digg

Join DiggAbout

The Digg Crew wants to hear your thoughts!
Please take our short survey about Digg and potential feature ideas.

See the original image at huffingtonpost.com —

Ifill: Palin "Blew Me Off"

huffingtonpost.com — She added that Palin decided to "give a stump speech" instead of a debate, and that there's "little a moderator can do" to stop that. Watch:

show profanity settings
expand all
  • Rusty626, on 10/05/2008, -36/+135How can Palin claim to be for women's rights and be so disrespectful to Gwen Ifill? And did you notice how David gregory toally ignored Palin's dis of Ifill? It jst killed him to say anything negative about her at all.
    • Dantewolfe, on 10/05/2008, -5/+37I was wondering if anyone would have the courage to say that Palin didn’t answer the most important issue of the debate concerning the economy – Did McCain support massive deregulation? When asked on SNL Tina Fey said, “No thanks,” Palin in real life just ignored the question.

      What’s great about SNL is now a magnifying glass is going to be put on the very issue the McCain camp thought they could avoid!

      • diggduggjoe, on 10/06/2008, -15/+5Deregulation was not as big an issue as the Fed, Fannie, Freddie and the CRA. The federal government and the Federal Reserve have a lot of blood on their hands. In a free market without politically correct pressure to loan to everyone, most of the bad loans would not have been made. Even allowing for some good old greed, it was the Fed that kept filling the bubble with cheap money that made this huge.

        Though derivatives played a role, I can see how the extreme use of them was demanded by the trillions of dollars of ***** loans. Somehow you needed to cover your share of the crapfest. The shear scale goes back again to the Federal Reserve and their relentless expansion of the money supply. Now we have a solution, expand the money supply some more. WTF?
      • Charlotte_Web, on 10/06/2008, -30/+11We already know that Ifill is in the tank for Obama.

        Ifill also deceived the Debate Commission and the McCain camp by not declaring the fact that she has a financial stake in the outcome of the election through her book deal. It's been estimated that she will make upwards of $300,000 on the book if Obama wins.

        Ifill has ZERO credibility as a journalist.
      • JoeMondo, on 10/06/2008, -10/+18Ifill's book was not a secret. It was known before her selection as moderator.

        McCain camp is just trying to rewrite history because they're losing.
      • Charlotte_Web, on 10/06/2008, -24/+15It wasn't a secret but it was an obscure fact.

        It was Ifill's responsibility to declare the book to the Debate Commission, and she did not. It was Ifill's responsibility to declare her book to the McCain camp before they agreed to her being the moderator, and she did not.

        And as a professional journalist, Ifill knows what a huge conflict of interest this was. She's not some kid fresh out of school who doesn't know any better; she's been a journalist for 27 years.

        Hell, even if it had been on the front page of the New York Times six months ago that Ifill was writing this book, she should never have been named the moderator because of the huge ethical problem here. Ifill stands to make a huge damn pile of money if Obama wins, and virtually nothing if Obama loses.
      • tyho, on 10/06/2008, -12/+10@JoeMondo
        There you go again Joe. In short your uninformed.....and just plain wrong.

        "The host of PBS'"Washington Week" and senior correspondent on "The NewsHour" said she did not tell the Commission on Presidential Debates about the book. The commission had no immediate comment when contacted by The Associated Press."

        Source: http://apnews.myway.com/article/20081001/D93HUHCO1 ...
      • heystoopid, on 10/06/2008, -5/+2Deregulation is a total furphy , the entire financial sector industry in the US collectively lost the plot became self propelled based on the simple fact greed is absolute and the high volume lending created the fiction and illusion of profits which in reality did not exist from circa 2003 onwards. it is as simple as that.
      • nfury8ing, on 10/06/2008, -3/+8So basically, because the committee is too ***** stupid to do a basic wikipedia search on Ifill, it's totally her fault for not saying everything possible about herself.

        Yep. Typical.
      • maybemable, on 10/06/2008, -1/+6So the mccain camp thought "a woman? brilliant."

        wouldn't be the first time.
      • Charlotte_Web, on 10/06/2008, -8/+5@nfury8ing:

        For a person who claims to be doing academic research, how can you be so ignorant of professional ethics?

        That's scary.

        Right off the bat, I would say that any research claims that you make would be highly suspect.
    • john2kx, on 10/06/2008, -10/+12Wait, what? When did Palin claim to be for women's rights?
      • ulmedas, on 10/06/2008, -0/+16She claimed to be a feminist during an interview last week.
      • Charlotte_Web, on 10/06/2008, -15/+7You may be interested to learn that the president of the L.A. chapter of NOW, a life-long Democrat, has endorsed Sarah Palin:

        http://digg.com/2008_us_elections/Head_of_NOW_in_L ...
      • tyho, on 10/06/2008, -8/+6Yeah it's a real stretch for a woman to be for women's rights.

        Unless you consider abortion to be a right, you can count on Palin defending women.
      • poxonyou, on 10/06/2008, -6/+11Charlotte: says a lot about her priorities. Women first even if that person is against everything my organization stands for.
      • Charlotte_Web, on 10/06/2008, -11/+5...except that Palin ISN'T against everything that NOW stands for. Only you Obama shills see it that way.

        Obviously, abortion on demand is one area where they are going to disagree. But,the NOW president lists off a number of reasons why she supports Palin in the video (if you had bothered to watch it).
      • Mejari, on 10/06/2008, -0/+3"Unless you consider abortion to be a right, you can count on Palin defending women."

        or equal pay...

        or being a decent human being towards rape victim (i.e. not making them pay for their own rape kit)

        or the advancement of intelligent women (somehow I think the election of a "folksy, winky, no-answer woman" might set back the advancement of women who are actually qualified).

        So yeah, unless you're for all those things, she's great!
      • tyho, on 10/06/2008, -1/+1@Mejari
        Your post doesn't make any sense, unless of course you can cite where Palin has been against equal pay and mistreating rape victims.

        As far as being intelligent, she clearly is.

        ps. Is English your primary language?
    • barfooz, on 10/06/2008, -0/+23You're really stretching with your first point. Supporting equal rights for women and observing protocol in a debate moderated by a woman are two very different, unrelated things.
    • jinnie, on 10/06/2008, -2/+4i think david gregory was taking pains to not seem overly critical of palin so he wouldn't seem biased. it was a pretty fair assessment.

      i don't think palin blowing off ifill was a personal attack. i forget who just said it (i think it was ifill) but yes, both candidates went into the debates fully aware of what they were going to do/say. biden focused his attacks on mccain not palin, and palin knew she was going to be stumping. after all, that's all she knew how to do going into it, and instead of faltering in speech and sounding like her failed interviews, she blasted through her talking points.
    • Californication, on 10/06/2008, -15/+5Here's a little twist for your mind:

      How can [Ifill] claim to be for women's rights and be so disrespectful to [Sarah Palin]? And did you notice how David gregory toally ignored [Ifill's] dis of [Palin]? It jst killed him to say anything negative about her at all.

      See how that works?

    • thespiff, on 10/06/2008, -0/+8Oh come on, I'm all for womens' rights but believe me I've disrespected my fair share of women. Of course, I've said/done mean things to other dudes too. And Palin disrespects ALL media folks, regardless of gender. So I don't think this is a discrimination thing.
    • Digger1123, on 10/06/2008, -0/+4I bet if it were a man she would have done the exact same thing.
    • RogueIlluminati, on 10/06/2008, -8/+2Here's the thing... When you're in a debate, and the moderator is OBVIOUSLY for the other candidate, it's probably a good bet to ignore her. And when I say obviously, I mean that Ifill has written a book about what the nation WILL be like when Obama wins... I may be wrong, but I was pretty sure a debate moderator was supposed to be an objective party. I guess Americans and American politics don't really want a fair race. Not that you're getting one with two candidates who aren't even eligible for the office that they are running for. McCain was born in Panama before our military base was even built there, and Obama was born in Kenya. People just need to wake up.
    • rootsm3, on 10/06/2008, -1/+2Saran Palin is an *****.
  • Duvie, on 10/05/2008, -22/+166Yep, Rusty's right. Palin dissed Ms. Ifill, The Commission on Presidential Debates, Joe Biden, and the American people. She needs to go back to the Far North and never, ever venture down here again. Her latest comment, a misquote at that, that "there is a special place in hell for women who don't support women" suggests as well that there's another place she can go
    • kcapxis, on 10/06/2008, -18/+8Before you go feeling sorry for the Commission on Presidential Debates, understand that they're an illegal organization dedicated to hijacking the debate process to ensure that not only do Democrats and Republicans continue to be your only supposed choices, but that neither of them actually have to say anything which might make them look bad.

