It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

VP debate moderator Ifill releasing pro-Obama book

page: 3
3
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 1 2008 @ 04:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sublime620
reply to post by nyk537
 


I'm glad you didn't try to twist my words into somehow I said he's debating foreign leaders on stage (like this other guy). It's obvious we just have a difference in opinion on what kind of diplomat Obama has the potential to be.

If he gets elected, we'll find out. If not, we'll see how McCain is able to mend the broken ties we're currently faced with.


You said his public speaking skills equates to negotiating skills. Two entirely different universes.
If other countries would warm to Obama more readily from the getgo it would be only because they percieve him as a weak pushover that they could take advantage of to gain in their own national interests.
You must always have leverage before negotiations, leverage is the only thing that matters not elequent speaking skills. Obama does not understand this concept he many times stated he would negotiate without precondition. When his masters told him that was not the way the world worked he changed his message. Of course other countries are chomping at the bit to court this rookie and fleece him for all we've got.




posted on Oct, 1 2008 @ 04:26 PM
link   
reply to post by Sublime620
 



I feel like I have been ripped off in this election! I am angry and don't give a rats arse about who the VP debate moderator is. That is the least of my concern when considering the candidates running this year. I am pissed and growing more so w/ each passing day and idiotic statements being made on both sides.

When are ppl going to wake up and realize that we are being screwed over royally w/ either of these choices for candidates. This isn't like voting for CLASS president, ya know. This is someone who is supposed to uphold the values of this country (which obama will undoubtedly fail to do) and someone who is supposed to have a MAJOR clue in what is going on in the country AND the world (which Palin doesn't have and it says a lot that McCain chose her as running mate). ANYONE defending either of these sides gets a big fat "F"!!!!



posted on Oct, 1 2008 @ 04:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by _Del_
Actually, I think the Democrats are largely shooting themselves in the foot on this. By continuing to lower the bar for Palin's expected performance she only has to come out even to come away with a perceived victory.


Given that in her recent interview she looked like a mumbling idiot, I expect that "coming out even" might be a challenge for her.

C'mon people, what kind of value that outdoorswoman brings as a co-leader of the nation? Let her govern Alaska already.


Honestly, I wonder if this is not what the McCain/Palin campaign is counting on, that being the Obama supporters summing her up as a bimbo because she throws a couple of interviews and makes a couple of weird remarks.

We know that McCain isn't stupid because he chose Palin and rallied the support of America for the RNC and scared the living crap out of the Democrat Party. Whether or not she was the right choice for the long run remains to be seen, but she was the perfect choice for that moment in time. It worked wonders and derailed the Democratic party for a short while.

My theory as to what is happening: When Palin was introduced, Obama and his party were really spooked. Badly enough to where the rumors about Biden dropping out of the race to be replaced by Clinton were swirling around the country in earnest. Remember when there were stories about Biden dropping out due to health issues?

Knowing that an Obama/Clinton ticket would kill their chances for good, McCain and Palin decided to make Palin look less dangerous by having her throw a couple of interviews and make some off-handed comments that won't get her into any trouble, just make people say "whaaa?". And the Democratic party gets a bump in polls in the meantime.

Meanwhile, a rumor circulates that Biden will be dropping out on or about October 5 to be replaced by Hilary Clinton as linked here at Snopes, which has the rumor status set to "undetermined".

So the debate happens and Palin destroys Biden at almost every turn. America is stunned and a second Palin rally begins. Biden now faces a tough choice - if he resigns, the rumor will be proven as true and could ultimate hurt the Obama campaign greatly. If he stays, Democrats will be left to vote in Obama based solely on Obama, having lost confidence in Biden.

So there it is - just a theory I've formed over the last couple of weeks. But it explains why all of the sudden McCain/Palin would be fumbling the ball at the last moment.

[edit on 1-10-2008 by sos37]



posted on Oct, 1 2008 @ 05:08 PM
link   
reply to post by justamomma
 


It always comes down to the lesser of two evils.
There is no such animal as a "good" politician. There may be a few who start out that way but they never make it anywhere in the real world of politics. So if you are waiting for such an animal to vote for, that day will never come.
If you are hopelessly naive, then you see your candidate as a savior and good guy, something they can never be in the real world. If you find such a candidate then you have lost all touch with reallity, see a doctor who will prescribe lots of meds and seclusion.

With all that said, there is absolutely nothing wrong with deciding the lesser of two evils, the alternative is no choice at all and the most evil will always win out, see dictatorships for historical evidence.



posted on Oct, 1 2008 @ 05:28 PM
link   
reply to post by SectionEight
 


there is much truth in what you have said and I have to be honest here that I am suprised you have said it considering.

