Head on over to Memeorandum and read some of the posts there. It seems that CNN allowed supporters of - and even staffers for - Democratic candidates to ask the Republican candidates (difficult) questions. Examples:
- retired Brigader General Keith Kerr, is a member of Hillary Clinton’s campaign for the Presidency. He asked them about gays in the military
- Concerned Undecided Log Cabin Republican supporter David Cercone = Obama supporter David Cercone
- Concerned Young Undecided Person “Journey” = John Edwards supporter “Journey”
- Concerned Undecided Mom LeeAnn Anderson = Activist for the John Edwards-endorsing United Steelworkers union LeeAnn Anderson
Could CNN have known the political affiliation of these individuals? Why yes. They’re very honest about it at their own websites, in profiles, and with regards to the retired General… well… if that one wasn’t clear to CNN, the greatly respected news network has a serious problem
It seems like CNN vetted these questioners all right…to make sure they were Democrats!
No wonder the questions I heard sounded like liberal questions or conservative caricatures. I was wondering why they weren’t asking questions about subjects that actually interest conservatives….
And giving that Clinton plant time to prattle on, almost longer than the candidates got for their individual answers, well, it did look pretty odd.
And Dems were afraid of FoxNews. Amazing!
That’s twice that CNN seems to have “missed” Democrat activists in the questioners of debates. The first time Democrat activists were in the audience I mostly blamed the Democrats themselves for putting their people in the audience, though I found it highly doubtful that CNN was just an innocent victim.
But as Bush says “Fool me once, shame on you….you can’t fool me again”
If it was doubtful that CNN wasn’t in on the plants the first time around, but this second time it stretches the limits of anyone’s credulity to think that they weren’t in on it the second time around.
Perhaps CNN aspires to be the anti-Fox News?
I cannot decide on the reasoning, ratings/financial or political/personal - maybe a bit of both, but it seems that CNN is planting the questioners when you read the total amount of submissions and can match so many of the invited guests and questioners to Democrat campaigns and activists. Though my reading on the various blogs suggest the inclusion of the retired military officer was a big part Coopers own Gay agenda promotion. That is probably supported if you consider the inordinate amount of time that he was given to debate the Republican candidates after they answered.
Google out some of the other questioners, and have fun with it. Truthers, even. A real bag of mixed nuts.
While apologizing for Hillary’s gay general, CNN claimed they didn’t have time to background the questioners. What a crock! It’s called Google, folks. A coffeeboy could’ve run the bunch in a couple o’ hours. Geez.
Seriously. Most of those folks popped right up on a quick search. Activists and nutburgers (with crossover).
Tully, you’re being very nice to CNN with your presumption of incompetence, and that’s counting you’re more conservative than I. I would be highly surprised if they weren’t directly involved in the matter, meaning that they knew about the IDs of the questioners and went ahead anyway.
Remember how the Democrats boycotted the Congressional Black Caucus debate because it would be hosted by Fox? I thought then that the GOP should have refused to participate on any CNN debates, if the Dems were allowed to play politics that way. But the GOP didn’t, and as a result, we’ll keep seeing garbage like this. How anybody can call Fox partisan and CNN unbiased is beyond me.
I’m not exactly presuming incompetence, Lynx. Just noting that the offered excuse seems more than a teeny bit weak–especially given the recent history with the CNN Democratic debate. It’s not incompetence if it’s a willful failure to background. They had plenty of time.
I think very much so. I don’t watch either network often but when I do catch CNN now, I note that they seem to be using more and more of Fox’s tactics. And really they seem to be less left leaning than they were under Ted Turner (though CNN international is a different story altogether- certainly no shift to the right or center there). I guess they still favor Democrats but more mainstream, corporate elite ones it seems.
I guess they still favor Democrats but more mainstream, corporate elite ones it seems.
For the same reason Willy Sutton robbed banks.