      It was founded by former heads of the Democrat and Republican parties, for chrissakes.

      I guess the point is that it doesn't really matter what happens in the debates. Regardless of who won, we've already lost.
      • EtherGnat, on 10/06/2008, -0/+13I see the inherent flaws in the current debate system, but what's "illegal" about it? It seems to me anybody could set up a debate that felt like it, and that candidates are free to agree to or refuse any events they want.

        Not arguing, I'm legitimately curious what your view is.
      • kcapxis, on 10/07/2008, -0/+0I'm glad you asked.

        It is illegal because it is independently financed. Federal law prohibits corporate contributions in connection with federal election campaigns. Organizations such as GE, Philip Morris, and Anheuser-Busch throw huge wads of cash at the CPD every year, which should boil the blood of every liberty-loving American. The League of Women Voters, which managed the Presidential debates for decades before the Republican and Democratic parties spun off the CPD, was non-partisan, publicly-financed, and allowed third parties. For so long as the CPD maintains the debates there is literally a zero percent chance that any third party will ever be allowed on the stage.

        Not only is it illegal, but it flies directly in the face of what our nation was founded upon. Our allowing something like the CPD to hijack these debates was a large step backwards in our experiment in democracy. Why would a candidate come to the debate you, the League of Women Voters, or anyone else has set up when they have one run by their own people that is privately-financed, requires no real negotiations, and guarantees that you won't be asked an even remotely difficult question?
    • streak, on 10/06/2008, -3/+31I thought Ifill did a very subpar job as the moderator. She could basically have phoned in her performance, and in this clip, Ifill basically "blows off" her responsibility. The very first time Palin didn't answer the question, Ifill should have said, "No one has suggested you answer the questions the way we want, but you do need to answer the questions." And at, say, 30 seconds into her response, if it seemed Palin was still going to avoid answering, Ifill should have interrupted to push Palin for an answer.

      My own opinion: Ifill was neutered by the questions about her book that the RNC raised the day before the debate. Even though the RNC knew about the book deal when they vetted her.
      • BossKey, on 10/06/2008, -0/+12I agree that Ifill did not hold Palin accountable to answering the specific questions, but it was clear that the weak debate rules themselves do not hold Palin accountable either.

        If "you do need to answer the questions" was true, then every time Palin (or Biden) failed to answer a question, Ifill should have been empowered to say "You haven't answered the question either in your statement or rebuttal, therefore you have violated the rules of this debate and your allotted response time for the next question is reduced by 30 seconds..." or "...your score is reduced by 5 points" or something like it.

        But there is no actual penalty for not answering the question! Because of this, Palin knows there is absolutely nothing stopping her from ignoring the question and saying whatever the hell she wants, knowing the networks will broadcast every last word. It's the perfect, free, high-ratings platform for a message repeated a la informercial, she and the Republicans knew it, and used it!

        When will we have an actual accountable debate between candidates, instead of a simple exchange of statements?
      • Gerz1219, on 10/06/2008, -5/+8The RNC played a very clever game here -- they purposely had an Obama partisan moderate the debate, just so they could cry "bias!" after the fact. It's a win-win tactic because if Ifill had actually asked follow-ups or pointed out the simple truth -- that Palin flat out refused to answer most of the questions -- then the Republicans would have just dismissed the results. Although the more I think about it, if Ifill had produced the deer-in-headlights moment we were all rooting for, that probably would have caused lasting damage that no media bias cries would have remedied.

        I'm surprised this tactic got past Obama's team, but then I'm pretty sure they agreed to the debate rules before it was known that McCain would pick a babbling cue-card-reading idiot for his running mate.
      • Mononuclear, on 10/06/2008, -5/+2I totally agree with you that it is the moderators job to make sure someone stays on topic but when you said "phoned in" I wanted to punch you in the face. Other than that recently overused to point of nausea phrase I agree 100%.
      • aoou4444, on 10/06/2008, -0/+5"But there is no actual penalty for not answering the question!"

        Yes there is. We, the voters, see what happened. We know she didn't answer the questions. It's up to us to dole out the punishment.

        The moderator should interrupt the answer after it's clear they aren't answering and ask the candidate to please answer the question and repeat it if necessary. To have time penalties and points seems more appropriate for a competition with winners and losers not a debate intended to inform the American people.
      • streak, on 10/06/2008, -0/+5The penalty would be interruption by the moderator and a very public admonition to answer the question. Perhaps Palin had pre-programmed responses to such interruptions, because she didn't intend to answer the questions, but interruptions can still contribute to derailing a candidate's unruly game plan and takes away from their time.

        I meant "phoned in" in the literal sense. Really, Ifill didn't need to be present. Her questions could have been previously recorded and played back on timed cues.
      • poxonyou, on 10/06/2008, -0/+7It's both good and bad. If the moderator interrupts, asks tough follow-ups, they're going to hear a lot about it afterward. If any damage was done by her, the campaign would use it as a chance to shift focus away from Palin and on to Ifill. "Liberal elites trying to sabotage our campaign!" It actually was the story right before the campaign started ("Gwen Ifill is writing a book about Obama! She's totally going to rig the debate against Palin!"", and perhaps that prevented her from being more involved. I fear Tom Brokaw won't be as in the background as the PBS crew. He probably wants to be part of the story, and he's openly supported McCain.
    • sx66gns, on 10/06/2008, -2/+6You know what , I think I might just go ahead and get the skilled worker visa rolling now , I need to beat all you fools out of this place , if Obama wins , I'll come back.



      If anywhere still wants Americans.
      • apackofmonkeys, on 10/06/2008, -3/+1Dammit, that's what all the libs promised they'd do if Gore lost, then if Kerry lost, but we still had to put up with all of you lying, whining bastards when you went back on your promises and stayed.

        All talk and no walk; so get out of here already!
    • nedzeve, on 10/06/2008, -0/+8Flashback 2004 presidential debates: Bush completely disregarded the moderator, talked out of turn, generally acted like he aways has: "I'm above the law."

      We re-elected him.

      Sadly, I don't think the debates really matter.
      • streak, on 10/06/2008, -3/+2This VP debate could have been very different and mattered much more if the moderator had done a decent job.
    • DestroyFascism, on 10/06/2008, -3/+1'We re-elected him.'


      Did you really?
    • DevinKev, on 10/07/2008, -0/+0Respect is something that is earned. Ifill had no business moderating a debate with a financial state in the political outcome. She was lucky she got the respect that she did get.
  • MavTheMaverick, on 10/05/2008, -66/+25I'd love it if Palin blew me off!

    ;)
    • mywhitenoise, on 10/06/2008, -4/+11Hey, you're a maverick too!?
    • ace429k, on 10/06/2008, -4/+12I hear you can get STD's in Fable 2
    • metaliq, on 10/06/2008, -5/+1You* could do better.

      *She's not that attractive, but I'm sure you're into it, and most everyone
    • thefiendster, on 10/06/2008, -6/+2way to show your level of intelligence.
      stick to what is presented here and comment accordingly.
  • Dantewolfe, on 10/05/2008, -15/+82I was wondering if anyone would have the courage to say that Palin didn’t answer the most important issue of the debate concerning the economy – Did McCain support massive deregulation? When asked on SNL Tina Fey said, “No thanks,” Palin in real life just ignored the question.

    What’s great about SNL is now a magnifying glass is going to be put on the very issue the McCain camp thought they could avoid!

    • tyho, on 10/06/2008, -11/+1She said she was for tighter regulation and the conservative ideals of encouraging big business through tax incentives which create jobs. She said it more than once.

