BTW, about Ifill not “telling them” that she was writing the book. It was announced to the public in July.

1) She hasn't written the section on Obama because she's waiting until after Election Day. Of course, the whole scope of her book would hinge on whether he won or lost.

2) Sure, she probably didn't write any of the marketing copy of her book. Even if the summary was written by an overzealous marketer looking to capitalize on pro-Obama sentiment with no connection to Ms. Ifill, it still creates the appearance of impropriety, even if it's only an illusion. On the other hand, I don't see her clamoring to change the title or any other part of the display copy.

3) I absolutely cannot see why Ms. Ifill would not have foreseen that the book would be a contentious enough issue that she'd have to clear it with the CPD. Note what I'm saying here: She has the right to publish anything she wants, and many people (including me) will buy the book whether or not Obama wins.

But if you've given your word to a nonpartisan commission that you will moderate a debate between candidates of two rival political parties, do you then decide to write a book that discusses only one of those candidates (whether positive or negative), and then not advise the commission that you're writing it?

If “the Media” was in the middle and not choosing sides there would be no war on the leftist, democrat, socialist media.

Say good bye to the USA, it will soon be renamed USSA: United Socialist States of America, unless you stop it.

The point is that by writing a book that positively analyzes, at least partially, Barack Obama's candidacy, it automatically creates excuses, both for Palin's supporters and Palin's antagonists. As a thirty-year veteran, Ms. Ifill knows very well the dangers of appearing (emphasis on appearing) anything less than objective.

Clearly what happened, in my opinion, is that Ms. Ifill moderated the debate in 2004 and therefore the Commission felt she didn't need to be vetted a second time. On the other hand, at any point before yesterday (emphasis on yesterday) Ms. Ifill could have let them know that she was writing the book. Again, it is clear to me that she didn't because they would probably have removed her to avoid any appearance of impropriety.

I'm a registered Democrat and I believe this whole situation could easily have been rectified without incident months ago. All this is going to do is set up a month of conservative whining — especially if Palin loses the debate — and a month of self-righteous liberal responses. How is this good for the election?

She is definitely not impartial as a journalist….

McCain himself said that Ifill was a fine choice for moderator.

You know, Tom Brokaw has some particularly nice things about John McCain and some not-so-nice things about MSNBC's pro-Obama coverage. Does that mean he should not moderate the later debate? Some on the left think so. I think that's baloney.

Unless they act like idiots during the debate there should be no issue about it.

Desperation folks, pure and simple.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/01/gwen.ifill/

I agree with Elyas, this is really little more than a continuation of the right wing’s war on the media. Enough is enough. Ifill will do a fine job of moderation tomorrow, of this I have no doubt.