I don’t understand the premise of the complaint. Shouldn’t any American be able to ask questions, as long as they’re reasonable and factually accurate?
This whining diversion reminds me of the Bush policy of excluding non-Bush supporters from attending his speeches and the VA GOP policy of requiring a loyalty oath and vote pledge.
Has the GOP become so partisan and fragile that their candidates can’t even handle questions from people who aren’t approved Party Members?
In contrast, several of the questions at the CNN Democratic Debate were from obvious Republicans (which is just fine, IMHO) and no one complained a bit.
I completely agree, but wonder why the Democrats are not being similarly criticized. Have there been ANY opportunities for people who disagree with Democrats to challenge them on those issues? I don’t know what questions you are claiming came from Republicans in the Democrats’ YouTube debate, but I can’t think of any. Certainly there weren’t any coming directly from people affiliated with Republican candidates’ campaigns. Do you have any documentation that there were?
Oh, yeah. The Democrats also got a pass for avoiding the FoxNews debate while the Republicans got bashed for being reluctant about a YouTube sandbagging.
Double standards much?
I absolutely agree, I think the Republicans should be held with their feet to the fire on any and all tough questions anyone can think about.
I also think the Democrats should be held to equal standards rather than softball questions by supporters for Democrats and hardball questions to Republicans by Democrat supporters.
Do you not feel that the Democrats should be open to fair play?
You were going to mention Clinton’s handlers turning the mic off of people at his speeches whenever they diverted off an approved question line too right?
There is a difference in selecting questions from a man-in-the-street Democrat and a member of a Democratic campaign staff. There have been a few more uncovered, among them Adam Florzak, who quit his job with Caterpillar to work with Dick Durbin on social security reform. Also, the guy who asked the question about corn subsidies, Ted Faturos, is a former intern for Democrat Congresswoman Jane Harman.
Jason, To answer your question, there were clearly people who “disagree with the Democrats to challenge them on those issues” at the CNN Democratic debate. E.g. here are some of the questions:
1. “I’d like to know, if the Democrats come into office, are my taxes going to rise like usually they do when a Democrat gets into office?”
2. “To all the candidates: Tell me your position on gun control, as myself and other Americans really want to know if our babies are safe. This is my baby, purchased under the 1994 gun ban.”
As far as I know, no one has researched their party identity, nor should they, IMHO. The anti-Democratic tilt and opposition to liberal issues was obvious and entirely okay. It was a non-issue at the Democratic debate — no one was whining about it.
In contrast, it speaks volumes that the GOP echo chamber is trying to go after the affiliations of the questioners, rather than focusing on the content of the answers.
I can’t say I’m surprised at that tactic anymore, though it is sad that pundits still echo it and people still fall for it.
I think it is hardly fair to call this site a “GOP echo chamber” on this point when one of the administrators (me) is agreeing with you on this point.
I do think that CNN had an obligation for due diligence in revealing the formal campaign affiliations of questioners, especially since they took the additional step of inviting one for a personal follow-up at the actual debate. I don’t blame the GOP for calling foul on that failure to reveal, though I don’t think it is worth making a big stink about. The question itself was perfectly fair.
Plus, these are PRIMARY debates. Their main purpose is to help Republican voters decide who they want to be their candidate in the actual election. I had no problem with CNN choosing “undecided” Democrats as the audience for the Democratic debate (though they should have actually called them “undecided Democrats” rather than just “undecided voters”), because that debate was mostly to help Democrats decide who to vote for in the primaries.
At what debate do honest-to-goodness Republicans get a chance to question the people they’re going to have to pick between in the primary?
There was no anti-Democrat tilt and opposition to liberal issues at the last Democrat debate.
Pat, there are many Republicans who think that “don’t ask, don’t tell” is a really dumb policy that hurts U.S. national security. (Example: former Wyoming Senator Alan Simpson) It was a fair question even if the scope is limited to Republican issues.
