Palin-Biden Debate

[Guest]

Don't expect a fair, impartial moderator for the debate. Gwen Ifill, the moderator chosen by the Commission of Debates, is in the tank for Obama. She has a pro-Obama book coming out about the time of the inaugaration and an Obama win would help sales. Three words occur to me, conflict of interest. Can you imagine the democratic left's outcry if Sean Hannity was selected as the moderator.

The link attached is from a conservative commentator. If you will scroll down the page there is a video of the "impartial" Gwen Ifill's reaction to Sarah Palin's convention speech. Nothing like video where the camera will not conceal the truth from the lying eyes of those that would try to spin this one. UNBELIEVABLE.

Tim Russert, we miss you.

http://michellemalkin.com/2008/09/30/a-debate-%E2%80%9Cmoderator%E2%80%9D-in-the-tank-for-obama/

[Guest]

WOW....that is all I can say. Both Democrats and Republicans should be insulted and upset about this !!

I am convinced that the media just decided prior to the primary that Sen Obama should be the next President. The backers of Sen Clinton saw how it worked, complained and got nowhere and it continues !

[Guest]

OMG!! I can't believe I am typing this but my hands won't stop...I AGREE with BOTH of you!!

AAHHHHH......where has my mind gone... my left sided voice has left me!! :1rotfl:

I truly do believe that we should have someone very impartial...and I do miss Tim Russert too!

I am not sure why the commissioners would choose her...is there no one left amongst journalist that could possibly be a little more unbiased and fair?

:shocked:

[Guest]

Even more interesting will be the camera work during the debate. Watch for the cut-aways onto Gov. Palin when Sen. Biden is speaking. Trying to show a glimpse of her in an uncomplimentary way seems to be cine-sport now, and shots of Sen. Biden in such a manner will be avoided at all costs.

It is sad when these events become who can upstage whom. It would be better if these debates were audio-only to keep the video-gamesmanship at a minimum.

[Guest]

this election has nothing to do with the will of the people. You know the media is fully aware the impact the moderator they have chosen will have on intelligent people of the planet.
And just like our representatives do in Washington they do what ever is in their best interest.....regardless of we the people.
I also think the Palin debate preparation team will take these tactics into account. My bet is she does better than expected (an impossible measurable...I know).

We shall see. What the opposition or the media can't influence is her appeal to the average Dick and Jane who feel they have someone to relate with...not uppity....non elitist...talks freely of home and family...

All the supposed intellectual evaluation, conclusion and subsequent bashing really adds no value. The people, maybe for a change will not listen to just the partisan political canned rhetoric.....if there is any anywhere by anybody...why do you think the Dems are working so hard in the rust belt states and the swing states.....the know they don't have a lock on anything.


BTK

[Guest]

are casting chum on shark infested waters....:coolsmiley:

BTK

[Guest]

Just read a bit more about this lady. Frankly, she should be replaced and the McCain campaign should demand it. They will not, of course, as that would simply add fuel to the ongoing war on McCain as it is.

She has had complaints before about allowing her bias to show, and how this was kept secret from the McCain camp is just beyond me. Imagine the outrage if ANYONE CONNECTED TO SEN MCCAIN IN ANYWAY were selected and then add that it appears that it was kept secret....just imagine the outrage, and it would be justified !

[Guest]

To be fair, I just read in the Washington Post that this book was not a secret...that it was discussed earlier this month in an article, and I have no reason not to believe that.

That does not mitigate all the other trappings of this story !!

[Guest]

The expectation of how Gov. Palin will do Friday night will be mighty low after her "performance" with Katie Couric. Here is the exact exchange for one question:

COURIC: Why isn't it better, Governor Palin, to spend $700 billion helping middle-class families who are struggling with health care, housing, gas and groceries; allow them to spend more and put more money into the economy instead of helping these big financial institutions that played a role in creating this mess?

