She's a backer of Obama, and that's that.
Posted on 10/01/2008 11:43:07 PM PDT by KJC1
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."
---snip---
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."
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
When all else fails...Pull the card...
Yeah, that’s what stood out to me too.
BUMP......wishing the outrage would rise to the level of a firestorm.....
Exactly, we know Ifill's a partisan liberal Democrat and that's bad enough, but now Ifill has been shown to have a financial interest in Obama's success, that's a step too far.
A poster on another site posited that Sarah, first thing should congratulate Ifill on her new book: The Breakthrough: Politics and Race in the Age of Obama.
I thought this was a wonderful idea that I'd love to see.
Notice Ifill suddenly tranforms into "The host of PBS' "Washington Week" and senior correspondent on "The NewsHour" when it boils down to the most important fact of the whole contraversy.
Ifill failed to inform the Commission on Presidential Debates about the book, I find THAT "curious".
Let’s have Ann Coulter or Michelle Malkin moderate the next McCain/Obama debate and see how the libbies cry.
They should be treated as no less partial than Gwen Ifill, whose book is clearly a conflict of interest.
I know these types.
They are black, and they hate patriotic white American people simply because they exist.
A caller on the radio today reminded the audience that Ifill used one of her shows as a vehicle to "feel sorry" for blacks who are violent criminals, and she also used the time to "blame whites" for the problems.
She is just another irresponsible black racist who is no different than Malcolm X or Michelle Obama in mentality.
She threw a tantrum on "Meet The Press" over the Don Imus controversy by claiming the only reason that Imus was sorry for what he said is because he was caught in the process.
Yet, I cannot find a single clip of that woman denouncing Jeremiah Wright for his BLACK RACISM AND HOSTILITY toward whites. I cannot find a single article where that woman attacked Obama for hanging around a Black Racist Organization called "Trinity United."
Why doesn't this woman denounce the racism coming out of Obama and his buddies?
Because she favors the advancement of blacks no matter how evil or insidious they are.
That is why Ifill is a black racist POS.
Source:
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/04/15/imus-ifill/
Call it what it is. An ETHICS charge since she stands to profit if Obama is innaugurated on Jan 20th, 2009.
This woman insults our intelligence! How many copies of that book are going to sell if B Hussein Obama is not elected? Ten? She should be bounced from the debate forthwith.
Playing the race card already? I find it curious that this bee-otch even has a job in the MSM. Could there be racial motives at play?
The proof is not in the pudding, Gwen; the proof is in your first deception; and by which we must now ask; how many more? How does one now judge your 'professionalism' - without first questioning/doubting it.
How can we be sure, that you have not compromised the integrity of this debate in some other fashion. . .Truth is we cannot be sure.
And now that Gwen is pulling a victim card out of the pack; only compounds the problem; while giving even more color to Gwen's perspective. Unfortunately.
(Loved Britt Hume, offering confidence in Gwen's professionalism as he knows her - worked with her - what, twenty years ago?)
Do not know who she was then; certainly can recoginze who/what Gwen is today.
No, your hubris, arrogance and stupidity has already destroyed your reputation. The chatter is just crowd talk watching the ambulances pull up after a car wreck.
Although, she did talk about her reputation, not her good name. If you Clintonsize her statement, maybe she has a point. She had a reputation, and it's not a good one.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.