Posted on 11/29/2007 5:49:19 AM PST by jdm
CNN and YouTube had weeks to select the questions for last night's debate, poring over 5,000 submissions to select the handful that made it to the candidates. They even flew a few of them to the debate in order to allow them a response to the answers provided by the Republican presidential hopefuls. Yet within minutes of the debate, bloggers discovered what CNN missed -- that one prominent questioner flown to Florida by CNN worked on the campaign of a Democratic rival, and that at least three other questioners have declared support for Democratic candidates. Michelle Malkin rounds it up:
The best thing about Republicans agreeing to do the CNN/YouTube debate is that it created yet another invaluable opportunity to expose CNN’s abject incompetence.
Retired Brig. Gen./gays in the military lobbyist/Hillary-Kerry supporter Keith H. Kerr wasn’t the only plant at the CNN/YouTube debate. The plant uncovering is in full-swing over at Free Republic.
Example: “Journey,” a.k.a. “Paperserenade,” the girl who asked an abortion question, is a declared John Edwards supporter. ... Brian McMurphy at SixMeatBuffet (hat tip See-Dubya) notes that David Cercone, the Pompano Beach, Florida, man who asked the question about Log Cabin Republicans, is a declared Obama supporter. ... The lead toy questioner, LeeAnn Anderson, who appears to be an ordinary mom concerned about her two children, whom she includes in her video, is a prominent Pittsburgh union activist–and aide to Leo Gerard, President of the American Steel Workers Union/John Edwards supporter.
Abject incompetence, yes. If these bloggers could discover this information -- mostly from their YouTube profiles, not exactly heavy lifting -- then CNN should have vetted the questioners better. With the possible exception of General Kerr, it doesn't appear that the questioners made any attempt to hide their affiliation; they simply posted their questions, and CNN blithely selected them at face value.
Bad journalistic practices? Definitely yes. But does that negate the questions themselves? I don't think so. The CNN/YouTube format closely parallels that of the traditional town-hall forum. For the most part, attendees do not get vetted at these events either, nor should they. After all, while a primary usually involves voters of one party, the entire nation has a stake in the selection of the nominees. If Hillary Clinton held a town hall in my community, I should have an opportunity to question her about her positions on issues without pledging a loyalty oath to do so.
The questions asked don't seem particularly outrageous. Kerr asked about gays in the military and Cercone about Log Cabin Republicans. Gays in the military have been a major policy issue for almost twenty years; gay issues relate to a major Republican strategy in the past two elections. The GOP encouraged ballot initiatives opposing same-sex marriage in 2004 and 2006 to help push evangelicals to the polls. Republicans make opposition to the "gay agenda" a big fundraising point on a regular basis. Those questions seemed reasonable, and reasonably asked. Although I disagree with the candidates on their positions on Kerr's point, they all gave reasonable and consistent answers.
The question on abortion -- would opposition to abortion mean jailing the women who seek them -- was hardly unusual. Fred Thompson actually gave the best answer on this, unflappable as always, which is that it doesn't happen that way now with clearly illegal abortions. Everyone on that stage has attacked Rudy Giuliani for his pro-choice view (with good reason, in my opinion); the Republicans have clearly made abortion a big issue in this primary. Shouldn't they expect to get precisely this question when talking about criminalizing abortion?
LeeAnn Anderson's question about toys, and by extension trade with China, may have come from left field, pun intended, but it touched on Duncan Hunter's biggest issue. He has been railing against free-trade agreements with China all during his presidential run. Also, it hardly needs to be said, but both Republican and Democratic parents and grandparents have concerns this Christmas about the next toy recall, and hoping their children and grandchildren don't find it the hard way. It's a rational question, made by someone with undisclosed interests in the answer, but the question itself is precisely the kind made in town-hall forums.
CNN deserves the brickbats it will receive for its atrocious research skills. However, Republicans should be prepared to answer the questions the candidates received in this debate. At some point, this will cease being an intramural fight and we will have to convince all of America to vote for our nominee. That won't happen if we can't handle fastballs, with a couple of curveballs in the mix.
bttt
What I think Morrissey misses here is that CNN picked Democrat Activists that posed questions that are only of interest to Democrat Activists and the MSM (I know, I’m being redundant). These issues are only of minor interest to most Republican Primary voters. Most questions of interest to Republican primary voters are totally missed by the MSM.
