Ravi
Diamond Member
There are several of us here that think we could do a better job at running the country.just once, i'd like the opportunity to vote for the greater of two goods rather than the lesser of two evils.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
There are several of us here that think we could do a better job at running the country.just once, i'd like the opportunity to vote for the greater of two goods rather than the lesser of two evils.
gee, that's a tough question. <flips coin>
nope.
Ain't that the truthjust once, i'd like the opportunity to vote for the greater of two goods rather than the lesser of two evils.
Well Gem? Was your outrage proved by the debate?
Larkin Wrote:
Absolutely, Larkin, absolutely. Please remember, I never stated that I did not believe she could be professional...only that she never should have been placed in the position in the first place due to her professional and financial stake in the outcome of this election.
When you are being chosen for something it is YOUR job to reveal anything that may indicate bias or anything inappropriate that could cause trouble for those who vet you. While it is the job of the vetters, in this case the debate commission, to remember and investigate Ifill's book, it was, first and foremost, IFILL's responsibility to be upfront with the commission about the fact that she was writing a book that some may view as affecting her impartiality.
She did not fully disclose vital information about herself, and therefore, SHOULD have ruled herself an inappropriate choice.
The bottom line is, just because she did an ok job, doesn't mean she should have been there in the first place. What I truly love...is how people want to say that because she didn't come out and fawn all over Biden...it somehow makes it ok. If the shoe had been on the other foot she never would have been there in the first place, and everyone knows that...whether they'll admit it or not.
Well good. She did an "ok job". So all your bullshit outrage was unfounded. Of course if Palin had tanked it would be "all the moderators fault".
And nice job playing the strawman. Its not that she "didn't fawn over Biden, and that makes it ok", its that she treated them equally, and THAT makes it ok.
If the shoe had been on the other foot? Oh, so you think Democrats would have whined and cried, but Republicans just stuck it up and played it cool? Or Democrats would have forced a change, but for some reason Republicans didn't because they are so confident and collected?
Man I remember when you weren't so much of a partisan hack.
I'm not sure why everyone assumes it will be a book fawning over Obama. The objective and level-headed statement I quoted is exactly why she should be moderator and McCain said:Ifill said that as the daughter of a minister who marched in civil rights demonstrations, she recognized the historic nature of Obama's candidacy. But, Ifill said, "I still don't know if he'll be a good president. I'm still capable of looking at his pros and cons in a political sense."
"I think that Gwen Ifill is a professional, and I think she will do a totally objective job because she is a highly-respected professional,"