Ya know I have never visited that site. I can at least tolerate (barely) the constant spew of bullshit that comes outta fox news. That Kos site I understand is totally nuts. Though I should really give it chance sometime.
Why don't you address the merits of her criticism? Isn't there a stunning lack of fairness in having this woman pretend to moderate the debate when she is already heavily invested in one candidate, plus has a sizeable financial interest in him winning? Would PBS or any other news organization ever allow this level of conflict with a conservative or republican journalist? Obviously, the last question is purely rhetorical because we know they would never hire a conservative or republican in the first place. As for PBS' supposed objectivity, they do not provide countervailing viewpoints for their own reporters. They usually try to balance the guests, but not the reporter or anchor. Ifill is a typical affirmative action hire. She is not held to the same standards as other journalists, and she seems to regard her own lack of objectivity as a matter of racial privilege. It was foolish of the republicans to agree to her as a moderator, but I suppose they figured the alternative could be even worse.
I am empathetic to the concerns of McCain supporters, but based on her past performance, I do think your fears should be allayed by the fact that she has demonstrated remarkable even handedness in past VP moderation. INO.
More enlightened, tolerant liberals. If you can't defeat a woman's arguments, make fun of her looks or call her a slut. And you wonder why normal people despise liberals?
Very well, let's just say you're an idiot for making that statement about Malkin and avoiding the subject of this thread, and leave it at that.
Doc your sexual yearnings for Malkin and Coulter are well-documented... Now, what do you think about Ifill "moderating" this debate?
oh jeez...There will be plenty of people watching and listening to this bore fest. If she shows any bias at all there will be plenty of little whine bags squealing to high heaven all about itâ¦unlike Malkin who squeals about it (potentially) before the fact. Listen haps...don't worry your pretty little head about all this. It means nothing. You'd do better spending your time preparing for President Barry.
My statement about Malkin is genuine. There is a whole parade of douchebags (Brent Bozell III, Mona Charen, Linda Chavez, Ann Coulter, Larry Elder, Michelle Malkin) that contribute to yahoo editorials. Malkin (and others from that list) has never written anything other than 100% pro right garbage. Whether people like it or not Gwen Ifill (and Jim Lehrer) are respected journalists. If not Gwen or Jim then who? Glenn Beck? Bill O'Reilly? Gwen will do a fine professional debate like she always does and her personal feelings are irrelevant here. She has never shown herself to be a biased hack.
LOL! Fair enough, Doc. You don't want to give a straight answer on the "none of this matters" basis, so be it. And I am preparing for life under Braddah Barry, aka Carter II. Gonna apply for welfare as soon as possible and quit this merit-based rat race ASAP. Life is going to be a lot sweeter across the pond here in Obama's home state.
Utter lie. Whether or not they are "respected journalists" is quite subjective. Why couldn't they find another party to moderate who doesn't have a book to sell that trips over itself in praise of Obama?