Michelle blogged on this yesterday … HotAir this morning. Oh Brother. Imagine, if you will ladies and gentlemen, a debate moderated by Rush Limbaugh … ok, maybe Sean Hannity, ok maybe … never mind.
“Instead, as Michelle Malkin notes, the CPD has chosen Gwen Ifill, the PBS host and author of an upcoming book on Barack Obama scheduled for publication on Inauguration Day, to moderate the debate between Sarah Palin and Joe Biden:”
And here’s a portion from Michelle’s post. Like the magazine cover?
“She recently penned a fawning cover story on the Obamas for Essence magazine that earned much buzz. The title? “The Obamas: Portrait of an American Family.” A sample of Ifill’s hard-hitting investigative journalism, illustrated with Kennedyesque photos of the Obamas and children posing at home on the backporch and by the piano:”






A clear conflict of interest, she certainly has a financial interest in Obama winning the election.
-Erik
Like that’s going to stop them??
The history of the Democratic party can be trailed through such august bodies and personages as Tammany Hall, the Pendergast machine and Huey P. Long.
Obviously having written a book about Obama paints her as biased, but the difference between her and Rush or Hannity is that they hate. They don’t prop up their candidate, they hate the other side. This wasn’t an attack book on McCain that she wrote. That’s the difference. Again, not unbiased, but certainly not like Rush or Hannity.
Advocating vigorously is not hate, Brian. Nor is emphatically disagreeing with the political and policy positions of the opposition. Accusing the opposition of “hate” is a weak excuse of an argument, an ad hominem assault meant to dehumanize the target of the accusation while refusing to deal with the substance of their positions.
Contrast Limbaugh with, say, Rhandi Rhodes “jokes” about assassinating Bush or Craig Kilborn’s “Snipers wanted” bit.
Of course it was the demo’s and the Kos gang who were in an uproar about apearing on Fox. Hey, goose meet well …