PALIN: That's why I say I, like every American I'm speaking with, were ill about this position that we have been put in where it is the taxpayers looking to bail out. But ultimately, what the bailout does is help those who are concerned about the health-care reform that is needed to help shore up our economy, helping the—it's got to be all about job creation, too, shoring up our economy and putting it back on the right track. So health-care reform and reducing taxes and reining in spending has got to accompany tax reductions and tax relief for Americans. And trade, we've got to see trade as opportunity, not as a competitive, scary thing. But one in five jobs being created in the trade sector today, we've got to look at that as more opportunity. All those things under the umbrella of job creation. This bailout is a part of that.
(What in the world did she say?)

[Guest]

Ms Ifill has written a book about four black politicians including Senator Obama and the Governor of Massachusetts. It has not yet been published. No one knows what she has said about Senator Obama or any one else. Her performance as moderator of past debates and other appearances and her past writings as a reporter are certainly up for scrutiny to validate whether or not she shows a public bias toward black or Democratic interviewees. In a recent interview with the Washington Post she said she had not made up her mind yet as to who she will be voting for.

Why don't we wait until after the debate to determine whether or not she gave governor Palin a fair shake in the debate? Remember, all we have at this point is a book title.

[Guest]

Ms Ifill has written a book about four black politicians including Senator Obama and the Governor of Massachusetts. It has not yet been published. No one knows what she has said about Senator Obama or any one else. Her performance as moderator of past debates and other appearances and her past writings as a reporter are certainly up for scrutiny to validate whether or not she shows a public bias toward black or Democratic interviewees. In a recent interview with the Washington Post she said she had not made up her mind yet as to who she will be voting for.

Why don't we wait until after the debate to determine whether or not she gave governor Palin a fair shake in the debate? Remember, all we have at this point is a book title.

I would suggest that you google her name and check on her PAST PERFORMANCE IN DEBATES :)

I dont care...I think she can be objective and hope there is nothing to make it doubtful...just seems like pretty poor spin on the debate !

[Guest]

I would suggest that you google her name and check on her PAST PERFORMANCE IN DEBATES :)

I dont care...I think she can be objective and hope there is nothing to make it doubtful...just seems like pretty poor spin on the debate !


HHhmmmm...sorry but now I AM confused....I know it doesn't take much my friend....BUT....do you think she CAN or CAN NOT be objective?

Just curious....

[Guest]

HHhmmmm...sorry but now I AM confused....I know it doesn't take much my friend....BUT....do you think she CAN or CAN NOT be objective?

Just curious....

Having watched her a number of times....None of those times where she supposedly put down Gov Palin....I would say yes.

There are two things that bother me....HOW could those who set this up allow this to happen simply for the appearance ?

Secondly, after watching her report on the convention speech of Gov Palin I was really put off by her attitude displayed (this video is now around the net).

Again, I think yes....maybe only because all of this publicity will sort of make put the spotlight on her !

THIS DOES NOT change my view of the media in general...Sen Clinton's campaign had it correct....THEY have decided on who they want to be elected....oh, I am beginning to really get off the topic...sorry !

[Guest]

Don't expect a fair, impartial moderator for the debate. Gwen Ifill, the moderator chosen by the Commission of Debates, is in the tank for Obama. She has a pro-Obama book coming out about the time of the inaugaration and an Obama win would help sales. Three words occur to me, conflict of interest. Can you imagine the democratic left's outcry if Sean Hannity was selected as the moderator.

The link attached is from a conservative commentator. If you will scroll down the page there is a video of the "impartial" Gwen Ifill's reaction to Sarah Palin's convention speech. Nothing like video where the camera will not conceal the truth from the lying eyes of those that would try to spin this one. UNBELIEVABLE.

Tim Russert, we miss you.

http://michellemalkin.com/2008/09/30/a-debate-%E2%80%9Cmoderator%E2%80%9D-in-the-tank-for-obama/


Now I've seen it all! You're all defending Palin before the debate has even taken place???? Wow, talk about the "fear factor". :22yikes:

If there was anything at all to this, I would think the "Duh" McCain campaign would have protested. Calm down folks. Sarah's scintillating insights are only a day away. "Tomorrow . . . tomorrow . . . I love ya . . . tomorrow . . . it's only a day away . . . " :1rotfl:

[Guest]

How racist can you be? Ifill was picked last year before Obama was even the candidate. Her book was already in the works. She hasn't even written the chapter on Obama yet. It goes back over forty years. She was selected by both parties because of her impartial background. You would never question a whilte moderator who was writing a book about politics. Anything to try and slant things your way. Why don't you just say what is really bothering you about her.