I am not naive.. I am not sure what it is that I am exactly. Jaded, maybe.. but it goes even deeper than that. Scared would be a good adjective considering the amount of ignorance that surrounds me in this country. I mean hell, look who is the VP choice for the republicans and the fact that so many defend her is just mind boggling to me. I know ultimately that either way, it will not matter. We are on a train that has been in motion for longer than I can remember.. but still... I just want ppl to at least show some intelligence by unanimously admitting that we are screwed either way this goes. Just to give me some confidence that awareness is there.



posted on Oct, 1 2008 @ 05:40 PM
link   
The fact is, if this were a court of law and Ifill were the judge, a mistrial would be rightly declared.

She is in the tank for Obama. Her financial future depends upon him winning. Read some excerpts from her upcoming book and observe how she fawns over Barack and Michelle.

She cannot possibly be neutral moderating this debate. She should be replaced.

Edit: I just heard that she did not disclose her upcoming book to the people who vetted her for moderator!

[edit on 1-10-2008 by jsobecky]



posted on Oct, 1 2008 @ 05:51 PM
link   
Honestly, the book is called "The Breakthrough: Politics and Race in the Age of Obama". I think it is safe to assume that the book will portray Sen. Obama in a positive light (i.e. "Pro-Obama").

I doubt that Ms. Ifill would laud the wonderful advances in civil rights, in our country, only to write about Obama as a disappointment, failure, or anything else other than good in general.

So, please, it's fair to say that you may think Ifill is fair or a good person. But Ms. Ifill stands to profit from an Obama-Biden win, and stands to lose a good deal of money if Obama-Biden fails to win the White House.

- Boat



posted on Oct, 1 2008 @ 06:00 PM
link   
With over 61,000 responses, this MSN poll agrees by a wide margin (70% to 30%) that there is clearly a conflict of interest and that Ifill should not be moderating the debate.



posted on Oct, 1 2008 @ 07:56 PM
link   
reply to post by SectionEight
 


Sure it does. Having a mastery of the English language translates to all other fields. Bush is an excellent example. He does not have the English language mastered. He is also not very coherent with his thoughts on stage. It doesn't take a much analyzation to figure out how that translates into his foreign relation skills.

Can you not imagine him negotiating with another leader? It's no wonder that those without eloquence often turn to threats and fear.

To say that Obama would get pushed around is baseless. Democrats have proven in the past that they have a spine when necessary. What real proof do you have that Obama can't handle tough negotiations?

reply to post by sos37
 


Possibly there is a conflict. I put yes. Mostly in the fact that the Republicans don't have a potentially biased moderator in the coming debates (but those moderators should be good). But the McCain camp has agreed, and there's not much to do about it at this point.

Why not just sit back, wait, and see if anything actually happens? Why kick up all this dirt when both parties have agreed and nothing has happened yet?

Is it me or have Republicans been the biggest cry babies this entire election?

[edit on 1-10-2008 by Sublime620]

[edit on 1-10-2008 by Sublime620]



posted on Oct, 1 2008 @ 08:01 PM
link   
So you don't think McCain or anyone in his campaign gave a second thought to what questions Gwen Ifill might be asking and you don't think they did ANY research on her at all for the past 2 months leading up to this VP debate???? They have been planning and preparing for this debate and you don't think anyone ever thought to check out the moderator???

Because the fact of the book is everywhere.

I think McCain is lying about not knowing about it and Ooops! It gets leaked 48 hours before the debate so they can play the victim and have a victim reason that Palin loses the debate. Classic...

And what about the fact that Gwen Ifill is a woman? Doesn't that automatically bias her toward Palin? That argument is as ridiculous as the one put forth in the OP.

I'll tell you what, if McCain camp didn't know about this before now, it's no wonder they 're losing because they are totally incompetent and McCain has no business being in the position of our nation's leader.



posted on Oct, 1 2008 @ 08:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic


And what about the fact that Gwen Ifill is a woman? Doesn't that automatically bias her toward Palin? That argument is as ridiculous as the one put forth in the OP.


About as much as the fact that Ifill is black makes her biased toward Obama. But the fact that she has a definite conflict of interest here cannot be overlooked, as much as Obama supporters would like it to be swept under the rug.



posted on Oct, 1 2008 @ 08:37 PM
link   
There is the definite appearance of a conflict of interest.

But, maybe everyone should wait until after the debate to say whether or not that conflict of interest colored how she handled her moderation of the debate?

Of course, if it does, there isn't much that can be done after the fact.

If it doesn't, then a big fuss was made/is being made over nothing.

