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: 4
3
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 2 2008 @ 06:47 AM
link   
a question to my favorite lefties.
do either of you find it that having this pro-obama moderator kind of stacks the deck against Palin?




posted on Oct, 2 2008 @ 08:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky
Ifill failed to disclose the book during vetting.


How do you know this? How do you know that it's required that moderators "disclose" books they're authoring? There's nothing to "disclose" as it's public information.



They don't agree now.


They don't? Do you have something that indicates that McCain or Palin objects to Ifill? Because I've seen statements from them both that they're fine with it. The only people who are not fine with it are those who seem to be setting Palin up for a victimized loss...


Originally posted by Fathom
do either of you find it that having this pro-obama moderator kind of stacks the deck against Palin?


Is she pro-Obama? I would say I think she probably is, but I'm not sure. She has said she's not sure of how good a president he'd be.

I don't know if I qualify to answer your question, but I'll give my opinion, anyway. In fact, I gave it in my first post in this thread, here.

1. Ifill is going to be critically viewed by 60 million people, and she knows it.
2. Sarah Palin has already shown her abilities in interviews.
3. Ifill is a very intelligent and able journalist, who knows what she's doing.

My answer to your question is "no". If anything, Ifill is a consummate professional and may even be more considerate with Palin to avoid the appearance of conflict of interest.

She has integrity! People are completely ignoring that.


[edit on 2-10-2008 by Benevolent Heretic]



posted on Oct, 2 2008 @ 08:38 AM
link   
Ifill has a financial stake in the outcome of the election.
If Obama wins, she will sell more books.
She should not be a 'moderator'.

Palin is going to bomb. That's my prediction. When she does, it will
be blamed on the moderator because the moderator is obviously
biased. Even if the moderator manages to do her job without bias
(which I doubt), it will still be blamed on her because of the fact that
she shouldn't have been moderator to begin with.

It would be best to let Palin bomb with a moderator who is not biased.
Then there is no excuse.



posted on Oct, 2 2008 @ 08:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by Loki
This is yet another example of the sloppy campaign that we have seen from the McCain camp.


I agree.
They should have vetted the moderators on their own.
They should have known about the book and the bias.
They should have insisted on a different moderator.
Now McCain is covering with 'no big deal' - and yet is really IS.

Another McCain mistake.

Election 2008 should be nicknamed 'WE ARE SCREWED '08' because no matter who gets in - Obama or McCain - we are definately screwed.



posted on Oct, 2 2008 @ 09:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan
Ifill has a financial stake in the outcome of the election.
If Obama wins, she will sell more books.
She should not be a 'moderator'.


I think she has the ability (just like the moderators here do) to set aside her own bias and make "fairness" more important than her own interests. Her book is going to do just fine, especially with all the free press it has gotten in the last 2 days.


I don't understand why people don't think she has the ability to remain neutral for the 90 minutes of the debate. Is it because she has a financial interest? Do you think that money is more important to her than her integrity and her career, both of which would suffer if she doesn't do her job tonight?



It would be best to let Palin bomb with a moderator who is not biased.


There is no such thing as a moderator who is not biased. What makes a GOOD moderator is that they can set their bias ASIDE while doing their job. That is the epitome of a good moderator. Besides, Ifill isn't going to be judging the debate, the American people are.

And no matter what happens, if Palin bombs, the excuses will be profuse. It will be Ifill, Biden, the press, Katie Couric, Tina Fey, the economy, whatever. There WILL be plenty of excuses for why she did so miserably. They cannot all be avoided. Ifill quitting would remove one excuse that the McCain camp is counting on. They want all the excuses they can gather. Palin is a victim of life. And, sadly, that's their current platform...



posted on Oct, 2 2008 @ 09:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

Originally posted by Fathom
do either of you find it that having this pro-obama moderator kind of stacks the deck against Palin?

She has integrity! People are completely ignoring that.

