I'm pro-McCain, but that doesn't mean I'm biased, right?

The talk of the water cooler today is the looming debate between the two vice presidential candidates that is happening TONIGHT (at 6pm PST for all of you sadly not in the know). Everyone is on the edge of their seats -- er, well, maybe not, but people are definitely excited about it.

The reason for the buzz of interest is not because these two people are particularly known for their eloquence and articulate nature. Oh, no. Both of the candidates have a slight history (well, Biden's is more than slight) of rambling, sticking their foot in their mouth, and generally being confusing when asked to answer questions to inform the American public. And people are looking at this debate like Dane Cook looks at someone in the path of a moving car-- it's tense, and it could be terrible, but you are NOT missing this kind of action.

Sarah Palin has had to debate before, when running for governor of Alaska, and although a lot of people hadn't even heard of Palin before she landed the job as #1 Bulldog, there are a lot of nasty edited and chopped up transcripts going around, preparing everyone for the complete annihilation of the hockey mom. And although a lot of people are giving Palin crap for not directly answering a question when it's asked to her (hellllooooooo, that's what you're supposed to do when you debate - you answer the question you wish you were asked and tie it in to the question you were actually asked), Andrew Halcro, a Republican from Alaska who ran against Palin in 2006, points out that this isn't necessarily a bad thing, and that it probably helped her win those two dozen times she debated him. Two dozen times! And you said she had no experience. If you'd like to see the Palinator in action click here and here.

And yet we have long-winded, foot-in-his-mouth Biden, who just last month asked a man in a wheel chair to stand up and let the crowd see him, as her opponent. Yes, he's spent more time in Washington. Yes, he has more experience in elections than she does (let's not forget, he's run for President twice and never even gotten close). But all the experience and all that time in the Senate has just earned him a reputation for giving long, boring, CONFUSING answers to questions that are fairly straightforward and simple, and an inability to relate to his audience (something Sarah Palin is quite good at). Not only that, but when he gets caught up in the (slow) momentum of his (unmotivated) speeches, he makes silly mistakes.

I think people are going to be watching this debate even more closely than they were watching the presidential debate (which scares me, but it's true). And at this point, quite honestly, it's good for the GOP that people are interested, because there's a potentially tragic oversight that has occurred in the preparation for this debate that will need to be watched carefully to ensure fairness. I'm talking about the selection of moderator, of course.

Gwen Ifill has been chosen to moderate the upcoming debate, and on the surface that's fine. A journalist and political pundit, Ifill actually moderated the 2004 debates, so she has experience (something we seem to be placing quite a bit of importance on in the election season). But, let's take a closer look, shall we?

1) Ifill, a Democrat (although host of a News Show on the relatively polite PBS), when moderating the 2004 debate between Cheney and Edwards got snippy when Cheney said he needed more than 30 seconds to address the points Edwards made in a one minutes long response. Gwen said, "Well, that's all you've got."

2) She was seen visibly frowning and making faces while Palin was giving her acceptance speech at the RNC this fall -- several PBS viewers called and wrote in to complain.

3) She's writing a book entitled The Breakthrough: Politics and Race in the Age of Obama, which actually has a chapter in it praising Obama, his work, his campaign, and his policies. It's to be released on January 20, 2009...the date of the inauguration of the next President.

Now, when I say an oversight has occurred, I don't mean that the McCain campaign was slacking and didn't look at her biography. Ifill actually "neglected" to disclose the subject of her book when asked to apply for the spot as moderator! That's not just neglect, that's shady. And, to make matters worse, this debate format actually gives Ifill MORE power and control than the 2004 format did!

Gwen Ifill has demonstrated a clear preference for Barack Obama and the liberal agenda, and I think that it's completely unfair to allow her to continue on as moderator of this debate. Think of how unfathomable it would be to have a moderator who had written a glowing biography of McCain! Liberals would be UP IN ARMS. And so, we should ensure that a fair debate occurs, if not by getting Ifill out of the spot then at least by being the guard dogs against bias, and raising hell if the bias is there.