I was also very impressed with her. It might have been the tone in which I read it. but then you resort to names.

Louise…yet ANOTHER delight from your post. (I say delight because you’re also so on point, and so easily understood. Not a wasted word).

So, thanks for describing Gwen’s qualifications. I guess I didn’t because well..I just ASSUMED that it would be OBVIOUS how much more qualified she is than Katie Couric, for such an assignment). And beyond those obvious qualifications, you really hit the number one in my own book.

• “…And the best credential of all ... corporate America doesn’t own her!”

Now THAT’S the best credential!!

She calls to mind another of my heroines, Shirley Chisholm, when she said “I cannot be bought, and I will not be bullied.” (that could be a word or two off..but it’s close).

On the debate with Katie, I hadn’t thought about the fact that her moderating (or question asking) might be kind of fun to watch, because I hadn’t considered the fact that she would be forced to read from a script (that she had no part in coming up with, because she couldn’t) and anything that goes off of that of course, could be interesting. Surely it could get away from her easily enough. So, it would depend on how much of a break the candidates are willing to give her.

On this..I’ve been pondering myself:

• “Given the few narrow minded racist hate monger, Obama attackers who try to dominate this web-site. And given they all do it while pretending they do it because they love Hillary, I suppose he/she can be forgiven for believing they are in any way typical.”

Have you noticed that there are so many MORE of them lately? Or, is it my imagination? What’s even more curious for me, is that while you suggest that they ALL do it while pretending they do it because they love Hillary, I’ve discovered among the more recent Obama attackers, that they don’t even PRETEND THAT!

I even asked one of them yesterday or today, WHO he/she actually SUPPORTED, because it wasn’t evident. There was nothing in the post, or in any of multiple previous posts, (and regardless of the thread topic) that would give anyone a clue that they actually supported Hillary. Rather, the ONLY objective of all of their posts, is to bash and smear Barack Obama!

Even those who started out with the ostensible justification of ‘defending’ Hillary, like Chalmers and Maani, and a few others, have since abandoned the pretext. From time to time, they’ll realize it, (like Maani) and attempt to reign themselves back in, with transparent comments like, “Oh no…I don’t HATE Obama; I actually kind of like the guy.” Uh huh…right.  But overall, it’s all just an Obama smashing parade that has since lost any possible veneer of doing any sincere championing for Hillary.
Besides that, they don’t even bother to keep the insults just directed at Obama. It includes anyone who won’t be taken in (or bullied) by the hate hype. Then we are attacked , as irrational, delusional, in denial members of the ‘Obama cult’ or an Obamamaniac, or something else along those veins.

And yes, they’ve begun to dominate the site, and I’m not quite sure WHY, because if in fact they were all that supportive of Clinton, I’m positive there are other sites where they could share their enthusiasm for her.

So, I’m not sure what’s up with that, and while it’s obvious that they are NOT ‘typical’ and that fortunately, most of us DO know better, it still troubles me. Admittedly there was a time, (albeit decades ago) when I made the other rather naïve assumption that these small-minded pin-heads with pea brains would simply die off. But I was, as I say, naïve. I’ve come to realize that these narrow minds, are recycled through generations, and especially for those who’ve not been exposed to much of anything else, despite what communications’ technology has provided.

Fortunately though, progress happens in spite of them.

Katie will have the benefit of good writers who will outline good questions. The problem is the “anchors” always have a need to slide in an innuendo [that pathetic ego thing] which immediately requires the candidate either give a different answer demanded by the shift to a prejudice, or a bogus issue, or try to answer in anticipation of the other guys answer. Which is why I gave up watching “debates” ages ago. So totally bogus!

However, this one may be fun to watch. Since Katie’s not to swift on the uptake, she’ll have to rely on writers to script her innuendos, and may find herself completely unable to guide further debate on any unscripted response that might come up. That’s the problem with news as entertainment. The brain factor is missing. And just in case people who are bothered by Katie’s version of reporting news cant quite put their finger on what bothers them ... that’s it. Anyone can read a script. Darn few can ad-lib intelligently.

But then I could be wrong. Reading between the lines, perhaps this debate is McManus’s hope to finally give Katie credentials.

I agree though. Gwen Ifill would make the debate worth watching. Like most PBS anchors she’s thoughtful, intelligent, informed and heads above even the candidates, with her knowledge of current issues, facts and events. And the best credential of all ... corporate America doesn’t own her!

But there will always be that tiny minority that can only see Ifill’s color. A handicap that prevents them from hearing or learning anything.

If someone happens to be a small minded non-typical racist white person with an honest bone in his/her body and that someone really believes they support Clinton. That would be the only reason. Hillary’s the “right” color.

And speaking of non-typical white persons. That must be a small circle ‘typical white person’ moves in, since he/she views him/herself as a typical. Thank goodness he/she isn’t. And if he/she got out more, he/she’d realize racial prejudice is rapidly becoming the smelly small exception. Hardly the typical norm. Certainly nothing anyone with self-respect would want others to see them as.

But as long as there are people with small minds and candidates and politico pundits who gravitate to the small mind, there will always be people with tiny egos pumping themselves up by telling themselves they are typical.

Given the few narrow minded racist hate monger, Obama attackers who try to dominate this web-site. And given they all do it while pretending they do it because they love Hillary, I suppose he/she can be forgiven for believing they are in any way typical.

Fortunately, most of us know better.