      Maybe you went to get some cheetos or something and missed it.
      • LRE13, on 10/06/2008, -0/+4Although you make a good point because cheetos are certainly worth missing part of the debate for, she did miss McCain's support of deregulation. She instead chose to talk about herself and what she would do. Not McCain's position or his campaigns.
    • LRE13, on 10/06/2008, -0/+4Actually it would've been funnier if they just went with what Palin said verbatim and have Queen Latifa actually call her on it. Suggestive dialogue and satire often times has a tendency to go over peoples heads.
  • BillHodges, on 10/05/2008, -78/+17And you consider yourself serious Dantewolf? SNL for the truth!! WOW that is a sad commentary for you for sure.


    Why wouldn't Palin ignore a person writing a fluff book on Obama asking the questions? I thpought she did well.
    • jperson, on 10/05/2008, -5/+67Tell you what, Bill. At your next job interview, ignore the questions, then tell us how it went.
    • TBombadil, on 10/06/2008, -6/+21satire is often closer to the truth than many other forms of media fool. and Palin sucked.
    • charm803, on 10/06/2008, -1/+21During one of the satires, they didn't even make fun of Palin, they just used her ACTUAL ANSWERS!
    • jambhaJ, on 10/06/2008, -1/+8Yeah Bill. Ignoring a question, how does it answer the question? I mean this is irrespective of what book who wrote.
      Are you also going to ignore my question and let me assume your answer?
    • Vonauda, on 10/06/2008, -1/+6Please tell me why it would be okay to ignore preset questions with the question directed towards you as "your response?"
    • LRE13, on 10/06/2008, -1/+6The book doesn't really have much to do with Obama at all. Later on there will be a chapter on him. But it's hardly worth calling an Obama fluff book. He's just the period at the end of the sentence. Unless some other black person manages to make it big in politics between now and when the book comes of course.
  • insomniac8400, on 10/06/2008, -84/+15***** gwen ifill. All you do is ask the person to answer the question. And don't move on until they do. The first presidential debate was a good example on how to moderate. We had one VP debate and Ifill ruined it. She is a terrible person and very unamerican.
    • MindyB, on 10/06/2008, -6/+31Gwen did not have the option of pushing for the questions to be answered! The McCain camp made it very clear that if Palin was ruffled in any way they would blame her and accuse her of bias--so Gwen was forced to do what she did, just let the spoiled brat of Palin do what she wanted to do on stage.
      The crap about "unamerican" is ridiculous and out of place! So you are saying that because Gwen did not force Palin to answer questions she is "unamerican"? The only one who acted "unamerican" was Palin for refusing to follow the debate questions and deny the American people the opportunity to be able to make intelligent decisions based on facts coming from both candidates.
      • CaptEnder, on 10/06/2008, -1/+2She had an option, unless constrained by the debate rules, which it sounds like she wasn't. Ifill should have done what she thought was right, regardless of what the McCain camp might have cried afterward. That's part of the problem with American politics and the media reporting thereof; very few are willing to do what is right if someone might object, question their motives or raise issue with them. If the principle/ideology is right, then stand up for it! Otherwise, you're no better than those who would criticize you.
      • skmckinny, on 10/06/2008, -8/+1Good. I am glad. Serves the debate commission for trying to sneak a one-up on any candidate.

        Ifill be damned.
      • insomniac8400, on 10/06/2008, -5/+1She let Palin directly lie to the american people. That is unamerican. She went so far as change the subject with a new question instead of allowing Biden to respond.
    • pooz, on 10/06/2008, -7/+32"All you do is ask the person to answer the question. And don't move on until they do. "

      If Gwen Ifill "didn't move" until Palin had answered the the question, she'd still be sitting in Missouri.
    • charm803, on 10/06/2008, -3/+8Palin is unAmerican. Ifill gave her the respect and Palin still had the balls to say she wasn't going to answer how Biden or Ifill expected her to.
    • eyepennies, on 10/06/2008, -1/+11Calling other Americans "unamerican" is the most unamerican thing you can possibly do.
      • insomniac8400, on 10/06/2008, -4/+1It's ok to use the tactic against McCain or anyone in the tank for McCain.
    • daehnomel, on 10/06/2008, -4/+6It's spelled un-American. But don't worry, I understand you're at a disadvantage. I mean, with your small neo-con brain it must be hard to process anything other than Fox sound bites.
      • ukfan, on 10/06/2008, -1/+1Yeah, instead you should fill up with the "truth" that is the Huffington Post.
  • Nitrouz, on 10/06/2008, -56/+25Palin can blow me off anytime she wants
    • blue98camaro, on 10/06/2008, -14/+3Hell yea! She is smooooookin!
    • ace429k, on 10/06/2008, -13/+1I hear you can get STD's in Fable 2
      • LRE13, on 10/06/2008, -0/+2Why'd you get dugg down here and not the first time you said it?

      • ace429k, on 10/06/2008, -0/+1lol an experiment gone weird
    • nedzeve, on 10/06/2008, -5/+2I'm sure she would. As in, she would utterly disregard your presence. As for fellatio, she'd also reject your advances towards that.
    • jambhaJ, on 10/06/2008, -2/+1But I betchya, she wont refuse McCain! :)
    • averagemario, on 10/06/2008, -0/+4You know those people who pretend not to be virgins? This is the kind of thing they say.
  • AmericanElitist, on 10/06/2008, -24/+33Palin decided to "give a stump speech" instead of a debate
    • ligyron, on 10/06/2008, -0/+18Is there an echo in here?
    • matyrice08, on 10/06/2008, -1/+7yes that is in the description.
    • msk275, on 10/06/2008, -3/+3That's all the Republican Machine trained her for. Anyone who defends Palin is either blind in both eyes or deaf in both ears, because America does NOT need someone like her for the situation we are in.

      All the trolls posting comments on here, I would think, would see that 1. Digg is mainly Pro-Obama, Anti-McCain/Palin, Pro-Paul (when they can). 2. This is HuffPo article, so it's left. ... But I'm guessing I'm giving them too much credit.
      • jnava121, on 10/06/2008, -3/+1wow you can post that comment on any pro obama article , sounds so general ? with no logic but full of emotional banter? sweett. just proves another mindless idiot! oh wait you, yourself just says "idiot" with no thought... don't want to be like you...

        *insert rebuttal here* or actually maybe start an argument first? did the junior college teach you that when you got out of probation?
    • Oracle95, on 10/06/2008, -1/+3It's more likely she learned her lesson about answering biased questions designed to create sound bytes no matter how you answer the question. No matter which side of the fence you're on, the days on "just answering the question" are over. Ifill had no business moderating a debate, so I'm sorry, but got more respect on that stage than she deserved.
  • sfgamergirl, on 10/06/2008, -10/+95If Sarah Palin wants to be a "maverick" and rewrite the rules of a formal debate... what else will she rewrite when she has Dick Cheney's power? Is that what America needs? An aspiring dictator who is a heart-beat away from the POTUS?
    • DivisibleByZero, on 10/06/2008, -10/+5Wasn't Biden the one talking about how Palestine shouldn't have had elections to keep Hamas from winning? Stifling democracy because the guy you don't like might win sounds pretty dictatorial to me.
      • ulmedas, on 10/06/2008, -1/+13I think he was pointing out the lack of forethought by the bush administration, in pushing for an election in an area that doesn't have any political infrastructure, then being completely surprised by the results and essentially placing economic sanctions of the people who live there because they were pushed to vote for their leaders.
    • SnaggyMcGee, on 10/06/2008, -0/+5The knock against Dubya in the early part of his Presidency was his insolent tendency to flout the constitutional separation of powers and legislative process, and behave like an immature monarch. Dubya has been sobered by nearly 8 years of reality and abysmal failure; he has expressed regret about his "bring it on" remarks and his inability to bridge the partisan gap in Washington. I see now that the latter was something he sincerely wanted to do, but regrettably completely clueless about actually executing. Sarah Palin is similarly clueless. While her non-politician personality titillates conservatives who loved Dubya's "shoot from the hip" style, it is indicative of a complete lack of understanding of politics and a large government that involves many, many different people and interests. She buys the hype, just like Dubya did, and believes that groveling and adulation from her fans and handlers implies that she has an executive mandate to do as she pleases. She doesn't get it and never will. Keep her away from Washington.
    • mufasa, on 10/06/2008, -0/+2http://www.desmoinesregister.com/article/20081001/ ...

