Republicans attack the moderator

The Republican attack machine is at it again. This time, in a preemptive strike on the eve of the highly anticipated vice presidential debate between Governor Sarah Palin of Alaska and Senator Joe Biden of Delaware, they are seeking to destroy the esteemed and highly respected African American journalist who will moderate the forum, Gwen Ifill of the Public Broadcasting Service (PBS).

The framers of this line of attack are basing their charges of bias on the basis of Ifill's forthcoming book, The Breakthrough: Politics and Race in the Age of Obama, which is tentatively set to be released early next year, on or near the day of the inauguration of the 44th President of the United States.  AOL even has a straw poll on the "controversy," with one of the questions asking if Ifill should be removed as moderator. 

Additionally, some conservative media outlets like Fox News and WorldNetDaily.com are now all but hinting that she is unfit to moderate the debate.  The latter, in their "exclusive" article on Ifill's "pro-Obama" book, say her book seeks to "shed new light" on the subject of a new generation of African American politicians who are "forging a bold new path to political power."  The obvious questions, at least to this writer, are these:  So?  What's wrong with that?

This partisan line of reasoning claims that Ifill now has a vested (financial) interest in the outcome of the election.  That is, they suggest, the success of Ifill's book depends on an Obama victory. 

The GOP spinners also charge that since Ifill has authored a piece on the Obama family in Essence, and since her "attitude was dismissive" and her facial expressions conveyed "disgust" during her coverage following Palin's speech at the Republican National Convention, then she is clearly not to be entrusted with the task of being a neutral facilitator for the debate. 

But perhaps none have gone as far as columnist Michelle Malkin, who recently wrote the following on her blog:  "There is nothing 'moderate' about where Ifill stands on Barack Obama. She's so far in the tank for the Democrat presidential candidate, her oxygen delivery line is running out."

This malevolent campaign against Gwen Ifill is scurrilous and totally unwarranted.  And transparent.  Why shouldn't Ifill or any other political reporter write about Obama and his historic ascent in American politics?  No doubt, hers will ultimately be but one in a whole new political genre in American publishing.  It is ridiculous to suggest that the book will only sell well if Obama wins.  No matter the outcome on November 4, journalists and scholars will henceforth study the Barack Obama phenomenon.  It is undeniable that the senator from Illinois is an historical figure.  Should Ifill be demonized or penalized, or labeled as unethical because she is ahead of the pack with her publication?  This writer thinks not.

Let's look closely and contextually at what is really going on here.  As it stands, Sarah Palin has become something of a laughingstock going into the debate.  This is not debatable.  Following her disastrous interview with Katie Couric--and Saturday Night Live's devastating reenactment of it, with Tina Fey as Palin--even many conservatives are openly beseeching John McCain to remove her from the Republican Presidential ticket while there is still time.  Others are quietly watching McCain take a nosedive in the polls, and praying that Palin can just make it through the debate without looking like she is, as conservative columnist Kathleen Parker asserts, "clearly out of her league."  

In the face of this, and other troubling Palin missteps, Team McCain has been systematically advancing the notion that the big, bad media is out to get poor Sarah.  For days now, McCain handlers have been decrying the "gotcha" politics of the media and the "trap-door questions" being posed to Palin, in the astonishingly few interviews that she has fielded since she was named as McCain's running mate.  But now, as the stakes are so high in the Palin/Biden face-off, they have upped the ante. 

It is not enough to launch a macro-level, shotgun attack on the media--particularly since even the conservative press is reporting on McCain's "Palin Problem."  No!  Now they have tactically decided to zero right in on the debate's moderator with micro-level, telescopic, rifle fire. They figure that since they cannot afford to actually remove Palin from the ticket, and they can't stop the debate, then their best option is to discredit the debate itself. In other words, the fix is in, they would have the world believe. 

Not only that, they hope to have a "chilling effect" on Ifill, with the hope of rendering her "toothless" in her role as an adversarial journalist in this very important debate. Particularly, since the American people know virtually nothing about Governor Palin, beyond the GOP narrative about moose-hunting and the "Thanks, but no thanks to the Bridge to Nowhere" canard. 

Don't get me wrong, Ifill should closely question both candidates, but she should not be put in the position of having to "walk on eggshells" with Palin. After all, this may be the one chance for a journalist to ask the Alaska governor a set of pointed questions--in a forum that will allow for a start-to-finish viewing of her answers, as opposed to the piecemeal ratings-driven handling of her interviews thus far.  

Hopefully, Ifill will remain strong and focused in the face of this brutal and withering onslaught, which has likely only just begun. That she would not is unthinkable. After all, the American people want and deserve answers. And, if the McCain campaign persists in sheltering Palin from on-going, probing questions about her policies and beliefs, Ifill may be the last member of the Fourth Estate to be allowed to ask them.  Clearly, the stakes are high, but if anyone can handle this delicate task, it is Gwen Ifill--as long as PBS stands firmly behind her, as well they should.