Interested: With all due respect, your memory of history appears to be severely distorted by partisan blinders.
As my post above shows, there WERE tough, anti-Democratic questions at the CNN debate. You just have a blind spot there.
And anyone who seriously thinks that the Bush Whitehouse isn’t orders of magnitude more tightly controlled than Clinton needs to take another look at the facts. Rove, Cheney and Bush took pride in how they elevate loyalty and information control as core values.
In contrast, people complained that Clinton was TOO gregarious, spending time interacting with questioners well past the scheduled time. He loves to debate and interact with people and is pretty eloquent off the cuff. You may disagree with him, but it’s too facile to say that “yes, the GOP is bad but everybody does the same thing.” They don’t.
Along with the question of Diamonds? Those were not tough questions. They were routine, factory-churned responses.
Than show an ability to be equally critical when Clinton and the Dem’s do the same thing you crucify the Repubs for doing. Until then - you’ll be called on it.
Jason: sorry for suggesting this site is a “GOP” echo chamber. FWIW, the NY Times opinionator also echoed this storyline, as have others — even Anderson Cooper himself to an extent.
I do disagree with that choice of priorities, especially when the real outrage is that some truly important topics like healthcare weren’t even discussed at the debate.
“be equally critical when Clinton and the Dem’s do the same thing”
The point is, they didn’t do the same thing.
It’s false even-handedness to say “everybody does it” when everybody doesn’t.
I wasn’t complaining about the question, Jason, just the questioner. If it’s a real issue among Republican primary voters, it shouldn’t be too hard to find an actual Republican to ask it.
By “tough, anti-Democratic questions,” country, do you mean questions like the one from the man caressing his gun as he asked about gun rights? When they find a caricature of a gun-rights supporter to ask a question about guns, I don’t call that even-handed.
It is on YouTube. That is a problem with the format — YouTube tends strongly towards the snarky and the young (including the “young at heart”) — a demographic that in my personal experience leans distinctly leftward. This is why I think anything that draws from YouTube will inevitably be ideologically a rigged game that favors Democrats. It is like subjecting Democrats to a debate where the questions are drawn from talk radio callers.
If such a debate were proposed, would the Democrats submit to it? I seriously doubt it. Yet they demanded that the Republicans submit to a YouTube debate.
Oh please.
It’s false to deny that the Democrats have engaged in the same tactic when they willingly have.
Your correct that Clinton often went on as much as he could to talk to everyone at a campaign event. The man loved to campaign - and probably still does. However your being confused if you think a semi private one on one conversation - typical of Clinton events - is the same as a televised campaign speech.
At Bill Clinton’s first campaign speeches his handlers did remove the mic from anyone that diverted from approved questions.
There is no holier than thou between the Democrats and the Republicans. The only difference is when they’re caught at corruption. There was no anti-Democrat element at the Democrat Debate on CNN. None, period - end of story. The investigations proved that the ones giving the questions are Democrat supporters. Hate to tell you - that is not the definition of anti-democrat party.
I’ll say again, I’m fine and welcome real, hard - not fabricated questions to the Republican party. but I also expect that the Democrat party will have the integrity and intestinal fortitude to play fair ball.
Pat/Interested:
Isn’t this an “anti Democratic” question at the CNN democratic debate?
“I’d like to know, if the Democrats come into office, are my taxes going to rise like usually they do when a Democrat gets into office?”
As for the questioner on gun control, wasn’t it Charlton Heston who said they could pry the gun from his cold dead hands. Is that a caricature, or the leader of the movement? Was the snow man an unfair caricature of people concerned about global climate change. Was asking Hillary about pearls and diamonds a caricature?
You guys have such thin skins.
How about complaining about the lack of health care questions or not even asking if they agreed with Bush, our president and the GOP leader, a single time?
No it’s not, when you have undecided Democrat voters at a Democrat debate. And the questioners are proven to be Democrat Supporters who then go on to ask a question that has not only been around for half a decade plus - it is a certain fabricated answer.