      Watch the top video on the right side.

      Quote (McCain) :

      "If i were a dictator, which i have always aspired to be [...]"

      Not a good sign.
    • phreakyo, on 10/06/2008, -1/+1stop fearmongering, it's a pretty huge leap to go from VP -> Dictator

      she's just not informed very well, doesn't seem especially bright, and so she reverted back to the only thing she's learned in the last 5 weeks, which is the stump speech
      • SnaggyMcGee, on 10/06/2008, -0/+1Why are you defending her? That same "aw shucks" benefit of the doubt that people gave Dubya is what led to 8 years of misery. If she can't stand the heat she can get the hell out of the race.
  • SethEllis, on 10/06/2008, -7/+27I don't understand why you are all so surprised. After all the McCain campaign told us that Palin was going to do this long before the debate ever began.
    • tyho, on 10/06/2008, -9/+2That's because Palin did her job that night. The pro-obama majority on digg came here to whine.

      If you watched the whole clip, you saw Ifill said neither the two candidates debated each other, which in her opinion was what the debate was for, and I agree.

      Biden debated McCain and Bush, while Palin spoke to the American people and appealed to her base. I think they both did a good job.

      The fact that Liberals are calling it a tie means Palin won out over all in my book.
      • thespiff, on 10/06/2008, -0/+4How can you say they both did a good job when they both abused the format? I wanted a debate. I already know their stump speeches. I wanted to learn something new. And all I learned from that debate is that Palin is better than I thought at memorizing talking points.
      • sousademiami, on 10/06/2008, -0/+3I haven't seen anyone calling it a tie. I've seen "Biden won, Palin did BETTER THAT EXPECTED."

        But when expectations include failing miserably, then doing better than that doesn't make you a winner.
    • pantone287, on 10/06/2008, -1/+1Don't I know it. She blew me off in the backroom 5 minutes before air time.
  • MindyB, on 10/06/2008, -12/+148Palin and the McCain camp are benefiting from the sexism coming from their own camp-McCain, and the right wing media. In a serious VP debate, she is not graded by the substance, facts or knowledge but by her "folksy style", "smiles", "common speak", "winks", "poise", "confident looking". By their extremely low standards set only for her, a pet rock could have also been deemed successful in this debate!
    If she were a man, would she be as coddled and protected by the media--especially the right wing media?
    If she were a man, would she even be taken seriously for a minute?
    If she were a man, could she have gotten away with the absolutely ridiculous contention that she has foreign policy experience because of Alaska's proximity to Russia?
    If she were a man, could she have gotten away with resorting to winks, cutesy folksy talk, and speaking in nonsensical sentences that have absolutely nothing to do with the topic in question?

    Palin is a disgrace, she knows she has the benefit of sexism to get away with being a completely uninformed, intellectually incurious, specious idiot by flapping her eyelashes, winking and speaking like a "folksy" child.
    What she is doing is disrespecting and making fun of all women who work very hard to be taken seriously in the world. What she is doing is setting women's progress on a reverse course. She is worse than the men who espouse sexism to keep from taking us seriously.
    Her and McCain are among the most despicable human beings I've come across.
    • ulmedas, on 10/06/2008, -4/+1She is in fact giving credence to those that say feminism has go too far (as well as all of the other equal rights efforts).
    • wexmajor, on 10/06/2008, -1/+15"If she were a man, would she be as coddled and protected by the media--especially the right wing media?
      If she were a man, would she even be taken seriously for a minute?
      If she were a man, could she have gotten away with the absolutely ridiculous contention that she has foreign policy experience because of Alaska's proximity to Russia?
      If she were a man, could she have gotten away with resorting to winks, cutesy folksy talk, and speaking in nonsensical sentences that have absolutely nothing to do with the topic in question?"

      Ask Dubya.
      • Takayama, on 10/06/2008, -1/+4I'm an European, so this might be a different angle to what you see over there at the USA ...

        Compared to Palin, King George seems like a liberal intellectual to me.
      • thespiff, on 10/06/2008, -0/+5Exactly right wexmajor! I was going to get into this lengthy post about how she's being coddled not because of her gender but because she's an idiot and the party needs to hide that.

        I had a painful debate the other day with a woman who is a Palin supporter.

        Conversation went something like this:
        Her: "Palin has this great appeal to small town people, and she has family values, and she can communicate well with the average American. She's not some Harvard graduate showing off some huge vocabulary that people don't understand."
        Me: "How does talking folksy and shooting moose qualify you to be a heartbeat away from the Presidency? This isn't about looking cute and talking to me like my mother would when I was 8. This is about being the leader of the free world."
        Her: "Isn't it important that the President be able to communicate with the people in terms they can relate to?"
        Me: "No. It's much more important that the President be intelligent enough to make the right decision in high stakes situations. We're not electing a nanny, we're electing our boss for the next 4-8 years. I'd rather have a competent boss that kept the company above water and thus kept me employed than a boss that I can relate to."
        Her: "You're wrong."

        Shoot. Me. Now.
    • lichmicro, on 10/06/2008, -11/+1I would like to "come across" Palin's teeth, if you catch my drift
    • supferrets, on 10/06/2008, -1/+2Well put. I can imagine Hillary saying something to this effect.
    • porkdanish, on 10/06/2008, -0/+2It seems pretty clear that she has not gotten away with it. She's being lampooned everywhere. She's even a joke on Fox.
    • gridity, on 10/06/2008, -0/+1I can't stand the winking...When was the last time you trusted a politician who winks at you?
    • tcaincross, on 10/06/2008, -0/+0You are so right!
      All of this ignorance...winking, "Soccer Moms", "3rd graders extra credit", at such a serious time in our country. Absolutely Pathetic...
      she is! I mean, if this woman, becomes President (McCain is so old).
      Imagine her going to other countries (etc.) representing The United States of America.
      Before the campaign, when she shook hands with Biden, she asked him...Can I call you JOE? At that time, he should have asked her,
      Can I call you Sarah? The critics had said that he should be extra careful about calling her Sarah...he should refer to her as Govenor Palin
      Give me a break...she needs to go back to ALASKA and never even
      consider running in a race like this. She is NOT qualified! Palin, do us a favor and your family....JUST GO HOME!!!!!!! You are way out of your league!
    • firebhaal, on 10/06/2008, -0/+1well put
    • jiffyjag, on 10/06/2008, -0/+0Completely right. But where the heck IS Hillary? This is the kind of argument only a qualified woman can make without the sexism charges getting in the way.
  • p9s50W5k4GUD2c6, on 10/06/2008, -8/+14Gwen was pissed at Palin on MTP this morning.

    I'd given good money to hear her say what she really thinks about Palin - "not answer MY questions you winking bitch!"

    ... or something like that. ;)
    • tyho, on 10/06/2008, -3/+6That would have made her appear as insignificant as you.