Hunny, that baby got thrown out in Dan Rather's bathwater.

It is a well known fact that the msm has absolutley no integrity.


[edit on 2-10-2008 by Fathom]



posted on Oct, 2 2008 @ 09:49 AM
link   
I don't think Ifill will have any problem moderating this debate in a neutral manner. She's has previously moderated national political debates, so it's not like this is her first rodeo.

Any insinuation that "the deck is stacked" against Palin is absurd.

Palin will either be able to handle herself in a debate of this magnitude, or she won't. She is responsible for her own performance this evening. Not Biden. Not Ifill.

At some point Palin will have to accept responsibility for her actions, and start shouldering some weight in this campaign.



posted on Oct, 2 2008 @ 09:52 AM
link   
Its a going to be difficult to find someone who's unbiased in politics. We can always import a moderator from China. We do everything else...



posted on Oct, 2 2008 @ 09:58 AM
link   
I think this plays well for Palin.


She can't go wrong really. If she sucks. it was the biased moderator. If she rocks, it was against all odds.

Imagine if you were the McCain campaign. Palin is not exactly eloquent or informed ( let's be realistic, she isn't ). How do we counter that? Oh wait ! The moderator is Pro-Obama?? PERFECT.

Like I said in another thread, Obama needs to be the one to replace her. Palin has a almost surefire win with her moderating.

Not rocket science..



posted on Oct, 2 2008 @ 10:00 AM
link   
Everyone has their own political opinions. Ifill should be allowed hers.

The question is, can she maintain impartial while moderating the debate. I think she can.



posted on Oct, 2 2008 @ 10:02 AM
link   
Palin may very well bomb, but Biden has been known to say some completely ridiculous things himself. If he screws up during this debate the people will see it before the media has a chance to sweep it under the rug. Of course by tomorrow morning any mistake Biden makes will be forgotten and all we will hear is what a moron Palin is.


I'm not wasting my time watching this drivel.



posted on Oct, 2 2008 @ 10:03 AM
link   
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 


I agree (with all of the points up to the last paragraph of the post...and I agree with most of that).

Was it the best thing for Ifill to not disclose the book to the debate committee? No.

Can she remain neutral during the debate tonight? Probably.

Let's have everyone just take a breath and wait for the actual debate. If Ifill comes off as biased, then it is good for Palin. If she remains neutral, well, then this fuss was for nothing.

[edit on 10/2/2008 by skeptic1]



posted on Oct, 2 2008 @ 10:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by Fathom
a question to my favorite lefties.
do either of you find it that having this pro-obama moderator kind of stacks the deck against Palin?


If previous debates are of any guidance, it doesn't matter what political inclinations of the moderator are. The questions are scripted, there is little leeway in formulating these. Answers are apparently prefab as well. It's a play. You get to judge the actors, not the usher.



posted on Oct, 2 2008 @ 10:15 AM
link   
I find this disturbing, but what can I do.

For the life of me I still don't know what qualifies Obama,

he is eloquent?

and she has over 80% approval rating in Alaska,

She can't be that stupid.

While congress looks very stupid to me with its 18% approval rating,

What do we want?

We will see what the future holds.



posted on Oct, 2 2008 @ 10:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by Stormdancer777
For the life of me I still don't know what qualifies Obama,

he is eloquent?


Being able to present your ideas is a convincing manner is a key element of leadership. After all, it's people who will have to do your bidding. Obama can do that and he's inspiring. Palin can't.


and she has over 80% approval rating in Alaska


Frankly, I never doubted she did a decent job there! Seriously. It's just that she belongs there, taking care of her wonderful state and her kids, and not in the White House.



posted on Oct, 2 2008 @ 10:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by skeptic1
Was it the best thing for Ifill to not disclose the book to the debate committee? No.


Do we know that she didn't "disclose" it to the debate committee?? I'm seriously looking for some indication one way or another. Besides, of course, John McCain's word, which is not dependable imo.


