Will you watch?

[herb fellows]

Fellow Texan, and F.D.R. Vice President "Cactus Jack" Garner is quoted as saying that the vice presidency wasn't worth "a warm bucket of spit,".

I personally think he probably overrated it substantially..

Tell that to Gerald Ford, amongst others. It is potentially as important as the presidential decision, unfortunately.

[herb fellows]

In that case there's no debate (pun intended), Sarah wins hands down! Beauty vs Foot-in-mouth, which would you rather be looking at for a few hours?

As long as it's looking at, and not listening to, agreed.

[dbhost]

Tell that to Gerald Ford, amongst others. It is potentially as important as the presidential decision, unfortunately.

And aside from Veto power, so is the Presidency. The real power is the courts anyway. THAT is where a President makes his mark... Somehow we have gotten to the point that the courts think they can make law, not enforce law. And so it goes...

[cgallery]

Tom, I still haven't made up my mind who to vote for yet. But the book you refer to seems to be about blacks in politics. Here's a link http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081002/...t/debate_ifill . The title of the book is The Breakthrough: Politics and Race in the Age of Obama

Ed

"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."

She didn't tell 'em because she knew they'd likely want to find someone else to moderate. I think this speaks volumes about the moderator's ethics.

Are things really so bad in this country that we can no longer find a moderator that isn't ethically challenged?

Is it really the case that the debate commission doesn't have a standard questionnaire where they ask the moderator candidates to disclose any TV, radio, Internet, book deals? What is the debate commission doing all day long, for God's sake?

We deserve better than this!

And don't get me wrong, I'm not saying she is biased or a left or right winger. What I'm saying is she withheld crucial information that any commission in their right mind would want to know, and now claims they had other ways to find out.

Had she been upfront and they still felt she was the best candidate, then FINE. But this is nonsense.

[Ed62]

I'm not saying she is or isn't biased. Did her not disclosing the fact about the book leave room for questioning? Certainly! I think the proof will come in the way she handles the debates. Maybe it's time to fix more than Wall St. in this country. Disclosures should be a must.

Ed

[cgallery]

Certainly! I think the proof will come in the way she handles the debates.

But now both sides have a legitimate argument. If she is tough on Palin, the republicans can say she has a dog in the fight (I think it is unquestionable that her book will sell better if Obama wins). If she is soft on Palin, the democrats can say she went too far to avoid being seen as biased.

That is why she should have been up-front in the first place.

What has happened in this country is, we have lost all ability to be impartial and unbiased.

I have no problem with a confirmed democrat or republican acting as moderator. But: (1) You tell the commission about your upcoming book launch, and (2) When you walk out on that stage you put away your biases as best you can.

We know she didn't do #1, why do we expect her to do #2?

I don't know why I'm so stoked over this other than to sit here and wonder, how the heck did this happen?

[Gator95]

Minds made up, but will watch debate strictly for entertainment value.

[Black wallnut]

New option added to poll, guess which I voted for!

[LarryG]

I don't see the choice I need, which is, "I'll catch the rerun on Saturday Night Live."

(Actually, I voted for "I'll watch it live or recorded," the former being what I plan to do.

[dkerfoot]

My mind is made up and I will probably watch anyway.

But - I will turn it off when the "reporters" start telling me what just saw...

[germdoc]

I still like my idea of "Texas-style Ultimate Cage Match" better...

Re' Gwen Ifill, if you've ever seen her before, her problem is not that she's too partisan, it's that she's too fair. She's like an anti-Bill O'Reilly. In truth, the GOP is VERY happy to have her as opposed to someone who will be confrontational.

Re' Walter Cronkite, here's his famous address on Vietnam: http://facultystaff.richmond.edu/~eb...kite_1968.html. (As Johnson reportedly said, if I've lost Cronkite, I've lost the country.) You can be the judge if there's anything to disagree with in his statement. LBJ ultimately agreed with Cronkite because about a month later he withdrew from the Democratic nomination for presidency.

[gsmittle]

My mind is made up and I will probably watch anyway.

But - I will turn it off when the "reporters" start telling me what just saw...

I dunno. Sometimes watching the spinmeisters desperately "explaining" what the candidate said is the most entertaining. Sometimes I wonder it they're from a different planet.

I heard an interview on NPR yesterday about some interesting research on bias and perceived bias. Seems the moderator is most fair when both sides are unhappy....

g.

[jonmulzer]

My whole lack of interest is based on the huge gap between what the mainstream media is presenting, what special interest groups are presenting and the truth.

Some where starting with Walter Cronkite lying about the Vietnam War, the press no longer provides an objective view of the situation. So why watch and listen to the BS. I am going to the shop and try and finds some things

You listen to too much Limbaugh, Hannity and Ingraham.

[crokett]

It may be on while I teach myself Perl but I won't pay that much attention to it.

[herb fellows]

I'm not saying she is or isn't biased. Did her not disclosing the fact about the book leave room for questioning? Certainly! I think the proof will come in the way she handles the debates. Maybe it's time to fix more than Wall St. in this country. Disclosures should be a must.

Ed

Unfortunately, everyone listening that is aware of this will twist the way she handles the debates to their own liking. Just human nature. You would need a philosopher king to decide empirically if she was left or right of center.
That being said, NOBODY is neutral as far as I'm concerned. These two are so opposite, I can't see someone still trying to figure out who they are going to vote for.