Media Bias....Partial List of Veep Debate Questions Tonight

[JPK1NH]

Media Bias....Partial List of Veep Debate Questions Tonight

http://jimtreacher.com/archives/001643.html
A partial list of Gwen Ifill's questions for the VP debate

Mayor Palin, Barack Obama is a handsome, charismatic demigod. How many boxes of Kleenex will you need after your crushing loss?

Senator Biden, what is your favorite color? And if you have time for a follow-up question: Why?

Mayor, you talk funny and you own a tanning bed. Why haven't you released Trig's birth certificate?

Senator, have you seen those pictures of Obama in his swim trunks? If not, I have them right here.

Mayor, what are the names, ages, and blood types of all 71 members of the Belgian Senate? And why are you unwilling to admit that your inability to instantly produce any and every fact I demand makes you unfit to stand in the way of history?

Senator, you've spoken at length. Could you please continue?

Mayor, which is your preferred method of stifling dissent, banning books or burning them? Since it's both, please explain how you can deny the accusation that you're a fascist, which I am making now.

PS, just in case you didn't realize that this is something of a joke....it is.....even though this woman should NEVER be the moderator because of her obvious bias and fiscal conflicts due to the fact that she has a pro obama book being released on 1/20/09

[deknow]

regardless if her book is pro or anti obama, the fact that it is partially about obama, has obama's name in the title, and is to be released on inauguration day means that the sales will definitely be greater if obama wins the election. this is a real shame that gwen is doing the moderation.

deknow

[BjornBee]

Not sure who are bigger screw-ups. The people that are in Washington, or the people in the media. It's gotta be close on so many levels. Corruption, bias, stupidity, etc.

[dragonfly]

:D :D
That is hilarious. :)

[sqkcrk]

regardless if her book is pro or anti obama, the fact that it is partially about obama, has obama's name in the title, and is to be released on inauguration day means that the sales will definitely be greater if obama wins the election. this is a real shame that gwen is doing the moderation.

deknow

So deknow, do you now feel that any of the above made a difference in the way Gwen moderated the debate? If so, can you say how?

I didn't watch the whole thing. I went to bed after the first hour. What I saw in the first hour, from Ms. Ifell, I felt, was even handed to both candidates. She's Gwen Ifell, not Bill O'Rielly, so I didn't expect her to go after anyone in Bill's fashion.

I wonder why the commission hasn't asked O'Rielly or Hannity to moderate?

[JPK1NH]

So deknow, do you now feel that any of the above made a difference in the way Gwen moderated the debate? If so, can you say how?

I didn't watch the whole thing. I went to bed after the first hour. What I saw in the first hour, from Ms. Ifell, I felt, was even handed to both candidates. She's Gwen Ifell, not Bill O'Rielly, so I didn't expect her to go after anyone in Bill's fashion.

I wonder why the commission hasn't asked O'Rielly or Hannity to moderate?

She behaved and was more or less impartial because she was under the gun.

She is in a position to benefit in a large way if one candidate wins in Nov and as such should have recused herself from the position.

There is NO WAY she can remain impartial and she was dishonest in failing to tell the debate committee of her situation when she submitted her application.

[Hillside]

She's a journalist and journalists often write books. You'll never find ANYONE who is completely impartial to do this kind of thing, but Ifill's professional enough to make it work for everyone.

She pretty much spent the evening tossing softballs and letting the candidates talk about whatever they wished. She wasn't so much a moderator as a discussion starter. It seemed to work well enough.

[sqkcrk]

She behaved and was more or less impartial because she was under the gun.

She is in a position to benefit in a large way if one candidate wins in Nov and as such should have recused herself from the position.

There is NO WAY she can remain impartial and she was dishonest in failing to tell the debate committee of her situation when she submitted her application.

The book has been known about since back in the spring.

Had she not been producing a book such as she is would she have been out from "under the gun"? How was she under the gun and how did this change her questions?

Was she impartial, "more or less", as you say. In what way was she more impartial? In what way was she less impartial?

"She behaved..." IMO she "behaved" like she always does. Just what I expected of her. I like her. In case you couldn't tell.

Who would you have rather than Gwen?

[sqkcrk]

She's a journalist and journalists often write books. You'll never find ANYONE who is completely impartial to do this kind of thing, but Ifill's professional enough to make it work for everyone.

She pretty much spent the evening tossing softballs and letting the candidates talk about whatever they wished. She wasn't so much a moderator as a discussion starter. It seemed to work well enough.

W/ the format as it was and the person that she is, we got what we got. The format was agreed upon by the two campaigns I believe.