Awful Ifill

To be honest, I never quite understood Atrios' animosity toward Gwen Ifill. I watched Washington Week in Review from time to time, and while she wasn't the best moderator I had ever seen, she beat a lot of others. So she was chatty, and her teeth were too prominent -- so what? She had good guests and kept things flowing well.

My opinion changed drastically tonight. I listened to the vice-presidential debate on the radio; I've become enough of a political junkie that I try to catch the speeches, the debates, keep up on new polls. So I sat down and listened to it... I thought it was a draw, personally, as Edwards missed several good points and Cheney seemed to deflate once he waded into domestic issues. My vote is already cast, my impressions don't matter except as a member of the Democratic machine.

A couple of questions the moderator asked, however, sent me almost through the roof. As I mentioned, Gwen Ifill wasn't a bad moderator to my mind -- until now.

My letter to the Newshour:

I listened to the Vice-Presidential debate tonight on the radio, and I was appalled when I heard some of the questions asked of Senator Edwards. The questions Gwen Ifill asked Vice-President Cheney were to the point and occasionally even thought-provoking, but then she would come back with a totally inappropriate question for the Senator. The worst one to my mind was the following: "As the vice president mentioned, John Kerry comes from the state of Massachusetts, which has taken as big a step as any state in the union to legalize gay marriage. Yet both you and Senator Kerry say you oppose it. Are you trying to have it both ways?" To any thinking citizen who passed a civics class, this is utter nonsense. Is she implying that Senator Kerry runs the state government of Massachusetts (which actively opposed gay marriage)? That he controls the court that ruled on it? That he was privately cheering the ruling even as he publicly denied support? What was she thinking? There were a couple of other very unprofessional turns of phrase, which I recount below. "You and Senator Kerry have said that the war in Iraq is the wrong war at the wrong time. Does that mean that if you had been president and vice president that Saddam Hussein would still be in power?" This comes under the category of the "are you still beating your wife" question. No simple answer will dispell the notion that the Kerry-Edwards platform approved of Saddam Hussein, an insinuation which to my knowledge is totally ungrounded in any sort of fact. "Part of what you have said and Senator Kerry has said that you are going to do in order to get us out of the problems in Iraq is to internationalize the effort. Yet French and German officials have both said they have no intention even if John Kerry is elected of sending any troops into Iraq for any peacekeeping effort. Does that make your effort or your plan to internationalize this effort seem kind of naive?" Again, the question's wording sets the Senator at a disadvantage, and leaves the lasting impression in people's minds that a respected member of the press is calling Kerry and Edwards "naive". Changing the phrasing slightly, to "Does that alter your plans to internationalize this effort?" would be much better. I am no expert in debate, and I can point to at least this many serious breaches in professionalism during this 90-minute session. It is totally unacceptable to me that the moderator of a national debate come across as this partisan; if it was not intentional, then it was a sign of critical lack of skill, making Ms. Ifill unqualified to preside over such an event. I would ask that, should Ms. Ifill be selected to moderate any other debate in future, her questions should be written or at least vetted by an impartial editor before airing them. A repeat of this performance would only serve to further damage the reputation of the media. Thank you.

I was so pissed I even neglected to praise Jim Lehrer's handling of the first presidential debate; I thought he did a superb job.

I had heard that Ifill was real pals with Condi Rice, and that she was a partisan hack, and I thought it didn't matter. I guess Atrios was right after all.

--A