How Can Gwen Ifill Possibly Be Fair?

As if we needed more proof that the media is totally in the tank for the Obamessiah, here's a Michelle Malkin column detailing the EXTREME conflicts of interest that the moderator of tomorrow's Veep debate between Moose-Slayer and Dr. Teeth, Gwen Ifill of PBS, has with regards to Obama.

First some background: Ifill hosts PBS's "Washington Week in Review" and I've enjoyed the show for quite a while even though it's just Beltway liberals from big Treason Media outlets spewing their liberal biases to each other. (I guess I view it as a comedy about people with either so little self-knowledge or such utter contempt for their viewers, they believe they're actually being objective journalists.) However, as I noted in "The Moose-Slayer Cometh!", after Palin's speech, "The PBS crew sounds depressed that she did so well." Don't just take my word for Ifill's sour demeanor, watch for yourself:



I figured she was just having typical liberal angst*, but as Malkin details, she has more invested than even I was aware of:

In an imaginary world where liberal journalists are held to the same standards as everyone else, Ifill would be required to make a full disclosure at the start of the debate. She would be required to turn to the cameras and tell the national audience that she has a book coming out on January 20, 2009 – a date that just happens to coincide with the inauguration of the next president of the United States.

The title of Ifill’s book? “Breakthrough: Politics and Race in the Age of Obama.” Nonpartisan my foot.

Ifill’s publisher, Random House, is already busy hyping the book with YouTube clips of Ifill heaping praise on her subjects, including Obama and Obama-endorsing Mass. Governor Deval Patrick.

Ifill and her publisher are banking on an Obama/Biden win to buoy her book sales. The moderator expected to treat both sides fairly has grandiosely declared this the “Age of Obama.” Can you imagine a right-leaning journalist writing a book about the “stunning” McCain campaign and its “bold” path to reform timed for release on Inauguration Day – and then expecting a slot as a moderator for the nation’s sole vice presidential debate?

Despite the protestations of her colleagues that she will be fair, Ifill has appeared on numerous radio and TV talk shows over the past several months to cash in on her access to the Obama campaign. 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.”

During the Democratic National Convention, Ifill offered her neutral analysis before Michelle Obama’s speech on NBC News: “A lot of people have never seen anything that looks like a Michelle Obama before. She’s educated, she’s beautiful, she’s tall, she tells you what she thinks and they hope that she can tell a story about Barack Obama and about herself…”

Like Obama, Ifill, who is black, is quick to play the race card at the first sign of criticism. In an interview with the Washington Post a few weeks ago, she carped: “[N]o one’s ever assumed a white reporter can’t cover a white candidate.”

It’s not the color of your skin, sweetie. It’s the color of your politics. Perhaps Ifill will be able to conceal it this week. But if the “stunning” “Breakthrough” she’s rooting for comes to pass on January 20, 2009, nobody will be fooled.

Crikey! Is this for reals? Someone on the Debates Commission thought it would be OK for someone with a vested interest in one of the candidates success to oversee this cage match?!?

The stakes are already pretty high as the conventional wisdom is that Moose-Slayer will do a face plant against the slick plagiarist from Deleware - Palin's been weak in interviews and the idiots at Team McCain HQ have kept her so under wraps that a "Free Sarah!" movement has erupted in the conservative media - and a poor showing will be devastating to McCain's chances for any substantive gaffes will be conflated with the smear campaign they've been running for the past month-plus into a deafening cry of "UNQUALIFIED!!! UNWORTHY!!!"

I've got a post in the works for tomorrow which shows just how frightening Obama's network of terrorists is and that for all the media spin and audience projection, he is the most dangerous and radical person to get near the levers of power and horrible consequences for America are in store if he wins the Election. Given McCain's lack of fire to fight his liberal pals and Palin's wet-behind-the-earsness, the debate was seen as a pretty big deal and with the moderator clearly too invested in the outcome of the race (as in foot, not color), the fix seems ever more in.


* I also see that on the 2nd night of the RNC, I had these observations about Ifill:

• Gwen Ifill is giving Tucker Bounds, McCain's campaign spokesman, the third degree that she didn't give her friends at the DNC last week. How am I not surprised that suddenly their journalistic teeth will are now out? She's asking if Palin's nomination is about to be scrapped since they've slung all the mud Fuhrer Obamessiah demands of them and she's obviously not worthy according to them. Keep it up, Treason Mediaers - the backlash will be stunning if I know the decency of the general public.

• OK, I'm back, it's perhaps 20 minutes later and a dour Gwen Ifill is asking someone else if Sarah Palin is a drag and to be tossed overboard. What media bias?

I had no idea this was coming or I would've said something them. Yeesh...chalk up Gwen Ifill in the Obama Compulsive Disorder positive column.

ADDITIONAL THOUGHTS: The lineup of moderators was known long ago, so why is this just coming out two days before the debate? Why didn't Team McCain move to have Ifill removed for her obvious conflicts? Imagine it this way: If Brit Hume had a book slated to drop on Inauguration Day about John McCain, do you think he'd be allowed to moderate a debate? Exactly!

UPDATE: Power Line concurs:

Ifill's position is untenable. She will almost certainly be accused of (a) being unfair to Palin in order to sell her book, (b) being unfair to Biden in order to prevent accusation "a" or (c) both. Either the first of the second accusation will be quite plausible.

Ifill was selected by the Commission on Presidential Debates. In my view, her selection discredits this body. And Ifill's decision to accept the role of debate moderator during this cycle discredits her. In 2012, neither the Commission on Presidential Debates nor Ms. Ifill should play a role in presidential debates.

In case you think a respectable journalist would take pains to avoid sacrificing their all-important credibility, I've got two words for you: Dan. Rather. Four years ago, he threw away his career in order to smear Dubya with forged documents. The means justifies the ends to the Treason Media and perhaps Ifill anticipates becoming the Press Secretary to the Obamessiah after she's become radioactive as a journalist.

As I said above, the fix is in.