Unless this is the first you’ve heard about any possible contention over the Bush tax cuts?
That must be it.
I would recommend you complain to your Democrat Party Headquarters. They may be able to fit your request into the next GOP debate.
Why you refuse to hold the Democrat party to the same standards we think the GOP should be held to is beyond me. Are you afraid of asking Democrats unscripted questions? We are here saying - ask the GOP anything you want, be hard, be hitting but be fair and unscript them both.
“We are here saying - ask the GOP anything you want, be hard, be hitting but be fair and unscript them both.”
I agree.
So really all the outrage is not about the GOP debate at all.
My mistake.
While I think that CNN did stack the question deck, I also think it was the most interesting of all the unending debates that have been broadcast. It was the closest to what a debate should be not what debates have evolved into. It also goes to show that the best debates can take place if the debate environment is hostile. The sad part is we have not nor will we see anything similar from the Democrat Party in this campaign.
What I found most depressing is that all the left leaning stereotypes of Repubs were hit. No Repub would ask these questions because.. well, for the most part, all they are, are stereotype.
Lets see, the question from the Brig. Gen about don’t ask don’t tell. Anti gay, check. (someone remind me who started don’t ask don’t tell).
The question about with the Bible. The repubs are religious zealots. Check
The question about the confederate flag. The repubs are racist. Check.
Country, while the question on taxes had some snark, I’m not sure true statements can be considered anti anything.
The problem isn’t with CNN, the problem is YouTube. YouTube is one step up from MTV’s Jackass show. Many submitted videos to YT mimick the self mutilation of the old MTV show. Maybe the next CNN/Youtube debate will be moderated by Johny Knoxville and candidates will take it in the “nads”. From MTV:
Now a foreign policy debate with questions from Brookings, CATO and AEI experts would be boring. But the pols would have to answer real questions from non-Snowmen.
I don’t know, call me crazy, but I think it would be nice if, at a Republican PRIMARY debate (what is the purpose of that again?) at least a few questions could be asked by Republicans.
It’d be kinda nice to have these guys questioned on the issues Republicans care about. Is that not the point of the event? To aquaint those likely to vote in Republican primaries with the candidates?
But no, like tonto says, we get to hear more about the lefts view of a caricature.
So we have the left planting questions for the Democrats. And we have the left planting questions for the Republicans.
We also have the left wondering, “What’s wrong with that?”
“The problem isn’t with CNN, the problem is YouTube”
And if Fox hosted a debate for Dems and loaded it with questioners from Rush Limbaugh’s audience and campaign workers from Republican candidates, would you be just as forgiving of Fox? Would the problem be with Rush? Or might you hold Fox responsible?
I would recommend you complain to your Democrat Party Headquarters. They may be able to fit your request into the next GOP debate.
ROFLMAO. Naw, just ask CNN directly.
To expand…it’s easy for Republicans to reflexively blame Democrats for this fiasco. After all, they are the opposition! But hey, attempting to gain advantage through means fair and foul is SOP in campaigns. If the GOP could’ve stacked the Dem debate, they would’ve. If they could’ve stacked the GOP debate, they would’ve. But they couldn’t.
They couldn’t because it takes cooperation and/or active facilitation and/or willful blindness from the sponsoring network to stack the deck that way. Mere gross incompetence or ignorance would be equal-opportunity. This obviously wasn’t, it was one-sided and not the first time. Repetition knocks out the props from the claims of inadvertency–they had plenty of warning from the previous incidents, and yet it happened again, and then some.
CNN arranged the venue and format. CNN chose the questions. CNN failed to vet the questioners. CNN allowed, organized, plotted, and arranged the imagery and stereotyping and question order. CNN solicited re-taping from some of the questioners for their preferred questions. CNN flew in Kerr to have him in the audience. And so on.
Tha’s all CNN’s bad.