      I think Ifill did a good job, given her bias I detected none during the debate.
  • lola29, on 10/06/2008, -6/+24I think if Gwen Ifill would have confronted Palin more it would have been used against her. Ms. Ifill did fine, but I wish she would have required Palin to answer the questions. Palin's answers were dizzying in their vagueness and lack of content.
    • diggzoid, on 10/06/2008, -0/+2It's clearly the moderators responsibility to keep the candidate on topic. In this regard Ifill failed and let Palin run riot - even telling her outright that she would ignore the questions. Ifill should have been firmer and could have done so without appearing to be partisan. Once again the McCain side had preempted things by lowering expectations and questioning Iifill's credibility ahead of the debate.
  • nodonjuan, on 10/06/2008, -12/+67I haven't heard so many "you betcha's" since I watched "Fargo" last. Why does everyone think small town values are any better? With small towns come small minds and Joe Six Pack beating his wife.
    • TVarmy, on 10/06/2008, -1/+8I think it's a political tool because they want to get people from those communities to vote for whichever candidate seems more like an outsider.
    • rockstar1o9, on 10/06/2008, -0/+8Because small towns make up a majority of the swing states.
    • Ahnteis, on 10/06/2008, -1/+13"You Betcha" isn't a value -- small-town or otherwise. It's a colloquialism designed to make you think she HAS small-town values.
    • jambhaJ, on 10/06/2008, -3/+6But I loved her whenever she winked. It made me ignore "all"her mistakes. We do need a VP, who can wink in the face a of a disaster and smile!
  • VoteGOP, on 10/06/2008, -52/+12When you've got a biased moderator, asking obviously anti-Palin questions, what do you expect her to do? The GOP's VP nominee shined on Thursday and America saw the birth of a Washington political career that won't stop at the vice presidency. She handled the question beautifully and didn't let Washington elitists tell her how to address the American people. She was straightforward, honest, and charismatic, unlike the stale Biden who just wreaks of Washington corruption and greed. Way to go Sarah!
    • cquinnd, on 10/06/2008, -2/+28Please provide examples of Bias, and a definiton of an "anti-Palin" question to attempt regaining credibility.
      • VoteGOP, on 10/06/2008, -38/+0The American people saw it and that's all that matters. Ask small town America (the swing states) who won and you'll see they saw through Joe's more of the sames Washington nonsense. Gov. Palin talked straight to the hearts of real Americans, and now they know that they'll have affordable healthcare on *their* terms, no new taxes, and real, republican protection from terrorists knocking on our front doors (unlike under an Obama regime). That's what counts. Not some liberal nut's opinion on an elitist blog site.
      • SelfHomicide, on 10/06/2008, -2/+25So if you and the American people saw it, then why can you still not give an example?
      • ducky101, on 10/06/2008, -1/+18yet not one example of bias, just a blizzard of words..
      • kraetos, on 10/06/2008, -1/+21That's funny, because just like the first Obama-McCain debate, roughly twice as many undecided voters thought the Democratic candidate won.

        Out of curiosity, how much is the McCain campaign paying you?
      • Dipsomaniac, on 10/06/2008, -2/+19Wow, not a single example of an anti-Palin question.

        Oh, and the undecided voters thought that Biden did better by far, and the projections have favoured Obama / Biden even more since the VP debate.

        You just can't win for being terribly and stupidly wrong, can you?
      • Apokalyps2547, on 10/06/2008, -2/+15No no, you've got it all wrong.
        Asking Palin any questions at all is biased against her ;)
      • Mujokan, on 10/06/2008, -1/+12We got a perfect example of GOP empty talking points and boilerplate blustering, at least. Why don't they just sing the national anthem every time they're asked a question about anything.
      • bossm4n, on 10/06/2008, -13/+4How many times do you have to be told about the pro-Obama book she just authored that is due out on inauguration day? If that's not a bias, and you don't get it, there's no helping you. That being said, I thought she did an admirable job as a moderator.

        http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/scott-whitlock/20 ...
      • jaxcs, on 10/06/2008, -0/+11If this book is shows such strong bias why was her appointment as moderator approved by the McCain camp?
      • LRE13, on 10/06/2008, -0/+5It's funny how McCain's strategy of taking all of Obama's messages from the past 2 years is actually working on some people. And if by biased you mean having a book with Obama's name in the title then you're wrong. The chapter on him hasn't even been written yet. I mean the book is about how the civil rights movement and those involved helped give way to the current group of black politicians are making their way through the political landscape. Obviously given the subject matter you couldn't leave out the first black person to make a viable candidate for the highest political office there is. And sure she was honest in that she answered the questions with what she knew. Unfortunately she still didn't know what the job of the VP and that crack about her saying she didn't know before was actually a joke is bogus. VP is just the President's understudy. She needs to go back to Alaska where she's useful and can actually do some good instead of on the national level where she needs to deal with the entire world.
    • diggproof, on 10/06/2008, -2/+15"anti-Palin questions". That's pathetic. You need to get a candidate that knows something other than drilling oil and boy do you need one quickly. She's got no substance. She couldn't answer some of those questions if her life depended on it.

      So tell me, what were some of the "anti-Palin" questions, you pathetic shill? I guess when your candidate brings absolutely NOTHING to the table except for the fact she has breasts, then all they questions are going to appear like they're made to school them. She got schooled big time by Joe, Joe knows foreign affairs and ran circles around that novice.

      Where was her rebuttal to the the criticism of McCain's health care plan? The one where he taxes your employer and will drop 20 million people. She was remarkably silent about that *****. The audience wasn't because they were laughing at the Ultimate Bridge To Nowhere, a direct stab a Palin's enormous gaffe that she said her first day on the trail.

      I could go on, and on, and on about how weak Sarah Palin is and unqualified she is to even be on the same stage as Biden. Obama wasn't quite the governor of Alaska, but what's funny is as a state senator he was responsible for more people than her entire damn state.

      So please, let's hear those questions that you thought were unfair, because I hope you realize that all the damn questions were anti-Palin because Palin is anti-knowledge.
      • VoteGOP, on 10/06/2008, -12/+2The fact that a Ifill would badmouth a candidate she was chosen to moderate is evidence enough of her bias. It's just the MSM's effort to promote the "black man raised on the streets becomes president" sob story that is Barack Husein Obama. It's like a gosh darn made for TV movie. McCain and Palin will pull through, though. You betcha they will.
      • kahoona1, on 10/06/2008, -3/+3Now who is being bias?
      • PunkRampant, on 10/06/2008, -1/+7All we want is ONE example of a question that showed bias. It appeared to me that Ifill left her own political leanings out of the debate, and she was fairly objective.

        So? What question was biased?
      • Digger1123, on 10/06/2008, -5/+2@diggproof
        Then I am sure you could go on, and on, and on, and on about how weak Barack Obama is and unqualified he is to even be on the same stage as McCain (Or Palin for that matter).
      • ollersmom, on 10/06/2008, -0/+2Amen to that.
        Ifill did the best she could given the situation at hand...
      • diggproof, on 10/06/2008, -0/+3Really Digger1123, then how come Obama's winning right now? Age doesn't automatacally equal wisdom and just because McCain's been alive longer than Obama doesn't mean he's the better man for the job. Poor Johnny graduated at the bottom of his class. People don't want another jerkoff stupid president running this country futher into the ground.
    • hierophantus, on 10/06/2008, -1/+11Really, you're beyond obvious as a talking-points spouting paid troll (even if only paid in McCain points). Seriously, it's embarrassing. Pick a different name and try again.
    • eyepennies, on 10/06/2008, -1/+6Don't you see? These right-wing McCain shills are playing with a completely different set of rules. They have made it impossible to ever find common ground. VoteGOP, your notion of reality is so warped that it makes it impossible to even discuss anything with you. It's like trying to have a philosophical debate with a retarded person.
    • heystoopid, on 10/06/2008, -1/+4Sadly Pollster com does not support your view with some forty eight per hundred taking the totally opposite view even in your home state as we speak , unless the zombie graveyard occupants are recalled to life for one day to vote in November '08 .

      But as always the words "scared of the truth" , "denial" and "double standards" totally sum up your mobius loop argument which begins nowhere , goes nowhere and returns back on the bridge to nowhere.
      • Digger1123, on 10/06/2008, -4/+2Actually, 48% don't take "the totally opposite view" I am sure a good chunk of those are not strong Obama supporters, and are not as liberal as him, thus making them only take the opposite view.
    • rootsm3, on 10/06/2008, -0/+2Biden stale? You must've changed the channel when he choked up about his dead wife and daughter. You're a ***** *****.
  • magus_melchior, on 10/06/2008, -4/+27LOL. Brokaw opened with the SNL sketch! Nice man.

    Good commentary all around, too. They saw what Biden and Palin were trying to do, and Ifill's dilemma as a moderator having to deal with two people essentially giving stump speeches. At least Biden had the courtesy to answer Ifill's questions directly; Palin could only dance.
  • widget1985, on 10/06/2008, -14/+35Is it me or does every other story seem to come from just the huffington post?
    • sdevinen, on 10/06/2008, -14/+7Its definitely just you... Obviously yer not a Koolaid drinker.... otherwise you'd have known Huffington Post is the bible of Obamessiah followers...
    • kashem, on 10/06/2008, -3/+10The video was from Meet the Press on MSNBC...
      • TrancePhreak, on 10/06/2008, -4/+10Then post the original source instead of funding the Huffington Hate Machine.
      • PosedMagnet, on 10/07/2008, -0/+1So... reporting what happened is "hate machine"?

