VP debate and choice of Moderator?????

[MoonWater]

Date: 10/1/2008 4:02:52 PM
Author: starsapphire
Again, I just wonder what the McCain camp is thinking.....I mean, he picks Palin, great she''s a woman, whohoo.

Then we find out her daughter, who is 17 and not married is preggers.

Great.... Then, Palin has a mentally challenged infant. A VP with an infant, let alone a mentally challenged one, that infant needs it mother, how much mothering is she going to be able to do while running the country?????? Then, we find out that she is ultra conservative, shooting guns, and making speeches in church and all that. I like her (hesitation) but, couldn''t McCain have picked someone a little more seasoned, someone that the press knew about from other campaigns????? I mean, it has been virtually nothing but ''let''s find out about/attack Palin'' for the last month or so. I cringe to find out anything more damaging about her. And that Katie Couric interview. UGH

And now this moderator writing this book. She is so sure Obama is going to be elected Pres, that they are releasing it in the month of the inauguration!!!! No one else sees this???? I think someone in the McCain camp is asleep at the wheel or the Obama camp has infiltrated the McCain camp and is doing evil deeds....

LOL your emoticon placements are cracking me up. I think you should write a conspiracy theory book and release it on the same day as Ifill''s book. You''d rake in millions!

 

[starsapphire]

Wow, I may have just convinced myself that Obama may be the better choice after all.....

 

[Anna0499]

Date: 10/1/2008 3:41:27 PM
Author: EBree

Date: 10/1/2008 3:36:58 PM
Author: IndyGirl22

Date: 10/1/2008 3:35:20 PM

Author: EBree

Date: 10/1/2008 3:29:33 PM

Author: IndyGirl22

I’m sure if the book was anti-Obama there would be an uproar, though.

I''m confused- is Ifill''s book anti-McCain?

No, I''m saying that people are saying it''s a non-issue that it''s pro-Obama by all available accounts. So would it be a non-issue if it were anti-Obama, or pro-McCain for that matter? I think not.

Just because something is pro-Obama does not mean it is anti-McCain. A book that is anti-either candidate would be a much bigger deal.

No one answered my question about how she''d be able to tip the debate to Biden with such a strict format (without being obvious). As I see it, her book is only as big a deal as Fox wants to make it. I mean, the debate hasn''t even taken place and they''re claiming she''ll be biased, just as they (Nancy P.) claimed the questions would be unfair.

C''mon, now.

Obviously, no one said that. Okay, to rephrase my post - I truly believe that if the moderator wrote a book about how McCain has changed politics with his stunning presidential campaign the Dems/liberals would be all over it. I didn''t answer your question about Ifill tipping the debate because I don''t necessarily think she will. Some posts on this thread already show the level of scruntiny that will be able to be applied by both sides afterwards. A more non-partisan moderator would eliminate this speculation.

 

[FrekeChild]

I would have to say I think Obama is already a pretty huge historical figure (for our time), without winning the race. It wasn''t that long ago that African-American people were considered "second class citizens" and not allowed to vote, and now one is very possibly going to be the President of the USA. His name will most certainly be in the history books.

Having said that, her book is probably a good read, but will not be likely to interest any generation but the ones that are witnessing this race. So...I think putting his name in the title is a great way to sell more books.

It''s like myspace books for parents. The problem with them is that they were mostly published after the myspace craze was letting up, and the books became irrelevant.

Having said all of that, I don''t think it matters much. They''ll be given questions, answer them, and it''ll be over. I highly doubt she wants to hurt her career by presenting biased questions. Lets face it, with Palin''s performances so far, if she can make sense in at least one question, she''ll be doing far and above my expectations of her (and I know I''m not the only one) and Gwen''s book will not matter in the slightest.

 

[starsapphire]

If the moderator were writing a book called, Politics in the Age of Palin, would you have an issue with her being the VP debate moderator?????