JMO...



posted on Oct, 1 2008 @ 08:49 PM
link   
reply to post by jsobecky
 


Apparently your candidate doesn't agree. So why not just trust his judgment and wait to see?

As far as I am aware, most of the time each candidate answers the same question. That's why moderators don't have a terribly large effect on debates (just like MS in our debate forum).



posted on Oct, 1 2008 @ 08:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sublime620
reply to post by jsobecky
 


Apparently your candidate doesn't agree. So why not just trust his judgment and wait to see?

As far as I am aware, most of the time each candidate answers the same question. That's why moderators don't have a terribly large effect on debates (just like MS in our debate forum).


Don't make assumptions about "my candidate".

And if we "wait and see", it will be too late, won't it, if Ms. Ifill decides to sabotage the debate?

Moderators have a much bigger role than asking the questions, through body language, tone, etc. . Otherwise, the candidates could just read the questions off of a teleprompter.



posted on Oct, 1 2008 @ 09:03 PM
link   
reply to post by jsobecky
 


I'm not making an assumption. McCain said he was fine with it.

If he's fine with it, I'm fine with it. I agree there could be a conflict of interest, but I would be surprised if she would be so unprofessional as to treat the candidates different. Though it doesn't matter, it's not my decision. It's McCain, Palin, Obama, and Biden's decision.

They all agree. So let the debate begin.



posted on Oct, 2 2008 @ 12:22 AM
link   
Basically I do not agree with this, however, what is worse is the person that has biased beliefs in their head and you would never know, that's the one that you must watch out for, I mean it's hard to find a truly unbiased moderator, if they have to I say get the one from the presidential debate, but depending on the format if they came up with pre scripted questions from non partisan people and she professionally asks the questions and does not interject her emotions I do not see this as a huge problem in that case but with all the press they will probably have to find another one, but this in no way should postpone the inevitable.



posted on Oct, 2 2008 @ 12:38 AM
link   
McCain was just on FOX "news" calling her a professional and saying he had no qualms about having that moderator.

What was she going to do to be biased? Tell Palin to shut up while she's talking?
If she was skewed it would likely be obvious.

I tend to go with the "setting up excuses theory".

I think Palin will do OK , but Biden is wayyyy more experienced at this sort of thing, so she only has to do ok to do "quite well" in the eyes of her supporters.



posted on Oct, 2 2008 @ 01:29 AM
link   
reply to post by SectionEight
 


It's not a pro-Osama book.

The book is about important new leasers in the Black Community, Osama just happens to be one of them, probably the most notorious...

I am certain of her being an outstanding presenter, and academic. She would never, in my opinion, be a biased participant in the debate. The fact that this information is out, she has been writing the book for two years, just makes me feel even more secure that the debate will be fairly moderated.

The fact that the lady from Alaska is a total brainless idiot should not reflect negatively on the moderator...(or on her future book)



posted on Oct, 2 2008 @ 05:28 AM
link   
reply to post by Sublime620
 



Originally posted by Sublime620
reply to post by jsobecky
 


I'm not making an assumption. McCain said he was fine with it.


You're making an assumption that McCain is *my* candidate.



Originally posted by Sublime620
If he's fine with it, I'm fine with it. I agree there could be a conflict of interest, but I would be surprised if she would be so unprofessional as to treat the candidates different. Though it doesn't matter, it's not my decision. It's McCain, Palin, Obama, and Biden's decision.



Ifill failed to disclose the book during vetting. If a juror had failed to divulge key info during voir dire, he/she would be disqualified.


Originally posted by Sublime620
They all agree. So let the debate begin.


They don't agree now.



posted on Oct, 2 2008 @ 05:51 AM
link   
The fix is in? Hardly. Biden has always been the favorite since the day the VPs were announced.


Firstly, Biden has experience and if vegas were to give odds on this fight I'd put them like 5 to 1 in favor of Biden.

At any rate:

The moderator should be completely neutral, but it seems she may have a conflict of interest. Unfortunately, the book is about Obama, not Biden. Also, the McCain Campaign was sorely remiss in ignoring her book when they had the chance to ask for a new moderator.

Although we should consider that she is a news correspondent and at least tries to maintain neutrality.

One final thought:
This is yet another example of the sloppy campaign that we have seen from the McCain camp. This should be a complete non-issue. They had the opportunity to revise the Moderator list. Basically, people crying about it now can sit back and watch. Sarah Palin was going to get a whuppin before but now she's going to get a flat out tongue lashing. Say, i wouldn't mind...ahem. Nevermind.

Besides, if all else fails they can just hook her up to W's old earpiece. I bet Rove still has the other walkie talkie.




top topics



 
3
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join