        WOW, you have a distorted view of reality..
    • diggksquared, on 10/06/2008, -3/+2Just you...
    • tyho, on 10/06/2008, -6/+8Yeah the Liberal attack sites are in full swing. With like 30 days 'till election you can't expect much more.

      Irrational hate is very entertaining to watch, so are implosions. I want to be here on Digg to see the meltdown if McCain wins.

      I'll be like Scrooge McDuck wallowing in it.
    • MightyLime, on 10/06/2008, -0/+8It's not just you. Any Palin-related video seems to be filtered through the Huffington Post at the moment. Why don't people just post the original video page?
    • maz2331, on 10/06/2008, -4/+2The Obamatons are revved up to full speed.
    • EcadSGO, on 10/06/2008, -0/+1Digg is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Huffington Post. Didn't you get the memo?
    • Nescirian, on 10/06/2008, -0/+1When this has come up in the past, what I've been told is that HuffPo is easy to spam because they put a "digg this!" article on every article.
      In addition, their political leaning is close to digg's.
      It's not really much of a conspiracy.
  • demicritter, on 10/06/2008, -40/+7Gwen I Shill is full of shoe fit.
  • ironpirate, on 10/06/2008, -44/+6HUFFPO IS THE BIBLE
  • demicritter, on 10/06/2008, -31/+9Did you notice Biden's super-white teeth and Botoxed forehead?
    • morcheeba, on 10/06/2008, -1/+8Some times a guy's just gotta feel pretty...
    • k3rfuffl3, on 10/06/2008, -1/+7Palin needs some botox in eye lids to stop herself from winking so much
    • charlietuna, on 10/06/2008, -1/+4He does what he can.
    • tyho, on 10/06/2008, -4/+1@kerfuffle

      That wink really got to you didn't it? =P
    • heystoopid, on 10/06/2008, -1/+4Sad , you can do better if you tried , or is a troll thing about nit picking the irrelevant detail ?
    • tyho, on 10/06/2008, -5/+1@heystoopid
      You're taking the high ground here?

      Wasn't it just 2hr27min ago you posted this in reference to what McCain was drinking?

      "Too much prune juice in the mix obviously given the huge volume of crap of stinky elephant doo doo that flows from his mouth ."

      You might make a good Democrat politician some day, if you pass the third grade.
  • paulvq, on 10/06/2008, -7/+10Heh, sounds kinky.
  • NyteStarNyne, on 10/06/2008, -6/+24I thought Ifill did a very neutral job, despite the controversy before the debate.
    • holzp, on 10/06/2008, -0/+9Her desk did a neutral job: she didn't do a job. The candidates walked all over her.
    • eyepennies, on 10/06/2008, -1/+5The pre-debate controversy was fabricated by the McCain campaign as a back-up plan in case Palin did really poorly. As were the grossly lowered expectations for Palin. It's kinda obvious.
    • MightyLime, on 10/06/2008, -1/+2"Your Neutralness, it's a beige alert."

      "If I don't survive, tell my wife: 'Hello.'"
    • porkdanish, on 10/06/2008, -0/+1I thought that Queen Latifa was moderating.
  • PopcornDave, on 10/06/2008, -8/+4Did anybody actually expect something substantial, besides furnishing soundbites for the opposing candidate's attack ads, to happen at the debates?
    • PopcornDave, on 10/06/2008, -2/+2For those who dugg me down, could you please explain what magical event you expected and got from that debate?
    • TypeEE, on 10/06/2008, -2/+3Some "Gotcha" similar to Katie Couric interviews?
  • CoreyTamas, on 10/06/2008, -6/+25"Palin 'Blew Me Off'"

    There has to be a better way to say that.
    • chrisduser, on 10/06/2008, -3/+17"Palin 'Tripped and her tongue landed in my vagina,' it was an accident, I swear!"
    • charlietuna, on 10/06/2008, -1/+2Yeah, the Brits don't like that idiom, and it makes more sense in the context which they use it.
    • Dejacque, on 10/06/2008, -4/+3I accidentally blue myself.
    • tyho, on 10/06/2008, -3/+4Uh, she was talking to adults, not the bevis and butthead generation.

      This is what passes as political discourse on Digg though. *sigh*
      • CoreyTamas, on 10/06/2008, -2/+1You're saying that Palin said "Palin blew me off"?

        That's just weird.
      • tyho, on 10/06/2008, -1/+2You're confused Corey, Ifill said it. Watch the vid silly.
      • CoreyTamas, on 10/06/2008, -1/+1If you read what you wrote, you'll see why I don't think I'm the confused one. But you're making me chuckle. :)
    • phantom_mullet, on 10/06/2008, -0/+2Michael (on the phone): You forgot to say away. It just doesn't sound right if you don't say away. (hangs up) Well, she blew them all away!
  • timschuit, on 10/06/2008, -18/+4Ifill will regret having made those comments once Palin is president!
    • TigerStar337, on 10/06/2008, -0/+5The odds of McCain/Palin winning are 13%. See this website for details: http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/
    • heystoopid, on 10/06/2008, -1/+1Pollster com does not share your confidence .
    • tyho, on 10/06/2008, -3/+1You two above me, Palin isn't running for president THIS year. She is a new star in the GOP, and she may well be president before Billary.

      reading comprehension FTW
  • davemitchell59, on 10/06/2008, -9/+27Ifill failed miserably. She didn't follow the format outlined, 90 second responses and 2 minutes for rebuttals. She asked different questions of each rather than keeping the questions the same for each. She didn't press either candidate to answer the questions that were asked. She was no more than a referee at a boxing match, keeping the opponents in the ring.
    • jnava121, on 10/06/2008, -9/+3who cares she makes money when her main man gets elected prez....... thats not biased right? new book deal sweet
    • tyho, on 10/06/2008, -2/+5"She asked different questions of each rather than keeping the questions the same for each."

      Guess we watched the debate in parallel universes of anti-time.
  • gdonald, on 10/06/2008, -9/+54Sarah Palin is a moron.
    • supferrets, on 10/06/2008, -0/+4That's all that really needs to be said.
    • EcadSGO, on 10/06/2008, -1/+1A perfect snapshot of the average leftist democrat. Where the ability to articulate a real thought fails grunt out an insult and get the whole kennel barking. Well done Fido, well done.
  • NecroDigg, on 10/06/2008, -17/+2That VPILF can blow me off anytime, np.
  • VinnieDaMac, on 10/06/2008, -10/+10Anyone who thought Palin was going to answer questions substantively is extremely "naiveté."
    • biological, on 10/06/2008, -1/+9you can't be naivete, you can be naive. naivete is when someone like yourself displays how naive they are, their "naivete"
    • tyho, on 10/06/2008, -3/+4LOL biological, right on!

      And after he went to all that trouble with the alt button for that é.
    • DrLeePhD, on 10/06/2008, -0/+2some of us use international keyboard layouts.... but then for others I guess that would require them to how to use those letters with the squigglies on-top.
      • maybemable, on 10/06/2008, -1/+3i'd prefer to be like biological and know what the word means than use all those squiggles on the wrong word.
    • tcaincross, on 10/06/2008, -1/+0Right on!
      And no, we knew she would not answer the questions...I think you meant to say "Substantially".
      However, we did expect for her to come up with something CLEVER to say. Afterall, she chose to run for a position, that involved presidency
      over The United States of America. She was not CLEVER for one second! We all know what we're good at and what we are not. You want to talk about NAIVE...look straight at PALIN because she knew that she was not qualified for this...BEFORE RUNNING!
      Thought: If McCain dies (old age) and Palin becomes president.
      Can you imagine her representing us...talking about "Mavericks"; "Soccer Moms", "3rd grade extra credit", and etc.
      I have often heard that "People TALK the TALK but cannot WALK THE WALK" but Palin CANNOT even "TALK the TALK"! And for McCain to pick her as his Vice President, what was he smoking?
  • aptanalogy, on 10/06/2008, -7/+2He said she blew him off on the stump.
  • bender240, on 10/06/2008, -8/+11"Ifill's first book, 'The Breakthrough: Politics and Race in the Age of Obama', is scheduled to be released January 20, 2009, Inauguration Day."
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gwen_Ifill
    • skmckinny, on 10/06/2008, -5/+3Conflict of interest.