Would that be a picture book? Because I don''t think you''d have enough substance to write a whole book about that topic. LOL.

I kid, I kid....

OMG, that was a low blow, but VERY funny.....you are baddddddd.....

 

[goobear78]

Date: 10/1/2008 4:21:38 PM
Author: FrekeChild
I would have to say I think Obama is already a pretty huge historical figure (for our time), without winning the race. It wasn't that long ago that African-American people were considered 'second class citizens' and not allowed to vote, and now one is very possibly going to be the President of the USA. His name will most certainly be in the history books.


Having said that, her book is probably a good read, but will not be likely to interest any generation but the ones that are witnessing this race. So...I think putting his name in the title is a great way to sell more books.


It's like myspace books for parents. The problem with them is that they were mostly published after the myspace craze was letting up, and the books became irrelevant.


Having said all of that, I don't think it matters much. They'll be given questions, answer them, and it'll be over. I highly doubt she wants to hurt her career by presenting biased questions. Lets face it, with Palin's performances so far, if she can make sense in at least one question, she'll be doing far and above my expectations of her (and I know I'm not the only one) and Gwen's book will not matter in the slightest.

I agree. Gwen Ifill is a professional journalist. She is not going to risk her campaign going "after" Palin. I feel she will be fair and do her job. Especially since mention of this fox news article, but before as well. I don't know if you've ever seen her, but she's very fair to both sides.

Now if the debate moderator was Keith Olbermann or Shawn Hannity well then, I could agree with either side getting their panties in a bunch.

 

[goobear78]

Just saw Ifill''s reponse to this:

In the Post article by Howard Kurtz, host of CNN''s "Reliable Sources," Ifill responded to criticism over moderating the debate.

"I''m in great demand -- everyone wants to talk to me -- but I''m not speaking for the whole race," Ifill said. "My job is to be a reporter. I cannot be the great interpreter. It''s not my job to be on someone else''s air telling them what black people think."

Ifill told Kurtz that as Obama accepted his party''s nomination for president, a white television reporter asked her: "Aren''t you just blown away by all of this?" She said she was not.

Kurtz also points out that "on one level, Ifill says, she views this moment as the daughter of a black minister who marched in civil rights demonstrations and who she wishes were alive to see what Obama has achieved."

Ifill told Kurtz, "I still don''t know if he''ll be a good president. I''m still capable of looking at his pros and cons in a political sense." Besides, Ifill says, "no one''s ever assumed a white reporter can''t cover a white candidate."

 

[Anna0499]

Date: 10/1/2008 4:44:48 PM
Author: goobear78
Just saw Ifill''s reponse to this:

In the Post article by Howard Kurtz, host of CNN''s ''Reliable Sources,'' Ifill responded to criticism over moderating the debate.

''I''m in great demand -- everyone wants to talk to me -- but I''m not speaking for the whole race,'' Ifill said. ''My job is to be a reporter. I cannot be the great interpreter. It''s not my job to be on someone else''s air telling them what black people think.''

Ifill told Kurtz that as Obama accepted his party''s nomination for president, a white television reporter asked her: ''Aren''t you just blown away by all of this?'' She said she was not.

Kurtz also points out that ''on one level, Ifill says, she views this moment as the daughter of a black minister who marched in civil rights demonstrations and who she wishes were alive to see what Obama has achieved.''

Ifill told Kurtz, ''I still don''t know if he''ll be a good president. I''m still capable of looking at his pros and cons in a political sense.'' Besides, Ifill says, ''no one''s ever assumed a white reporter can''t cover a white candidate.''

Wow - obviously it has NOTHING to do with her race. Didn''t take long for her to bring it up though.

 

[luckystar112]

Date: 10/1/2008 4:49:08 PM
Author: IndyGirl22

Date: 10/1/2008 4:44:48 PM
Author: goobear78
Just saw Ifill''s reponse to this:

In the Post article by Howard Kurtz, host of CNN''s ''Reliable Sources,'' Ifill responded to criticism over moderating the debate.