[Guest]

How racist can you be? Ifill was picked last year before Obama was even the candidate. Her book was already in the works. She hasn't even written the chapter on Obama yet. It goes back over forty years. She was selected by both parties because of her impartial background. You would never question a whilte moderator who was writing a book about politics. Anything to try and slant things your way. Why don't you just say what is really bothering you about her.


I TOTALLY resent and am TOTALLY OFFENDED YOU YOUR REMARKS.

Who do you think you are to call me a racist......This post is so very offensive....it is typical however to call names and call folks racist in this campaign so I should not be surprised at all.

I am so disgusted that anyone could come on here and make such an offensive and general condemnation of people they dont even know !!!

This is a low point on here

[Guest]

Chels, I believe the only thing most Republicans want is an even playing field. The voting public would appreciate it as well. McCain handled the issue with dignity and class. You might say he was downright presidential.

On the other hand, liberal democrats and their media accomplices want the wind at their back, sole possession of the ball, blindfolds on the opposition, the referee in their pocket and no wheelchairs in the stadium.

How 'bout those Phillies?

[Guest]

Bucco - I am sorry you took offense at my post. I am saying I don't think this would be an issue if she were white. She has been interviewed today and McCain has even said he doesn't see a problem, yet this link starts to question her integrity.

[Guest]

Bucco - I am sorry you took offense at my post. I am saying I don't think this would be an issue if she were white. She has been interviewed today and McCain has even said he doesn't see a problem, yet this link starts to question her integrity.

Well I was offended by your arrogance and self absorbance.....I said in this thread I thought she would be objective...I said in this thread that I have watched her and never saw any problems......

The questions raised in this thread are legitimate.....If Gov Palin's hobbies and her children can be taken to task and personally slammed all over this place then the moderator of a debate for Vice President should also be discussed and if you read instead of just yelling racist you would have seen that most of the chagrin was that the McCain camp did not know.

This is what is making this election so demeaning, so unamerican.....your calling everyone on this thread a racist pales to the same claims made by our national press to ANY critique or hard question to Sen Obama. I, personally, dont care if he is red, green or purple...he is a radical left wing socialist and has the potential to be extremely destructive to this nation. THAT DOES NOT MAKE ME A RACIST AND I know I am ranting here but I am getting tired of the personal attacks on here if you dont agree with someone elses candidates...it is arrogant and shows such elitism. There are those who can ignore it but for me I cant...I have to vent and have...sorry for the length and the rambling !

[Guest]

Then toss me into the same "pot" because I too am against a national debate moderator with probable conflict of interest, and the moderator should have the common sense to recuse herself. If this person were a mediator in a disputed matter, recusal would be the only ethical thing to do in such a circumstance. This debate - an obvious dispute on issues - is no different.

I had no idea whether this particular moderator was white, black, yellow, brown or pin-stripe, nor did it even enter my mind. That has nothing to do with it. This moderator from here on out will be looked as being an opportunist who is using this forum to promote her self interest (namely, an upcoming book which has now been highly referenced) for increased sales. Recusal may (or may not) result in fewer book sales, but recusal is the ethical thing to do. The debate will be stained by having a moderator with perceived bias, and that does neither candidate any good.

But, ethics is becoming so old-fashioned....

So, if expecting people, regardless of ethnicity, to act ethically is racist, I guess I can be called the "R" name as well.

[Guest]

She is a well respected journalist, with decades of experience. I have no doubt she'll be professional in her treatment of both candidates. Interesting to note, Ifill discussed the book in a interview with The Washington Post on September 4, well before the Commission on Presidential Debates announced the debate moderators. The McCain camp should have been aware had they done their homework, and acted accordingly. In any event, if Palin is worth her salt, she'll hold up her end in the debate.

[Guest]

Then toss me into the same "pot" because I too am against a national debate moderator with probable conflict of interest, and the moderator should have the common sense to recuse herself. If this person were a mediator in a disputed matter, recusal would be the only ethical thing to do in such a circumstance. This debate - an obvious dispute on issues - is no different.