I am listening to one CNN employee and he is doing a masterful job of ignoring the elephant in the room on his radio show...Glenn Beck.
For a man who can get absolutely hysterical over SOME of the democrats tactics and morals seems to be taking this absolute fraud committed by CNN quite well. I’m sure he wouldn’t lay low on this abomination because of money, could he?
Actually, yes, I do. This isn't the general election, but the primaries. The important thing at this point is for Republicans to select their candidate. The questions should be those that are useful to Republicans, and not these fringe peripheral sorts of non-issues.
"gays in the military" for example is not a Republican issue. It's a liberal issue, which means that the "discussion" is just a pointless flapping of gums and a waste of time.
That said, you're right in your later post about these "debates" not meaning much in the big picture. Since the whole event is pretty much a waste of time, it doesn't really matter much.
and the group of people interviewed after the show by Campbell Brown. Waht about the lady that stood up and said if Edwards were there she would vote for him? What was SHE even doing on that show? She was so dopey. I want them to see and speak with people they dont’ know. These are all plants and we’re sick of it. Boy, for people who are supposed to be so damned intelligent they sure dont’ know what’s going on in their own back yards (when they are caught in these lies that is) It’s all a plant and shows how desperate they are. And...since when does YouTube questioners fly out to the debates.
"Yet within minutes of the debate, bloggers discovered what CNN missed -- that one prominent questioner flown to Florida by CNN worked on the campaign of a Democratic rival, and that at least three other questioners have declared support for Democratic candidates."What a coincidence!
CNN flew all these people in and gave them microphones and allowed them to ask questions and speak their minds! And CNN with its vast resources didn't know they were Democrat operatives???
Don't you just hate it when you make a goofup like that?
Uh...incompetence is not exactly the just mot...
Freepers.
Be sure to send emails to all your friends to alert them to the latest Hillary/CNN scandal.
I just copied Michelle Malkins latest posting to an email and sent it to 75 of my friends.
Please use the emails to get this news spread far and wide.
bmflr
.
.
.
Why the smart money is on Duncan Hunter
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1926032/posts
Posted on 11/15/2007 3:43:17 AM PST by Kevmo
Does anyone think for a minute that CNN would allow Republican partisans asking loaded questions at Democratic debates?
Whatever happened to Iraq? Didn’t CNN find any questioners on the central issue of the day?
for a primary or caucus debate (not a general election) it DOES matter.
Like a company interviewing a potential candidate to work for them. Would you let a competitor interview your job applicant? ....no.
Well, he used it in Florida, didn’t he? Or did just Cooper call him that? If he did, he should be charged. Anyone want to look into that?
Maybe CNN shouldn't have declare these as "Undecided Republican Voters".
To tell you the truth, I didn’t hear them say that—but then, again, I only half-listened to it, as there was a lot of commotion in my house at the time.
To give DNCNN a pass is the height of naivete. They knew who all these people were and most likely were told by the Clinton Chinese Mafia who to Plant.
Pray for W and Our Freedom Fighters
Michelle is linking to my post.... I’m sooooooooooo proud.... :)
Not completely the end of the story.
All of the candidates seemed to hold up well to the questions, with the exception of Guiliani, I guess.
Hunter not only did well against the gay general, he did so well he put a press release out thanking Hillary for the plant.
By contrast, the libs won’t debate on Fox.
Then I don't understand why Hillary shouldn't be prepared to answer questions about HER campaign financing and Hsu. After all, I'm a voter, and I haven't been satisfied with the answers I've heard from her campaign about this.
Excellent post. Thank you for making each of those points to people in a position to do something about it. We should all be doing the same in our own spheres of influence. BTW—Your analogy to the NFL was spot on.
“I was personally embarrassed for the eight men on stage who had to suppress wincing over another guitar guy serenading the field with inane witticisms.”
Thank God! I thought I was the only one. Hell, I covered my ears and went “Yah,yah,yah!” all the way through it.
Personally, I think the whole Utube concept for debates is lame.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.