''I''m in great demand -- everyone wants to talk to me -- but I''m not speaking for the whole race,'' Ifill said. ''My job is to be a reporter. I cannot be the great interpreter. It''s not my job to be on someone else''s air telling them what black people think.''

Ifill told Kurtz that as Obama accepted his party''s nomination for president, a white television reporter asked her: ''Aren''t you just blown away by all of this?'' She said she was not.

Kurtz also points out that ''on one level, Ifill says, she views this moment as the daughter of a black minister who marched in civil rights demonstrations and who she wishes were alive to see what Obama has achieved.''

Ifill told Kurtz, ''I still don''t know if he''ll be a good president. I''m still capable of looking at his pros and cons in a political sense.'' Besides, Ifill says, ''no one''s ever assumed a white reporter can''t cover a white candidate.''

Wow - obviously it has NOTHING to do with her race. Didn''t take long for her to bring it up though.

So she thinks that the reporter asked her the question because she''s black....and that it was inappropriate because it shouldn''t be about race....while she''s writing a book about how Obama''s opening doors for black american''s?
I''m going to have to look up this whole interview, because this little snippet seems weird.

 

[MoonWater]

Date: 10/1/2008 4:21:38 PM
Author: FrekeChild
I would have to say I think Obama is already a pretty huge historical figure (for our time), without winning the race. It wasn''t that long ago that African-American people were considered ''second class citizens'' and not allowed to vote, and now one is very possibly going to be the President of the USA. His name will most certainly be in the history books.

Having said that, her book is probably a good read, but will not be likely to interest any generation but the ones that are witnessing this race. So...I think putting his name in the title is a great way to sell more books.

It''s like myspace books for parents. The problem with them is that they were mostly published after the myspace craze was letting up, and the books became irrelevant.

I disagree, because this is about a historic event in the United States. I think a future generation may discover this book while researching this time period. Assuming it''s well written, I''d imagine many future students citing her in their papers.

 

[goobear78]

Date: 10/1/2008 4:53:22 PM
Author: luckystar112

So she thinks that the reporter asked her the question because she''s black....and that it was inappropriate because it shouldn''t be about race....while she''s writing a book about how Obama''s opening doors for black american''s?

I''m going to have to look up this whole interview, because this little snippet seems weird.

Here''s the link the the article on CNN.com:

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/01/gwen.ifill/index.html

Whose calling my snippets weird huh? LOL.

 

[swimmer]

The last time Iffil was a controversy in the news, it was because she was accused of being too soft when interviewing Condoleza Rice about her role in the start of the Iraq war. As moon said, hard to imagine Iffil being accused of partisanship, she is a straight shooter.

ETA: but wouldn't any of the numerous old white men who normally do these debates be seen as biased since Biden is an old white guy? I mean if Couric is seen as "mean" then who on earth can moderate the darn thing? Someone from Access Hollywood?

 

[MoonWater]

Date: 10/1/2008 5:49:58 PM
Author: swimmer
The last time Iffil was a controversy in the news, it was because she was accused of being too soft when interviewing Condoleza Rice about her role in the start of the Iraq war. As moon said, hard to imagine Iffil being accused of partisanship, she is a straight shooter.

ETA: but wouldn''t any of the numerous old white men who normally do these debates be seen as biased since Biden is an old white guy? I mean if Couric is seen as ''mean'' then who on earth can moderate the darn thing? Someone from Access Hollywood?

LMAO! How about O''Reilly? Didn''t he use to host Inside Edition?

 

[Anna0499]

Date: 10/1/2008 5:49:58 PM
Author: swimmer
The last time Iffil was a controversy in the news, it was because she was accused of being too soft when interviewing Condoleza Rice about her role in the start of the Iraq war. As moon said, hard to imagine Iffil being accused of partisanship, she is a straight shooter.