I had no idea whether this particular moderator was white, black, yellow, brown or pin-stripe, nor did it even enter my mind. That has nothing to do with it. This moderator from here on out will be looked as being an opportunist who is using this forum to promote her self interest (namely, an upcoming book which has now been highly referenced) for increased sales. Recusal may (or may not) result in fewer book sales, but recusal is the ethical thing to do. The debate will be stained by having a moderator with perceived bias, and that does neither candidate any good.

But, ethics is becoming so old-fashioned....

So, if expecting people, regardless of ethnicity, to act ethically is racist, I guess I can be called the "R" name as well.

:agree::agree::agree::agree:

I had no idea that she was black!! Once I started reading more about her...well I figured it out....but honestly...the whole point of the thread was that she was clearly an Obama fan...black, white, red or purple....



On another note: I also know that Bucco did his homework and found that he felt comfortable with the decision....he came back after checking her out and told us she might just do a good job....

I appreciate all of the information on this thread...it will make the debates interesting to watch....I think if conn8757 had not called us racists...I may not have even known she was black until the debate started....and even then...I may not have noticed.....I think most of us see beyond color now a days.....it just doesn't really matter anymore....people are people....good or bad....educated or not....doesn't matter the color....what matters is the heart, soul and mind....ethics and leadership skills. Just my opinion. Thanks for listening...sort of...

[Guest]

rekop, your point is well taken but it cuts both ways....the The Commission on Presidential Debates should also have been aware of the potential conflict for the same reason. I don't know how anyone can watch Ifill's reaction to the Palin's convention speech and say she is objective. She couldn't control her disdain on camera. She is too much in the Obama tank to be objective.

That being said, Sarah will do just fine knowing where Ifill is coming from.

[Guest]

rekop, your point is well taken but it cuts both ways....the The Commission on Presidential Debates should also have been aware of the potential conflict for the same reason. I don't know how anyone can watch Ifill's reaction to the Palin's convention speech and say she is objective. She couldn't control her disdain on camera. She is too much in the Obama tank to be objective.

That being said, Sarah will do just fine knowing where Ifill is coming from.

Where is Ifill coming from? She should recuse herself? OMG! Have you all gone over the edge! The bar is set so low for Palin already, for her to look bad she'd really have to do something stupid. She's been coddled and pampered and prepped like no other candidate in history. If you were honest, you'd admit that no one would be good enough or fair enough to please any of the Republicans. Brings to mind that old saying "you can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear." Let the oinks begin! :duck:

[Guest]

Where is Ifill coming from? She should recuse herself? OMG! Have you all gone over the edge! The bar is set so low for Palin already, for her to look bad she'd really have to do something stupid. She's been coddled and pampered and prepped like no other candidate in history. If you were honest, you'd admit that no one would be good enough or fair enough to please any of the Republicans. Brings to mind that old saying "you can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear." Let's the oinks begin! :duck:
The same situation would hold true if it were a debate between the heads of the DNC and the RNC on their respective platforms. Moderators with an obvious political bias should not moderate political events under the guise of "journalistic neutrality." That's where professional ethics come into play.

[Guest]

Don't expect a fair, impartial moderator for the debate. Gwen Ifill, the moderator chosen by the Commission of Debates, is in the tank for Obama. She has a pro-Obama book coming out about the time of the inaugaration and an Obama win would help sales. Three words occur to me, conflict of interest. Can you imagine the democratic left's outcry if Sean Hannity was selected as the moderator.

The link attached is from a conservative commentator. If you will scroll down the page there is a video of the "impartial" Gwen Ifill's reaction to Sarah Palin's convention speech. Nothing like video where the camera will not conceal the truth from the lying eyes of those that would try to spin this one. UNBELIEVABLE.

Tim Russert, we miss you.

http://michellemalkin.com/2008/09/30/a-debate-%E2%80%9Cmoderator%E2%80%9D-in-the-tank-for-obama/
Reguardless, if indeed they tanked it for obama we will know. all i want to know, was Katie Couric's interview with Palin tanked also? or was that fact she sided with Obama on Pakistan then at McCain's statement it was just a voter she was talking to tanked also????????? Things that make you go HHHUUMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM

[Guest]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gwen_Ifill

I do not see any Democrat conspiracy theory here with the choice of Gwen Ifill as moderator in tonight's VP debate.

