator with less of a perception of 'bias' might have called both candidates--especially Palin--to the mat when she hijacked question after question to put forward her own, tangential talking points.

My favorite bit of vomit-inducing rhetoric was when the moderator specifically asked for a critique of the current/Bush administration, Biden offered one, and Palin accused Obama/Biden of dwelling on the past.

The difference between a bulldog and a hockey mom? BULLSHIT.

I think it was a (likely orchestrated) maneuver of the Republicans in the vein of this very thread that brought out the questioning of the moderator's objectivity at this point (rather than some time ago when they knew she had gotten the assignment). They likely didn't want her replaced; they wanted her neutralized.

She made an effort on the very first question to point out that neither Biden or Palin had answered the question. They both just laughed at her--and then Palin flatly stated that she was going to say what she had to say regardless of the questions (and more or less did just that).

If the moderator had gone any farther in pinning them to responsiveness, the amicuses of the world would be here saying "I told you she was biased toward the Democrats." It's all pretty much orchestrated.

Where I think the Democrats failed (again) is that I think Biden should have come with a subset of questions of his own to throw out at Palin at opportune moments--ones that the electorate would like answered but ones that probably wouldn't be indexed on those note cards she kept scanning--it would only take two or three to put her into a dither. Katie Couric had not trouble doing it.

She wanted to be couched in Alaska in her responses. There certainly are some very interesting questions that could have been asked about her and Alaska.

 

[Varian P]

Where I think the Democrats failed (again) is that I think Biden should have come with a subset of questions of his own to throw out at Palin at opportune moments--ones that the electorate would like answered but ones that probably wouldn't be indexed on those note cards she kept scanning--it would only take two or three to put her into a dither. Katie Couric had not trouble doing it.

I don't know. I think it was important that Biden not be the one to pin her down, lest he look "mean."

Oh, look, the big scary senator with years of experience and the intimidating foreign relations committee title under his belt is badgering the confused governor from the hinterlands! What a bully!!

Jeez, Couric was lobbing softballs, and still got accused of "gotcha" journalism.

Maybe the moderator would have drawn fire for being 'biased', but the moderator can better afford it, not being judged as a candidate.

 

[sr71plt]

I don't know. I think it was important that Biden not be the one to pin her down, lest he look "mean."

Oh, look, the big scary senator with years of experience and the intimidating foreign relations committee title under his belt is badgering the confused governor from the hinterlands! What a bully!!

Jeez, Couric was lobbing softballs, and still got accused of "gotcha" journalism.

Maybe the moderator would have drawn fire for being 'biased', but the moderator can better afford it, not being judged as a candidate.

There was middle ground for Biden--some play room--I think. (And I think that's the basic Democratic problem--not getting hard once in a while--and not knowing how to get the knife in and twisted and exit cleanly.)

And, you thought Couric was throwing soft balls? You don't think she set Palin up? For instance, what interviewer follows up with the "OK, name a couple of newspapers you read"? The looks Couric gave alone were good theater. Any further and we'd have gotten shots of her rolling her eyes heavenward.

 

[Varian P]

There was middle ground for Biden--some play room--I think. (And I think that's the basic Democratic problem--not getting hard once in a while--and not knowing how to get the knife in and twisted and exit cleanly.)

Honestly, I was just relieved that Biden went in for a bit of gentle stabbing where Obama had given McCain pass after pass in the first debate.

Maybe you're right, that the Dems need to get better at thrusting the blade. At the very least, they need to get better at delivering their points via snappy sound-bites, rather than via nuanced arguments and piles of facts, because obviously the slews of viewers labeling Palin "real" and "a breath of fresh air" after viewing her interview debacles on You Tube don't give a flying fuck about whether candidates for VP have the grasp of any basic facts about foreign or domestic policy.

And, you thought Couric was throwing soft balls? You don't think she set Palin up? For instance, what interviewer follows up with the "OK, name a couple of newspapers you read"? The looks Couric gave alone were good theater. Any further and we'd have gotten shots of her rolling her eyes heavenward.

Really? "What news sources do you read?" is a hard question?

Couric did look like she just sucked down a triple-dip ice cream cone for much of the interview, but I took the apparent agony of brain-freeze at face value. I admit, though, that I have no idea if that was theatrics on Couric's part, as I'd have been hard-pressed to even recognize her prior to pulling up the interview in the internet. Palin's answers were so silly, I thought Couric was doing a fair job of keeping a straight face. She must have been having a real moment of disbelief, that this person earnestly describing near proximity to Russia as foreign policy experience, essentially has a fifty-percent chance of being V.P. in three months' time.

 

[sr71plt]

Really? "What news sources do you read?" is a hard question?

Couric did look like she just sucked down a triple-dip ice cream cone for much of the interview, but I took the apparent agony of brain-freeze at face value. I admit, though, that I have no idea if that was theatrics on Couric's part.

The beauty was in the followup. It's natural for an interviewer's question to result in "Oh, I read the newspapers." Very, very few interviewers will follow up with "Oh, which ones?" Unless it's an indentifiable hard ball interview, they will give that a pass. That's pretty much a giveaway of a promised fluff interview turning intentionally "gonna getcha."

Couric did the same to Palin with a clip from a cafe visit where a questioner illicited a response from Palin that flew in the face of McCain's position on the issue. Couric let Palin give the vanila cover-up response the campaign had trained her to give and then leaned forward and pinned her down with a direct quote of what Palin had actually said. This was a gotcha interview from the get go.

I only saw segments here and there, but there were frequent followups that were guaranteed "gotchas." This wasn't lost on the campaign team (if maybe it was on Palin). They pulled her right in and closed the doors after that.

Couric's not a pushover and she was trained for drama. She's a local girl. (Her sister, Emily, was my state senator--and very likely would be Virginia Governor now if she hadn't died of pancreatic cancer instead). Couric was both a debater and actress at the university here.