ETA: but wouldn''t any of the numerous old white men who normally do these debates be seen as biased since Biden is an old white guy? I mean if Couric is seen as ''mean'' then who on earth can moderate the darn thing? Someone from Access Hollywood?

No, I don''t think her race has anything to do with the criticism of her moderating the VP debate. The fact that she brings it up right away is ridiculous IMHO. If support for one candidate doesn''t matter then why not Glenn Beck?

 

[Kaleigh]

Date: 10/1/2008 5:53:02 PM
Author: MoonWater

Date: 10/1/2008 5:49:58 PM
Author: swimmer
The last time Iffil was a controversy in the news, it was because she was accused of being too soft when interviewing Condoleza Rice about her role in the start of the Iraq war. As moon said, hard to imagine Iffil being accused of partisanship, she is a straight shooter.

ETA: but wouldn''t any of the numerous old white men who normally do these debates be seen as biased since Biden is an old white guy? I mean if Couric is seen as ''mean'' then who on earth can moderate the darn thing? Someone from Access Hollywood?

LMAO! How about O''Reilly? Didn''t he use to host Inside Edition?

No that was Pat O''Brien....

 

[MoonWater]

Date: 10/1/2008 6:26:52 PM
Author: Kaleigh

Date: 10/1/2008 5:53:02 PM
Author: MoonWater

Date: 10/1/2008 5:49:58 PM
Author: swimmer
The last time Iffil was a controversy in the news, it was because she was accused of being too soft when interviewing Condoleza Rice about her role in the start of the Iraq war. As moon said, hard to imagine Iffil being accused of partisanship, she is a straight shooter.

ETA: but wouldn't any of the numerous old white men who normally do these debates be seen as biased since Biden is an old white guy? I mean if Couric is seen as 'mean' then who on earth can moderate the darn thing? Someone from Access Hollywood?

LMAO! How about O'Reilly? Didn't he use to host Inside Edition?

No that was Pat O'Brien....

A Current Affair! I always screw it up. I think FI is so annoyed with me at this point because I always, without fail, say Inside Edition. What do I have against that show? LOL

Ha, I just checked his wiki page, he DID host Inside Edition. I'm going to rub that in FI's face now.

 

[MoonWater]

Hmm, so much for rubbing it in his face. Apparently I use to say A Current Affair all the time when in fact it had always been Inside Edition. I finally get it right this time and Kaleigh plants seeds of doubt!!

 

[goobear78]

So here''s the AP (Associated Press) story on this "controversy" and Ifill responds. What I find really interesting is that she said she hasn''t even written her chapter on Obama yet. For those of you who are interested (and to prevent weird snippets here''s the whole article below:

NEW YORK — PBS journalist Gwen Ifill, moderator of the upcoming vice presidential debate, dismissed conservative questions about her impartiality because she is writing a book that includes material on Barack Obama.

Ifill said Wednesday that she hasn''t even written her chapter on Obama for the book "The Breakthrough: Politics and Race in the Age of Obama," which is to be published by Doubleday on Jan. 20, 2009, the day a new president is inaugurated.

"I''ve got a pretty long track record covering politics and news, so I''m not particularly worried that one-day blog chatter is going to destroy my reputation," Ifill said. "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."

The day before the Joe Biden-Sarah Palin debate, columnist Michelle Malkin wrote in the New York Post about Ifill''s book, saying "she''s so far in the tank for the Democratic presidential candidate, her oxygen delivery line is running out."

In its online description of the book, Doubleday says that Ifill "surveys the American political landscape, shedding new light on the impact of Barack Obama''s stunning presidential campaign and introducing the emerging young African American politicians forging a bold new path to political power."

The McCain campaign found out about Ifill''s book in the last day or so, a spokesman said.