[Guest]

Tal.....Wikipedia aside, can you view this clip of Ms. Ifill and say she was neutral? I think not.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4zafLsAtp_Q&eurl=http://michellemalkin.com/2008/09/30/a-debate-%E2%80%9Cmoderator%E2%80%9D-in-the-tank-for-obama/

[Guest]

It's not difficult to see that if Palin does poorly in the debates, it won't be her fault. Bless her heart. People are already excusing her because of the moderator.

[Guest]

The expectation of how Gov. Palin will do Friday night will be mighty low after her "performance" with Katie Couric. Here is the exact exchange for one question:

COURIC: Why isn't it better, Governor Palin, to spend $700 billion helping middle-class families who are struggling with health care, housing, gas and groceries; allow them to spend more and put more money into the economy instead of helping these big financial institutions that played a role in creating this mess?

PALIN: That's why I say I, like every American I'm speaking with, were ill about this position that we have been put in where it is the taxpayers looking to bail out. But ultimately, what the bailout does is help those who are concerned about the health-care reform that is needed to help shore up our economy, helping the—it's got to be all about job creation, too, shoring up our economy and putting it back on the right track. So health-care reform and reducing taxes and reining in spending has got to accompany tax reductions and tax relief for Americans. And trade, we've got to see trade as opportunity, not as a competitive, scary thing. But one in five jobs being created in the trade sector today, we've got to look at that as more opportunity. All those things under the umbrella of job creation. This bailout is a part of that.
(What in the world did she say?)I think she said "I'm so darn nervous that my tongue just disconnected from my brain" . I think at this point Couric was even nervous. I was impressed with the excitement she brought to the convention and the bump she gave the party... but... I'm afraid this is too much.... too fast. And, when the media smells blood...

[Guest]

"Katie Couric: Why, in your view, is Roe v. Wade a bad decision?

Sarah Palin: I think it should be a states' issue not a federal government-mandated, mandating yes or no on such an important issue. I'm, in that sense, a federalist, where I believe that states should have more say in the laws of their lands and individual areas. Now, foundationally, also, though, it's no secret that I'm pro-life that I believe in a culture of life is very important for this country. Personally, that's what I would like to see, um, further embraced by America.

Couric: Do you think there's an inherent right to privacy in the Constitution?

Palin: I do. Yeah, I do.

Couric: The cornerstone of Roe v. Wade.

Palin: I do. And I believe that individual states can best handle what the people within the different constituencies in the 50 states would like to see their will ushered in an issue like that."

I thought Federalism meant a strong central government and not states deciding each issue as they saw fit??

[Guest]

It's not difficult to see that if Palin does poorly in the debates, it won't be her fault. Bless her heart. People are already excusing her because of the moderator.

I dont kinow where you get this from at all !! Except for maybe one person on here it has not been a big deal on this board, and as for a few bloggers out there...same type as blast away at Gov Palin on the left side each day...that is what they do.

How can you say that folks are making excuses for her ?

And the "bless her heart" comment, to me anyway, is sort of condescending...bet you wouldnt say that about a man !!!

[Guest]

John McCain, bless his heart, how could he have chosen Palin over all the other qualified candidates?????

[Guest]

It is my understanding that both campaigns had to approve the moderator and the book was first reviewed in June or July so I'm sure they knew about it.

[Guest]

It is my understanding that both campaigns had to approve the moderator and the book was first reviewed in June or July so I'm sure they knew about it.

Not my understanding but it does not make any difference. I am sure she will do well..she is a professional.

[Guest]

Sam...playing off your ball...nor would it be difficult to see that if she blows the doors off at the debate...it will be because she was so well prepped and not because, "bless her heart" she's tough, can handle the media bias and connects with a broad section of middle America. Further, if she hits the ball out of the park, partisans will say Ifill laid down because she was intimidated by questions on her objectivity. Its a standoff either way.