Originally posted by Stormdancer777
For the life of me I still don't know what qualifies Obama,


You're completely entitled to your opinion about Obama, but he was ELECTED by the people to be a candidate for president. So, they judge that he is qualified. WE the people have judged that he is qualified.



and she has over 80% approval rating in Alaska,


Palin's Approval Rating has Dropped from 82 to 68 in Alaska



What do we want?


I can only speak for me, but I want calm, articulate, educated, intelligent and insightful people in BOTH president and VP positions. Neither McCain nor Palin fit the bill. Heaven help us when we vote for someone because "She can't be that stupid". We've been there...



posted on Oct, 2 2008 @ 10:42 AM
link   
reply to post by buddhasystem
 


Hi buddha, I am not sure, being able to convince people has been done before, and not with good intentions.

Actions speak louder then words,what has she accomplished apposed to the do nothing congress.

I am probably beating a dead horse, but I am sorta stubborn and pretty loyal, once I take a liking to someone,I stand by them.

[edit on 103131p://bThursday2008 by Stormdancer777]



posted on Oct, 2 2008 @ 10:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by Stormdancer777
reply to post by buddhasystem
 


Hi buddha, I am not sure, being able to convince people has been done before, and not with good intentions.


I know! It cuts both ways. But you gotta be able to do that, because even with the best of intentions you ruin your organization (US) if you can't convince your staff (people).


Actions speak louder then words,what has she accomplished apposed to the do nothing congress.


Well it's like comparing apples an oranges. She was a brilliant councilwoman in the town of Wasilla, I can imagine. Actually the Supervisor in my town does a good job, I think McCain could have picked him.


I am probably beating a dead horse, but I am sorta stubborn and pretty loyal, once I take a liking to someone,I stand by them.


That's the problem with some people, like those staying in abusive relationships.



posted on Oct, 2 2008 @ 10:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
I don't understand why people don't think she has the ability to remain neutral for the 90 minutes of the debate. Is it because she has a financial interest?

Yes. A LARGE financial stake. That's a good share of why.
Her book will do okay if Obama doesn't win.
It will do exceptionally well if he does win (and I think he will).


Ifill isn't going to be judging the debate, the American people are.

She is the moderator. She has power in the moderator chair to sway the debate and to interject herself.


Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
I can only speak for me, but I want calm, articulate, educated, intelligent and insightful people in BOTH president and VP positions.


Then I guess you'll be voting for Ron Paul then, eh?

Obama isn't articulate. He speaks and gaffs worse then Bush43.
He isn't intelligent or insightful.
His alleged 'idea's' are just recycled Carterisms (all of which failed).
His flip-flops are Kerry-esque
Any notion that he's intelligent went out the window with his 'selma' speech.

By your standards - that's the end of the Obama/Biden ticket for you.

McCain is articulate but what he says reeks.
He's intelligent but only insightful 'sometimes'
He definately is NOT calm. His temper is legendary.
Palin is not ready for the job.
She's intelligent enough to run Alaska but not enough (yet?) for VP.

By your standards - that's the end of the McCain/Palin ticket for you.


Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
I think she has the ability (just like the moderators here do) to set aside her own bias and make "fairness" more important than her own interests.

Change of opinion, eh?



posted on Oct, 2 2008 @ 11:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan
Yes. A LARGE financial stake.


And you think money overrides integrity, morals? Because I don't.



Obama isn't articulate. He speaks and gaffs worse then Bush43.
He isn't intelligent or insightful.
His alleged 'idea's' are just recycled Carterisms (all of which failed).
His flip-flops are Kerry-esque
Any notion that he's intelligent went out the window with his 'selma' speech.


These are all opinion-based statements. My opinions are very different.



By your standards - that's the end of the McCain/Palin ticket for you.


They were never in the running for me (this election).


Change of opinion, eh?


Excuse me? I don't understand this comment.

[edit on 2-10-2008 by Benevolent Heretic]



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join