      She gave the first question, first response to Biden and the last question last response to Biden.
      It is AGAINST debating rules to give both to the same person.

      End of story. She played favorites.
    • jambhaJ, on 10/06/2008, -1/+2I think this is true only if there was only one question asked each was given more than one chance.

      But that is now how it happened. there were many questions.
  • charlietuna, on 10/06/2008, -3/+6This has been going on since 1988. We are only seeing the logical result. If Bide/Palin get elected this will become the norm. http://tinyurl.com/lowvoters (excerpt)

    October 3, 1988

    LEAGUE REFUSES TO "HELP PERPETRATE A FRAUD"

    WITHDRAWS SUPPORT FROM FINAL PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE

    WASHINGTON, DC —"The League of Women Voters is withdrawing its sponsorship of the presidential debate scheduled for mid-October because the demands of the two campaign organizations would perpetrate a fraud on the American voter," League President Nancy M. Neuman said today.
    ...

    • charlietuna, on 10/06/2008, -1/+2err I meant McCain/Palin get elected (doh!)
  • ShittyPunGuy, on 10/06/2008, -5/+3Ifilled up on news coverage of this debate long ago!
  • dw4prez, on 10/06/2008, -20/+7Diggocrats this could be worth a Holy Liberal holiday. Might I suggest Abortion Day.

    SAD THAT DIGG IS ONE SIDED. What do you expect from the liberal world. Oh yah, suppression and hatred. They be scared of truth.
    • illinoise89, on 10/06/2008, -1/+9I've been trying to get my city council to sanction Abortion Day as well! I'm glad someone supports my cause. You're welcome to hang out with me in my liberal cave any time you want. We can watch Keith Olbermann and eat arugula while perusing the New York Times weekend edition! Oh, and close the door. You might let the truth in.
    • msk275, on 10/06/2008, -2/+9Get yourself an education, then post something that has a point. ***** idiot.
      • jnava121, on 10/06/2008, -5/+3reply with a ***** point msk275 , and get yourself out of the homeless shelter.
      • tyho, on 10/06/2008, -4/+1I got the point, and you illustrated it. You sure you didn't get it?
    • Danby123, on 10/06/2008, -1/+3Yo *****! If you say liberals are suppressing the truth and don't give us any evidence to back it up, it makes you look like a moron.
  • sdevinen, on 10/06/2008, -13/+3Gwn Ifill couldn't concentrate on the answers probably cuz she had a tingle running up and down her legs in the presence of Obamessiah's VP pick...
  • mrogi, on 10/06/2008, -3/+18"I'm not going to answer that black woman's questions. I am not here to debate Joe Biden. I am here to speak directly to the American people and push my agenda." - Sarah Palin
    • DrLeePhD, on 10/06/2008, -1/+2well she got a chance to speak to her base and miss a huge opportunity to win undecided voters.
      Palin = FAIL.
  • Wahoo06, on 10/06/2008, -13/+7Geez, such a shame. Of course she is completely unbiased moderator who would never try to make the Republican ticket look bad before, during, or after the debate to try to help her book sales.
    • tribecom, on 10/06/2008, -3/+5Palin didn't need any help looking bad. She came across as a fool spewing campaign platitudes. I kept waiting for the music from Deliverance to start playing in the background. Nothing of substance.

      Ascribing bias to Ifill is just ignorant, nothing could have been further from that. The book issue is a complete red herring.
    • SnaggyMcGee, on 10/06/2008, -1/+0The Republican ticket looked bad before this sad excuse for a moderator ever gave Palin the opportunity to do the job. I've never seen such a lousy debate in my life. The only question Palin actually answered was on the subject of gay marriage. For the remainder of the debate, she gave a classic partisan conservative stump-speech designed to appeal to hard-right voters. Unfortunately for the McCain camp, elections are decided by swing voters. You think they're going to be convinced by titillating winks and "Drill, baby, drill?"
    • jambhaJ, on 10/06/2008, -0/+1IFill wasnt biased.
      Ok for argument sake even if we assume she was, that doesnt stop Palin from answering in a smart intelligent way. Bias doent affect anyone's intelligence does it?
      And if you still think she answered it all smartly, then good luck to you as well!
  • davemitchell59, on 10/06/2008, -12/+3Who cares if Ifill felt slighted by Palin's approach to the debate. This story could have been concocted last week and would have said the same thing. Ifill has already written the book on who she's voting for. She's just another one of Obama's "friends" we can add to the list that includes Ayers, Raines, Fannie, Freddie, all the contributors that are hiding their identities and contributing way above what the law allows.
    • jaxcs, on 10/06/2008, -0/+1Had you actually watched the vid, you would know that the central point wasn't Ifill feeling slighted, it's that neither candidate chose to debate each other. Biden chose to debate McCain and Palin went one step further by not debating at all but simply gave a stump speech.
      • paidhima, on 10/06/2008, -0/+1In Biden's defense, his strongest position was probably to do exactly what he did: debate McCain. Those that would vote for McCain because of Palin are either single-issue voters (abortion) or simply not voting based on issues at all. Debating her directly would be fairly pointless. Add to that her inability to answer a single question without an appeal to emotion and any attempt to debate her on facts and statistics would fall on deaf ears.

        Not to mention that if he went at Palin the way he went at McCain in the debate, he would come off as a bully.
      • jaxcs, on 10/06/2008, -0/+2Ifill actually made that point although not as directly as you say so here. What she said was that both set out to do something and that is what they did. Biden had his reasons to talk about McCain instead of Palin and Palin had her own reasons to avoid talking about anything. But, America was owed a debate and we didn't get one. Above all else, the story is not about Ifill's hurt feelings.
  • EggSaladKing, on 10/06/2008, -2/+8Sure Palin blew off Ifill.. I don't think anyone needed Ifill to tell us the obvious; but, Ifill was a horrible moderator and should have stopped Palin instead of letting her just say what she wanted.
    • tyho, on 10/06/2008, -2/+4One could say the same for the two dozen flat out lies Biden spoke. But if Ifill did that we would still be watching the debate you fool.
    • DevinKev, on 10/07/2008, -0/+1I don't know, half the questions were designed to create sound bytes. Palin was just too smart to fall into her trap and the bitch is upset about it.
      • EggSaladKing, on 10/08/2008, -0/+0Unfortunately all the debates have turned into opportunities for sound bytes instead of a debate. Seems worthless to me to even call it a debate if you are just going to get up there and talk about whatever strikes your fancy or take the questions as a suggestion. Just call it what it is: a competitive speech contest.
  • jetmax25, on 10/06/2008, -9/+7Well, everybody knows that the bird is the word!
    A-well-a bird, bird, b-bird's the word
    A-well-a bird, bird, b-bird's the word
    A-well-a bird, bird, b-bird's the word
  • JK1150, on 10/06/2008, -15/+11she also wrote a book praising Obama...
    • itinko, on 10/06/2008, -7/+2false you moron! she hasn't written the chapter on O'Bama yet.
      • JK1150, on 10/06/2008, -1/+2http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/entertainment/zont ...
      • writie, on 10/06/2008, -0/+1JK: he has a very strange perception of journalism: "If Obama gave her access, as she says that he did, then they were essentially in business together -- him in telling her story, and her in recording and then reporting it."

        That says more about him than about her. Are journalists "in business together" with their subjects on the Baltimore Sun?
    • SnaggyMcGee, on 10/06/2008, -0/+6That's a bald-faced lie you retard. Repeating it won't make it true or effective.
    • hohlermann, on 10/06/2008, -0/+1Gwen Ifill wrote a history book on race in politics that isn't out yet that included a chapter about Barack Obama because it's an appropriate and relevant to the subject. The title, "The Breakthrough: Politics and Race in the Age of Obama" is a reference to current events. Gwen Ifill is a journalist, not a partisan hack.
  • radiofrequency, on 10/06/2008, -7/+10So what are some examples of the questions Sarah Palin "blew off" that Ifill asked?
    • PunkRampant, on 10/06/2008, -2/+16Topic: Economy

      BIDEN: There are ways to help people now. And there -- ways that we're offering are not being supported by -- by the Bush administration nor do I believe by John McCain and Governor Palin.