[Guest]

Cabo, based on what I've seen so far, she doesn't stand a chance of doing well. Why didn't McCain pick Romney, Rice, Powell, or Hutchinson to name a few? My party threw it away with this election. I think the repubs want the democrats to win so they inherit the quagmire we find ourselves in right now.

[Guest]

Cabo, based on what I've seen so far, she doesn't stand a chance of doing well. Why didn't McCain pick Romney, Rice, Powell, or Hutchinson to name a few? My party threw it away with this election. I think the repubs want the democrats to win so they inherit the quagmire we find ourselves in right now.

:agree::agree::agree::agree:

Where is the fight?!!! There is no fight from the republicans! Except here on TOTV....

Isn't Bless her/his heart something southernors say when they can't find anything nice to say?? Just what I have been told....

[Guest]

[QUOTE=Cassie325;163798]

Where is the fight?!!! There is no fight from the republicans! Except here on TOTV....





Some folks think that TOTV is the real world :)

[Guest]

Not my understanding but it does not make any difference. I am sure she will do well..she is a professional.

What is your understanding? I'm curious Bucco. You seem to think this is some kind of Democrat Conspiracy. So exactly, how do you think the moderators are chosen?

[Guest]

What is your understanding? I'm curious Bucco. You seem to think this is some kind of Democrat Conspiracy. So exactly, how do you think the moderators are chosen?

PLEASE VERY CLEARLY explain what did I say that EVEN CAME CLOSE to what words you have put into my mouth.

The below as it is my last post in this thread must have been the one that convinced you.....

"Not my understanding but it does not make any difference. I am sure she will do well..she is a professional. "

Now please share what brought you to your conclusion ????

[Guest]

OR...was it this post by me...

"I dont care...I think she can be objective and hope there is nothing to make it doubtful...just seems like pretty poor spin on the debate ! "

[Guest]

It is my understanding that both campaigns had to approve the moderator and the book was first reviewed in June or July so I'm sure they knew about it.

This is the post you were responding to Bucco. Read one post ahead of yours.
Were you not responding to this post?

That's what I meant. You said "not my understanding." I wanted to know exactly what your understanding is on how the moderators were chosen?

[Guest]

This is the post you were responding to Bucco. Read one post ahead of yours.
Were you not responding to this post?

That's what I meant. You said "not my understanding." I wanted to know exactly what your understanding is on how the moderators were chosen?


It is not my understanding that the book was reviewed in June or July and that the McCain knew about it. Washington Post, I think, said it was "discussed" in the first few days of September and then subsequently she said she had not written about Sen Obama as of yet (which I would think would prevent the review you mentioned) and each article I read said that the McCain campaign was not aware !

I am not sure why you are all over me on this...I have said, especially yesterday after doing some reading, that I had no problem with it at all.

[Guest]

"Katie Couric: Why, in your view, is Roe v. Wade a bad decision?

Sarah Palin: I think it should be a states' issue not a federal government-mandated, mandating yes or no on such an important issue. I'm, in that sense, a federalist, where I believe that states should have more say in the laws of their lands and individual areas. Now, foundationally, also, though, it's no secret that I'm pro-life that I believe in a culture of life is very important for this country. Personally, that's what I would like to see, um, further embraced by America.

Couric: Do you think there's an inherent right to privacy in the Constitution?

Palin: I do. Yeah, I do.

Couric: The cornerstone of Roe v. Wade.

Palin: I do. And I believe that individual states can best handle what the people within the different constituencies in the 50 states would like to see their will ushered in an issue like that."

I thought Federalism meant a strong central government and not states deciding each issue as they saw fit??

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federalism_in_the_United_States

Black has turned white and white black with the old and new definitions of Federalist according to Wikipedia.

[Guest]

win or lose?
The debates are trumped up political entertainment.
You can't belittle Palin without looking at the plethora of office holders in Washingtion who are one :cus::cusof a lot less qualified than she is.
I will take somebody who doesn't know why things have to be the way they are over some smooth talking, experienced, do nothing encumbent....in any job in DC.
Partisan opinions are just that partisan which means youe in or out dependent upon whether you are blue or red.
I for one have more latitude than that in my decision making. I do not believe the other candidate is not what ever just because they are the other candidate!!!!!!!!!!
PArtisan politics cheat America from making good decisions.
Just pull the party lever.....NO MATTER WHAT.
Doesn't take much analysis or thinking.
But is the American way......no open minds...party first! Too bad.