Ifill said Obama''s story, which she has yet to write, is only a small part of the book, which discusses how politics in the black community have changed since the civil rights era. Among those subjects is Colin Powell, secretary of state in the Bush administration.

The host of PBS'' "Washington Week" and senior correspondent on "The NewsHour" said she did not tell the Commission on Presidential Debates about the book. The commission had no immediate comment when contacted by The Associated Press. A spokeswoman for John McCain''s campaign did not immediately return phone and e-mail messages.

Ifill''s resume includes jobs at The New York Times, the Washington Post and NBC News. She moderated the 2004 vice presidential debate between Dick Cheney and John Edwards.

She said it was the publisher, not herself, who set the Inauguration Day release date. It will be released then whether Obama wins or loses.

Although Malkin raised the topic of Ifill''s impartiality the day before the debate, the PBS journalist said that Time magazine noted she was writing a book in August, and that it has been available for pre-sale on Amazon.com. The book also is mentioned in a Sept. 4 interview she gave the Washington Post.

Ifill questions why people assume that her book will be favorable toward Obama.

"Do you think they made the same assumptions about Lou Cannon (who is white) when he wrote his book about Reagan?" said Ifill, who is black. Asked if there were racial motives at play, she said, "I don''t know what it is. I find it curious."

 

[Anna0499]

Date: 10/1/2008 7:45:48 PM
Author: goobear78
So here's the AP (Associated Press) story on this 'controversy' and Ifill responds. What I find really interesting is that she said she hasn't even written her chapter on Obama yet. For those of you who are interested (and to prevent weird snippets here's the whole article below:

NEW YORK — PBS journalist Gwen Ifill, moderator of the upcoming vice presidential debate, dismissed conservative questions about her impartiality because she is writing a book that includes material on Barack Obama.

Ifill said Wednesday that she hasn't even written her chapter on Obama for the book 'The Breakthrough: Politics and Race in the Age of Obama,' which is to be published by Doubleday on Jan. 20, 2009, the day a new president is inaugurated.

'I've got a pretty long track record covering politics and news, so I'm not particularly worried that one-day blog chatter is going to destroy my reputation,' Ifill said. '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.'

The day before the Joe Biden-Sarah Palin debate, columnist Michelle Malkin wrote in the New York Post about Ifill's book, saying 'she's so far in the tank for the Democratic presidential candidate, her oxygen delivery line is running out.'

In its online description of the book, Doubleday says that Ifill 'surveys the American political landscape, shedding new light on the impact of Barack Obama's stunning presidential campaign and introducing the emerging young African American politicians forging a bold new path to political power.'

The McCain campaign found out about Ifill's book in the last day or so, a spokesman said.

Ifill said Obama's story, which she has yet to write, is only a small part of the book, which discusses how politics in the black community have changed since the civil rights era. Among those subjects is Colin Powell, secretary of state in the Bush administration.

The host of PBS' 'Washington Week' and senior correspondent on 'The NewsHour' said she did not tell the Commission on Presidential Debates about the book. The commission had no immediate comment when contacted by The Associated Press. A spokeswoman for John McCain's campaign did not immediately return phone and e-mail messages.

Ifill's resume includes jobs at The New York Times, the Washington Post and NBC News. She moderated the 2004 vice presidential debate between Dick Cheney and John Edwards.

She said it was the publisher, not herself, who set the Inauguration Day release date. It will be released then whether Obama wins or loses.

Although Malkin raised the topic of Ifill's impartiality the day before the debate, the PBS journalist said that Time magazine noted she was writing a book in August, and that it has been available for pre-sale on Amazon.com. The book also is mentioned in a Sept. 4 interview she gave the Washington Post.

Ifill questions why people assume that her book will be favorable toward Obama.

'Do you think they made the same assumptions about Lou Cannon (who is white) when he wrote his book about Reagan?' said Ifill, who is black. Asked if there were racial motives at play, she said, 'I don't know what it is. I find it curious.'