      IFILL: Governor Palin, is that so?

      PALIN: That is not so, but because that's just a quick answer, I want to talk about, again, my record on energy versus your ticket's energy ticket, also.

      I think that this is important to come back to, with that energy policy plan again that was voted for in '05.
      • radiofrequency, on 10/06/2008, -0/+1LOL. Did Biden answer the question about economy?
    • PunkRampant, on 10/06/2008, -2/+19IFILL: Governor, please if you want to respond to what he said about Senator McCain's comments about health care?

      PALIN: I would like to respond about the tax increases.
      • BellaVitaGirl, on 10/06/2008, -0/+4Technically Ifill asked if Palin WANTED to respond to a certain topic. Palin apparently didn't want to! Poor word choice and poor backbone on Ifill's part. If it was me I would have said "RESPOND TO MY QUESTION ON HEALTH CARE!"
        Okay, maybe that's a lie. Then again, I'm not planning to moderate any presidential or vice presidential debates in my lifetime...I can afford to be hypocritical because no one will ever prove me wrong. Hehe.
      • radiofrequency, on 10/06/2008, -1/+1In his answer about healthcare Biden began criticizing Senator McCain for setting up a tax shelter for health care benefit payments made by employers. Sarah Palin wanted to address the health care question by tackling the allegations Biden made in his response. She began her response by saying "I would like to respond about the tax increases" - as they pertained to healthcare supply.

        Here's Governor Palin addressing McCain's health care plan directly during the debates (at 2:45)
        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=njBh3lKa6tQ
      • PunkRampant, on 10/08/2008, -0/+1@radiofrequency

        Wrong. Palin completely and blatantly changed the subject from health care to taxes.

        PALIN: I would like to respond about the tax increases. We can speak in agreement here that darn right we need tax relief for Americans so that jobs can be created here. Now, Barack Obama and Senator Biden also voted for the largest tax increases in U.S. history. Barack had 94 opportunities to side on the people's side and reduce taxes and 94 times he voted to increase taxes or not support a tax reduction, 94 times.

        Now, that's not what we need to create jobs and really bolster and heat up our economy. We do need the private sector to be able to keep more of what we earn and produce. Government is going to have to learn to be more efficient and live with less if that's what it takes to reign in the government growth that we've seen today. But we do need tax relief and Barack Obama even supported increasing taxes as late as last year for those families making only $42,000 a year. That's a lot of middle income average American families to increase taxes on them. I think that is the way to kill jobs and to continue to harm our economy.
    • tyho, on 10/06/2008, -7/+1@ Punk

      So I'm guessing you don't understand that energy policy and tax increases have a little something to do with the economy?
      • DrLeePhD, on 10/06/2008, -0/+5so i'm guessing you didn't watch the debate?
      • TypeEE, on 10/06/2008, -1/+1Then I guess she can tell you about her mama because her mama would spend and affect the economy as well.
    • zip000, on 10/06/2008, -2/+1Nearly all of her answers were tangentially (at most) related to the questions that were asked of her.

      Now, it is true that this has become the norm with debates over the past several years, but she took it to a new low.
    • mrASSMAN, on 10/06/2008, -2/+1All of the questions were ignored except "give a closing statement" ..except that wasn't a question.
  • Cyberdactyl, on 10/06/2008, -13/+3So. . . here we have yet another far left submittal about the liberal elite media on MSNBC commenting on the Republican VP candidate.

    Come on people!

    Do you -REALLY- expect anyone to take this as anything other than just another 'feed the choir' another far left, hard-on inducing link?
  • mrshickadance9, on 10/06/2008, -4/+21I'm still in college. I admit i don't have the most experience with the ways of the world as some may. But at the same time, I feel like I could honestly debate her and win. That's not right. I want someone that is smarter than I am to potentially hold the most important job in the country.
    • tyho, on 10/06/2008, -4/+2It's an illusion, she made it look easy, cause it was for her.

      Now if you have any evidence of her lack of intelligence, I'll be glad to respond.
      • jambhaJ, on 10/06/2008, -2/+0Ok, how about you give evidence of her intelligence?

        Governing Alaska must need more intelligence than governing NY isntit?
        If you compare her with Bush, then yes, she speaks coherently! Thats a first smart move over our lowest standard for president.
  • JenovaWitness77, on 10/06/2008, -6/+15This is ridiculous. It's an insult to Democracy that these two are even close to Obama and Biden in the polls. If you can't see that McCain and Palin offer nothing to this country, you deserve exactly what you get.

    • Zarchon, on 10/06/2008, -2/+3Thank you, thank you very much. I certainly hope I get the chance to be represented by these two.
      • jambhaJ, on 10/06/2008, -1/+1Why do you want to represented for failure? You can do it yourself also easily. You dont need McPalin for that.
    • Takayama, on 10/06/2008, -0/+6"The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter."
      -- Winston Churchill
    • shibagarden, on 10/06/2008, -0/+1It's actually a testament to democracy, but an insult to thinking citizens.
  • FENWAYFREAK, on 10/06/2008, -18/+9How can Ifill seriously complain about Palin not answering questions. It is the moderators job to make the candidate answer questions. Joe Biden didn't answer a single question either, yet she isn't complaining about that. She didn't ask a single follow up question the entire night.
    • Olfster, on 10/06/2008, -2/+5I agree. She was not a good moderator at all, by allowing them to skip the question and go onto their canned talking points.
    • metaliq, on 10/06/2008, -1/+8Biden actually answered most questions when he wasn't responding to Palin's libelous claims.
  • tantobourne, on 10/06/2008, -8/+3while not an alaskan native (only there for 2 years) i must say that palin is dong the rest of alaskans a great injustice. she is hogging the game-show spotlight and taking away from lesser, just as transparent, idiots that live there and not giving them a chance to shine your relevance in the limelight of the american media.

    hopefully we'll realize that although she might the fascinating side-show, the bigger show is getting under way under the big tent and the real three-ring circus. save your time and go see the big show first. after it's done you can always come back to the freak-show tent and watch how it plays out.

    ...don't get me wrong. good and bad, i enjoyed alaska. i guess i left right before she became wasilla's mayor. too bad she's their budding governor and vp-elect, running the risk of making alaska more of a laughing stock than it could ever have been. it might be a tough legacy to live down. don't always judge a body of people by their leaders.

    ~meep

    and the snl skit was better than the last, btw.
  • RetiredMidn, on 10/06/2008, -14/+7Wow, HuffPorn cites MS-DNC to air Ifill's criticism of Palin's performance in the debate, which means that we're assured that there will be no mention of the issue that Ifill's objectivity might be in question because she's written a book whose success is predicated on Obama's success in the election.

    Ifill comported herself properly during the debate, and deserves credit for that, but she destroyed her credibility by participating in the post-debate analysis in this way. She's entitled to her opinion that Palin "blew her off", but that opinion was readily available from others without destroying her pretense of objectivity.
  • Olfster, on 10/06/2008, -3/+7We don't need a person like Palin any where near Federal government. We have enough BS with GW. Think the AG fiasco was bad. America please wake up for this election.
    • maz2331, on 10/06/2008, -0/+1AG fiasco?

      Every US Attorney is in an at-will relationship with the President. He can fire them for any reason, or no reason. Political disagreement, stopping abuses, or even not liking the guy's tie is good enough. It's NOT a civil-service job at all.

      As for the AG.... they should have just said "Yep. We fired them because we didn't like them. Whaddaya gonna do about it?"
  • queenbee93, on 10/06/2008, -4/+3There is a new Poll on PBS about Palin being qualified for VP. The RNC got word of it and has had supporters inundate the site with yes votes for Palin. This poll is to be broadcast on the major networks later. it is not a scientific poll but an electronic poll--if you have an opinion about whether Palin is fit to be President or not--go to this link, also email this link to anyone who you think has an opinion on Palin.

    1) Click on link and vote yourself. Here''''s the link:
    http://www.pbs.org/now/polls/poll

    -435.html

    and cast your vote
    • elvis313, on 10/07/2008, -0/+1the link is bad, maybe they took down the poll
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 99 of 99 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.