BTK

[Guest]

win or lose?
The debates are trumped up political entertainment.
You can't belittle Palin without looking at the plethora of office holders in Washingtion who are one :cus::cusof a lot less qualified than she is.
I will take somebody who doesn't know why things have to be the way they are over some smooth talking, experienced, do nothing encumbent....in any job in DC.
Partisan opinions are just that partisan which means youe in or out dependent upon whether you are blue or red.
I for one have more latitude than that in my decision making. I do not believe the other candidate is not what ever just because they are the other candidate!!!!!!!!!!
PArtisan politics cheat America from making good decisions.
Just pull the party lever.....NO MATTER WHAT.
Doesn't take much analysis or thinking.
But is the American way......no open minds...party first! Too bad.

BTK


I agree....it is amazing the constant criticism of Gov Palin while everyone else shows their inteptness day in and day out and not a word !!!! GUESS if you do it "smoothly" it is ok and does not hurt as much !

My posts on this subject have less to do with Gov Palin than with the blindness to the ineptness we support in the name of something...party, age...dont know what but it is BLIND !! All some can see is Gov Palin !

[Guest]

Cassie...

"Bless your heart" means "You poor thing"
;)
From a native Virginian.....

[Guest]

Cassie...

"Bless your heart" means "You poor thing"
;)
From a native Virginian.....


OH....no wonder so many people said that to me....:1rotfl::1rotfl:

KIDDING!!!

Actually I appreciate the info....makes much more sense...thanks so much...

[Guest]

Heh Heh :clap2::1rotfl::clap2::1rotfl:

[Guest]

Tom Brokaw retired from the NBC Nightly News in 2004 at the age of 64. Then with the death of Tim Russert in June, Brokaw was named the interim anchor of Meet the Press. And Brokaw will also host the town hall meeting featuring Barack Obama and John McCain next Tuesday.

But lately, there is a growing concern over a number of activities from Brokaw that leads us to wonder whether Brokaw wouldn't be better off spending time at his Montana ranch.

This was how Brokaw ended a segment on this past Sunday's Meet the Press:

In fairness to everybody here, I’m just going to end on one note. And that is that we continue to poll on who’s best equipped to be Commander in Chief, and John McCain continues to lead in that category despite the criticism from Barack Obama by a factor of 53 to 42 percent in our latest NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll. Gentlemen, thank you very much.

Those numbers don't exist. Perhaps that isn't enough for you to consider. Let's try this Brokaw's association with the McCain campaign.

The New York Times, in profiling Brokaw before the town-hall format presidential debate, noted that Brokaw met with the McCain campaign to diffuse the right-wing rhetoric against the network.

His mission, he said, was to assure the candidate's aides that -- despite some negative on-air commentary by Mr. Olbermann in particular -- Mr. McCain could still get a fair shake from NBC News. Mr. Brokaw said he had been told by a senior McCain aide, whom he did not name, that the campaign had been reluctant to accept an NBC representative as one of the moderators of the three presidential debates -- until his name was invoked.
"My name came up, and they said, 'Oh, hell, we have to do it, because it's going to be Brokaw.' "Not quite enough for you? Well, there's a little more.
From the same piece in The New York Times, Brokaw "had "advocated" within the executive suite of NBC News to modify the anchor duties of the MSNBC hosts Keith Olbermann and Chris Matthews on election night and on nights when there were presidential debates."
Regardless of where you stand on whether Olbermann and Matthews should have been moved, the move was made in great part due to political pressure in the middle of the campaign. If Brokaw did so at the behest of the McCain campaign, or McCain himself, who Brokaw does admit to knowing socially (Brokaw doesn't know Obama socially), then his journalism credibility is damaged, not Olbermann's or Matthews'.
There is growing concern over whether Brokaw will be a fair and impartial choice to moderate the town hall style presidential debate next week.
Not that Brokaw could have been Russert, but his work on Meet the Press shows a startling lack of follow-up and aggression, which is a clear contrast to the style Russert, and Meet the Press, were famous for doing.
Brokaw was the milquetoast anchor of the Big Three in the 1980s and 1990s. Never the great reporter such as Dan Rather nor did he have the curiousity and worldliness of Peter Jennings, Brokaw was always the favorite son of the corporate media. He liked The Greatest Generation and wrote about them. He never stirred the pot, but never did anything great either.

