Just before the VP debate there was a mini controversy in some conservative circles about the moderator of the debate Gwen Ifill. She is the host of Washington Week in Review on PBS and will have a book published early next year called “The Breakthrough: Politics and Race in the Age of Obama.”

Some, such as conservative host Sean Hannity, believe her book, which none of them have seen, proves that Ifill cannot be objective because she seems to be favorable to Obama. Here is the bombshell proof (my words) Hannity brought up on his show to confirm his suspicions:

HANNITY (to Palin): Let me ask you one last question. There's been this issue that the moderator of tomorrow night's debate, Gwen Ifill, is apparently writing a book to come out the time the next president takes office, and apparently, I actually have the tape, and I'll play it for you. This is Gwen Ifill talking about the book and it seems very favorable to Barack Obama, I want to ask you out of this if you're concerned about it.

IFILL: My name is Gwen Ifill. I am the moderator and managing editor of Washington Week and a senior correspondent for the News Hour with Jim Lehrer. The title of the book is "The Breakthrough: Politics and Race in the Age of Obama". It's taking the story of Barack Obama and extending it to cover a whole new generation of black politicians who are doing similar things in different ways.

Am I reading something wrong?? Did I miss something anywhere in her statement that would suggest she’s leaning towards Obama? If anyone were writing a book on modern black politicians, Obama would be an obvious subject. If you look at traditional black politicians, Obama is far away from the mold of the preacher/civil rights activist. Also, considering he is one of the most prominent politicians, black or white, in America, it makes sense if you are writing a book about black politicians you have to include Obama.

So, let’s cut the crap and get to the ‘code’ implied in the conservative rhetoric. She’s writing a book about black Obama. She’s a black woman. Black people, by implication, always stick together so Ifill can’t be objective because Obama and Ifill are black. That’s the stupid, idiotic crap these conservative talkers want to point out to their listeners. Her statement, the big thing he used on his show to prove she was favorable to Obama, does NOTHING to prove that, other than her statement of the title of the book.

Conservative hosts, please get this straight; black people aren’t a monolith. We don’t see a black person and assume they are qualified without any credentials. We don’t take obvious gaffes and misstatements and gloss over them. Yes, I know you’ll bring up a bunch of examples of blacks walking in lock step agreement with ‘corrupt’ black people. The OJ Simpson verdict comes to mind, however I think, and a lot of other blacks I know, think the guy is guilty as sin. There’s the Washing Mayor Marion Berry embarrassment, where he was caught on camera smoking crack, was placed in jail and when he got out was reelected.

The thing is for every black politician or ‘leader’ you use as an example of black lock step, there are many people I could bring up showing the same lock step with non-blacks. Doesn’t Jimmy Swaggart still have a television ministry after confessing he had sex with a street prostitute? I seem to remember steaming tears and the phrase, “I have sinned against you my Lord.” We can go ahead and throw Jim Bakker into that little sex and minister flap, and the minister that hung out with the gay prostitute.

While we’re at it, let’s go ahead and bring up Bill O’Reilly and the sexual harassment suit. Oh, and just for good measure let’s bring up Rush Limbaugh and the drug thing. As far as I know, there are many in your circle who follow these two men and think of them favorably, yet they have done some questionable (being charitable) things.

I don’t bring them up to embarrass the men, but you have Ifill, who is writing a book on black politicians, and you have suggested because Obama’s in the book, which makes sense, she isn’t qualified to moderate a debate. Nothing she’s said suggested she can’t be objective and frankly many of her colleagues believe her style is fair and balanced. So the only conclusion one can say is you feel, because she’s black, she’s wants Obama to win.

Obama isn’t a sexual harasser or a pill popper, yet many of your conservative friends support folks who are; at least that would be the inference we have to go by if we applied the same standards you have dome to Ifill. Take your head out of the sand and realize just because she’s black doesn’t mean she can’t be objective in questions.