[samtheman]

So what is the left saying? That CNN is guilty of bias?

Noooooooo. Can’t be.

[pabianice]

Another criticism of Hillary! from the New York Fishwrap? What the hell is happening to the world?????

[Malone LaVeigh]

They called it a conflict of interest

I'm amazed they even know what that phrase means.

[WashingtonSource]

So this means Shrillary is still in free fall. I love it. And from her own “people,” the lag dogs at the New York Times. Or have they switched to Obama?

[COUNTrecount]

If WoofWoof can't make it for the next Demo "infomercial" is suggest this man as the "moderator".

[mtbopfuyn]

We need a pool for her inevitable melt down.

[Brad from Tennessee]

Wolfe Blitzer was specifically and publicly warned by the Clinton campaign not to run the debate in the style of Tim Russert. He and CNN took the warning seriously and turned the debate into a Clinton campaign event.

[Fishtalk]

When I heard Carville’s voice that night I thought the exact same thing....

ie....Carville is the guy who said if you drag a dollar through a trailer park....re Paula Jones....

If that isn’t an obvious attachment to the Clintons I don’t know what is.

I shrugged it off but knew that if CNN were doing a Republican debate and trotted out Karl Rove as a commentator it would be blasted from here to kingdom come.

You mean others notice it too?

[tcrlaf]

Think about this for a second, folks...

If CNN was willing to LIE for Saddam, just IMAGINE what these people are willing to do for Hillary?

[TomGuy]

Carville was there as a reminder to Team Blitzer that that warning earlier in the week [about not pulling another Russert] was still valid.

The debate had one major purpose: To rehabilitate Hillary from the disaster of the driver’s licenses, etc., during the previous debate.

It did that.

[OneHun]

I am having fun reading this article.  The socialists are beating up on each other!

 

[Red_Devil 232]

A CNN executive conceded that the cable channel should have more fully disclosed Mr. Carville’s past and that it was discussing how to handle such situations.

What they are saying is that they will continue to be involved in this biased type of situation and are discussing how to disclose it with minimal impact on their agenda.

[Steely Tom]

Liberals get to “re-examine.” Conservatives must resign.

[norton]

"A CNN executive conceded that the cable channel should have more fully disclosed Mr. Carville’s past and that it was discussing how to handle such situations."

Maybe they could simply insert a box under the picture that 'fully discloses' CNN's liberal bias?

That would cover all the socialist talking heads and 'news makers' equally.

[freespirited]

The hell with disclosure, they never should have invited present or former Clintonistas to be post-debate pundits.

[wildbill]

Apparently the only commentators CNN staffs itself with are Clinton supporters and fellow leftists.

No wonder they have a problem getting neutral pundits on the air.

[Cicero]

Well, interesting that they said this much. But they suppressed quite a bit. They forgot to mention that Maria Luisa got into a snit and let slip that ALL the questions were pre-planned, not just hers.

Also, they seem to think that it would be OK for CNN to stack the interviewers and commentators across the board with known clintonoid spinmeisters, as long as they disclose it in a brief aside.

That’s not my idea of a DEBATE.