This lady is ridiculous - she doesn't know why people assume her book will be favorable toward Obama? Perhaps because they've read her other works?!

She seems bound and determined to attribute people's doubts based on her race instead of her politics. If her book isn't pro-Obama then her publisher has a lot of explaining to do with their promos. It is obvious that the chapter about Obama has not been written because she's waiting for election results. I would assume that parts of her book that have been written mention Obama - I don't know any writers who designate the title of their book based on one chapter. I also think it's hilarious that she has already dubbed this "The Age of Obama." Give me a break. Powell was a captain in the Army in Vietnam when Obama was born!

 

[SarahLovesJS]

Just wanted to say she may be writing a pro-Obama book/have written a pro-Obama book and stand to benefit from Obama winning - HOWEVER! I feel like she did a good job.

 

[Anna0499]

Date: 10/3/2008 4:43:54 PM
Author: SarahLovesJS
Just wanted to say she may be writing a pro-Obama book/have written a pro-Obama book and stand to benefit from Obama winning - HOWEVER! I feel like she did a good job.

Ehhh I think she did a decent job, but she didn''t really do anything at all. She just recited the questions and let them answer however they wanted and then moved on. *Anyone* could''ve done that. I wish she would''ve pushed them more.

 

[purrfectpear]

After a bunch of people prejudged her on her impartiality, I don''t think she could push much. After all, who would she have pushed...Biden answered the questions, Sarah didn''t. If she went after Sarah then everyone would have accused her of being pro-Obama.

I think she did fine. I don''t expect a moderator to comment on answers or demand them. A question reader works for me.

 

[MoonWater]

Date: 10/3/2008 5:09:21 PM
Author: purrfectpear
After a bunch of people prejudged her on her impartiality, I don''t think she could push much. After all, who would she have pushed...Biden answered the questions, Sarah didn''t. If she went after Sarah then everyone would have accused her of being pro-Obama.

I think she did fine. I don''t expect a moderator to comment on answers or demand them. A question reader works for me.

Exactly! She knew what she was doing.

 

[Anna0499]

It would've certainly eliminated some of the "she didn't answer any questions" complaints being thrown around now, although she answered just as straight-forward as Obama or McCain did last week IMHO. And the fact that she "couldn't" push EITHER candidate is the exact problem with her being the moderator in the first place. Pick a non-partisan moderator and they could've pushed all they wanted.

ETA: No one wants commentary from a moderator, but keeping BOTH candidates on track would've been appreciated.

 

[Loves Vintage]

Date: 10/3/2008 5:22:19 PM
Author: IndyGirl22
It would've certainly eliminated some of the 'she didn't answer any questions' complaints being thrown around now, although she answered just as straight-forward as Obama or McCain did last week IMHO. And the fact that she 'couldn't' push EITHER candidate is the exact problem with her being the moderator in the first place. Pick a non-partisan moderator and they could've pushed all they wanted.


ETA: No one wants commentary from a moderator, but keeping BOTH candidates on track would've been appreciated.

I agree with PP's assessment. I mean really, no moderator could have pushed Palin to answer a question. She wasn't going to answer a question. She stated as much in the near the beginning of the debate.

I think Palin did so poorly in her tv interviews because the McCain people were attempting to craft her into an appropriate VP candidate, telling her what she could and could not do, she didn't know what the right thing to say was, and she wound up saying a lot of nonsense in an effort to avoid saying the wrong thing. Of course, Sarah Palin can name a few newspapers. She wrote an op-ed in the NY Times for goodness sakes, but she was so fearful of saying the wrong thing, that she tried to dance around the question, which did not play very well.

For the debates, she was obviously told to rattle off her talking points, regardless of what the question was. That's why she said: "And I may not answer the questions that either the moderator or you want to hear, but I'm going to talk straight to the American people and let them know my track record also." She had no intention of answering any question directly, unless it coincided with her talking points. She knows what an Achilles heel is, for goodness sakes, but she didn't know what would be an acceptable response so she just didn't answer the question.

