Michelle Malkin reports on the “completely objective” reporter who will “moderate” the vice presidential debate.
My dictionary defines “moderator” as “the nonpartisan presiding officer of a town meeting.” On Thursday, PBS anchor Gwen Ifill will serve as moderator for the first and only vice presidential debate. The stakes are high. The Commission on Presidential Debates, with the assent of the two campaigns, decided not to impose any guidelines on her duties or questions.
But there is nothing “moderate” about where Ifill stands on Barack Obama. She’s so far in the tank for the Democratic presidential candidate, her oxygen delivery line is running out.
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 Jan. 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? “The Breakthrough: Politics and Race in the Age of Obama.” Nonpartisan my foot.
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 Jan. 20, 2009, nobody will be fooled.
As I think about it, even Rush Limbaugh is LESS in the tank for McCain than Ifill is for Obama, as anyone who actually LISTENS to Rush knows. And there is not a chance he will ever be chosen to moderate a vice presidential debate, but the double standard of the media is so enormous that the Left simply can’t see around it. And to George Will, my apologies for suggesting he’d be as unbalanced as Ifill is likely to be. And Hugh Hewitt would be scrupulously fair. But surely the Left would react violently to any of the three as the sole moderator of an important debate, while we’re supposed to accept Ifill as the arbiter of fairness.
What does this mean for Palin? If she merely breaks vaguely even with Biden, it’s a major win, on the order of managing a tie in a boxing match when the ref is obviously against you, and lets your opponent do head-butts without calling them.
Read all of Malkin’s article to get a flavor for how many Obama tattoos Ifill has.