And he could have gone off into the sunset with his reputation relatively intact. But his clear partiality for the McCain campaign and his disdain for truth-seekers may put him in the same boat with Colin Powell.

[Guest]

Tom Brokaw retired from the NBC Nightly News in 2004 at the age of 64. Then with the death of Tim Russert in June, Brokaw was named the interim anchor of Meet the Press. And Brokaw will also host the town hall meeting featuring Barack Obama and John McCain next Tuesday.

But lately, there is a growing concern over a number of activities from Brokaw that leads us to wonder whether Brokaw wouldn't be better off spending time at his Montana ranch.

This was how Brokaw ended a segment on this past Sunday's Meet the Press:

In fairness to everybody here, I’m just going to end on one note. And that is that we continue to poll on who’s best equipped to be Commander in Chief, and John McCain continues to lead in that category despite the criticism from Barack Obama by a factor of 53 to 42 percent in our latest NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll. Gentlemen, thank you very much.

Those numbers don't exist. Perhaps that isn't enough for you to consider. Let's try this Brokaw's association with the McCain campaign.

The New York Times, in profiling Brokaw before the town-hall format presidential debate, noted that Brokaw met with the McCain campaign to diffuse the right-wing rhetoric against the network.

His mission, he said, was to assure the candidate's aides that -- despite some negative on-air commentary by Mr. Olbermann in particular -- Mr. McCain could still get a fair shake from NBC News. Mr. Brokaw said he had been told by a senior McCain aide, whom he did not name, that the campaign had been reluctant to accept an NBC representative as one of the moderators of the three presidential debates -- until his name was invoked.
"My name came up, and they said, 'Oh, hell, we have to do it, because it's going to be Brokaw.' "Not quite enough for you? Well, there's a little more.
From the same piece in The New York Times, Brokaw "had "advocated" within the executive suite of NBC News to modify the anchor duties of the MSNBC hosts Keith Olbermann and Chris Matthews on election night and on nights when there were presidential debates."
Regardless of where you stand on whether Olbermann and Matthews should have been moved, the move was made in great part due to political pressure in the middle of the campaign. If Brokaw did so at the behest of the McCain campaign, or McCain himself, who Brokaw does admit to knowing socially (Brokaw doesn't know Obama socially), then his journalism credibility is damaged, not Olbermann's or Matthews'.
There is growing concern over whether Brokaw will be a fair and impartial choice to moderate the town hall style presidential debate next week.
Not that Brokaw could have been Russert, but his work on Meet the Press shows a startling lack of follow-up and aggression, which is a clear contrast to the style Russert, and Meet the Press, were famous for doing.
Brokaw was the milquetoast anchor of the Big Three in the 1980s and 1990s. Never the great reporter such as Dan Rather nor did he have the curiousity and worldliness of Peter Jennings, Brokaw was always the favorite son of the corporate media. He liked The Greatest Generation and wrote about them. He never stirred the pot, but never did anything great either.

And he could have gone off into the sunset with his reputation relatively intact. But his clear partiality for the McCain campaign and his disdain for truth-seekers may put him in the same boat with Colin Powell.

I agree with this post 100%. I adored Tim Russett. Tom Brokaw lets his partisanship show through constantly. I have been watching Meet the Press for almost 20 years and I was very sorry when Tom Brokaw stepped in for Tim Russett. There is no comparison. Tim Russet was a superb moderator and left his opinions at the door. Whether he was questioning a Democrat or a Republican, he would never let them get away without answering. I'd see him ask three or four times.

Tom Browkaw is a great disappointment and completely slanted. I'm very sorry he's the moderator for Tuesday night's debate. I wasn't thrill with Gwen Ifill either. She really didn't follow up or push. :(