She is not stupid, but she is a puppet right now. No moderator was going to get her to answer the questions, and if they did, you betcha' they would be attacked for it today.

ETA: It seems a bit unfair to blame the moderator for Palin's failure to answer the questions. I mean, I think the responsibility to answer questions lies with the debater.

 

[Anna0499]

Date: 10/3/2008 5:39:08 PM
Author: Loves Vintage

I agree with PP's assessment. I mean really, no moderator could have pushed Palin to answer a question. She wasn't going to answer a question. She stated as much in the near the beginning of the debate.

I think Palin did so poorly in her tv interviews because the McCain people were attempting to craft her into an appropriate VP candidate, telling her what she could and could not do, she didn't know what the right thing to say was, and she wound up saying a lot of nonsense in an effort to avoid saying the wrong thing. Of course, Sarah Palin can name a few newspapers. She wrote an op-ed in the NY Times for goodness sakes, but she was so fearful of saying the wrong thing, that she tried to dance around the question, which did not play very well.

For the debates, she was obviously told to rattle off her talking points, regardless of what the question was. That's why she said: 'And I may not answer the questions that either the moderator or you want to hear, but I'm going to talk straight to the American people and let them know my track record also.' She had no intention of answering any question directly, unless it coincided with her talking points. She knows what an Achilles heel is, for goodness sakes, but she didn't know what would be an acceptable response so she just didn't answer the question.

She is not stupid, but she is a puppet right now. No moderator was going to get her to answer the questions, and if they did, you betcha' they would be attacked for it today.

ETA: It seems a bit unfair to blame the moderator for Palin's failure to answer the questions. I mean, I think the responsibility to answer questions lies with the debater.

No ones blaming Ifill for anything (at least I'm not); I think Palin did GREAT, so I actually am not that upset that she wasn't pushed. I am just sick of hearing the comments about how she didn't answer the questions; Biden didn't tell *me* or my Rep friends anything, so I think it depends which side you're on to begin with. It's as if people have never watched a political debate before - it's all strategy and if they expected something else then they haven't been paying attention. The Presidential debate gave us no answers (sadly) so I didn't expect this one to, either. She actually said, "I may not answer the questions the way you or the moderator want to hear, but I'm going to talk to the American people[.]" I said Ifill did a "decent" job - not amazing, not poor.

 

[Loves Vintage]

Date: 10/3/2008 5:53:02 PM
Author: IndyGirl22

Date: 10/3/2008 5:39:08 PM

Author: Loves Vintage


I agree with PP's assessment. I mean really, no moderator could have pushed Palin to answer a question. She wasn't going to answer a question. She stated as much in the near the beginning of the debate.


I think Palin did so poorly in her tv interviews because the McCain people were attempting to craft her into an appropriate VP candidate, telling her what she could and could not do, she didn't know what the right thing to say was, and she wound up saying a lot of nonsense in an effort to avoid saying the wrong thing. Of course, Sarah Palin can name a few newspapers. She wrote an op-ed in the NY Times for goodness sakes, but she was so fearful of saying the wrong thing, that she tried to dance around the question, which did not play very well.


For the debates, she was obviously told to rattle off her talking points, regardless of what the question was. That's why she said: 'And I may not answer the questions that either the moderator or you want to hear, but I'm going to talk straight to the American people and let them know my track record also.' She had no intention of answering any question directly, unless it coincided with her talking points. She knows what an Achilles heel is, for goodness sakes, but she didn't know what would be an acceptable response so she just didn't answer the question.


She is not stupid, but she is a puppet right now. No moderator was going to get her to answer the questions, and if they did, you betcha' they would be attacked for it today.


ETA: It seems a bit unfair to blame the moderator for Palin's failure to answer the questions. I mean, I think the responsibility to answer questions lies with the debater.

No ones blaming Ifill for anything (at least I'm not); I think Palin did GREAT, so I actually am not that upset that she wasn't pushed. I am just sick of hearing the comments about how she didn't answer the questions; Biden didn't tell *me* or my Rep friends anything, so I think it depends which side you're on to begin with. It's as if people have never watched a political debate before - it's all strategy and if they expected something else then they haven't been paying attention. The Presidential debate gave us no answers (sadly) so I didn't expect this one to, either. She actually said, 'I may not answer the questions the way you or the moderator want to hear, but I'm going to talk to the American people[.]' I said Ifill did a 'decent' job - not amazing, not poor.

According to CNN and NY Times, she said:

'And I may not answer the questions that either the moderator or you want to hear, but I'm going to talk straight to the American people and let them know my track record also.'

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/02/debate.transcript/

http://elections.nytimes.com/2008/president/debates/transcripts/vice-presidential-debate.html

I don't recall what she said; I just copied and pasted. I do, however, know she didn't answer the questions asked.

 

[luckystar112]

Date: 10/3/2008 6:33:48 PM
Author: Loves Vintage

Date: 10/3/2008 5:53:02 PM
Author: IndyGirl22

Date: 10/3/2008 5:39:08 PM

Author: Loves Vintage


I agree with PP's assessment. I mean really, no moderator could have pushed Palin to answer a question. She wasn't going to answer a question. She stated as much in the near the beginning of the debate.


I think Palin did so poorly in her tv interviews because the McCain people were attempting to craft her into an appropriate VP candidate, telling her what she could and could not do, she didn't know what the right thing to say was, and she wound up saying a lot of nonsense in an effort to avoid saying the wrong thing. Of course, Sarah Palin can name a few newspapers. She wrote an op-ed in the NY Times for goodness sakes, but she was so fearful of saying the wrong thing, that she tried to dance around the question, which did not play very well.


For the debates, she was obviously told to rattle off her talking points, regardless of what the question was. That's why she said: 'And I may not answer the questions that either the moderator or you want to hear, but I'm going to talk straight to the American people and let them know my track record also.' She had no intention of answering any question directly, unless it coincided with her talking points. She knows what an Achilles heel is, for goodness sakes, but she didn't know what would be an acceptable response so she just didn't answer the question.


She is not stupid, but she is a puppet right now. No moderator was going to get her to answer the questions, and if they did, you betcha' they would be attacked for it today.


ETA: It seems a bit unfair to blame the moderator for Palin's failure to answer the questions. I mean, I think the responsibility to answer questions lies with the debater.

No ones blaming Ifill for anything (at least I'm not); I think Palin did GREAT, so I actually am not that upset that she wasn't pushed. I am just sick of hearing the comments about how she didn't answer the questions; Biden didn't tell *me* or my Rep friends anything, so I think it depends which side you're on to begin with. It's as if people have never watched a political debate before - it's all strategy and if they expected something else then they haven't been paying attention. The Presidential debate gave us no answers (sadly) so I didn't expect this one to, either. She actually said, 'I may not answer the questions the way you or the moderator want to hear, but I'm going to talk to the American people[.]' I said Ifill did a 'decent' job - not amazing, not poor.

According to CNN and NY Times, she said:

'And I may not answer the questions that either the moderator or you want to hear, but I'm going to talk straight to the American people and let them know my track record also.'

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/02/debate.transcript/

http://elections.nytimes.com/2008/president/debates/transcripts/vice-presidential-debate.html

I don't recall what she said; I just copied and pasted. I do, however, know she didn't answer the questions asked.

LV, they BOTH got it wrong, and I'd say that's a pretty big mistake as the sentence means something completely different when you leave out those two words.

Here is a video of that part of the debate..fast forward to 5:10.

Indy is correct.

ETA: It actually pisses me off a little bit. I'm going to email them and see if they fix it.