Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Thursday, November 29, 2007
Amanda Carpenter :: Townhall.com Columnist
The Clinton News Network Strikes Again
by Amanda Carpenter
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


The YouTube/CNN debate that Republican presidential candidates tried to boycott proved as hostile as they feared last night in St. Petersburg, Florida.

CNN---sarcastically called the “Clinton News Network” -- allowed a member of Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s gay steering committee to ask Republican candidates if military personnel were “professional” enough to work with gay troops. The question came from the gay retired brigadier general Keith Kerr.

The story quickly ended up on the Drudge Report with this post from Townhall editor Jonathan Garthwaite.

Not only was Kerr’s Youtube submission aired, but he was introduced to the candidates and the audience on television and given a long opportunity to follow-up. CNN moderator Anderson Cooper asked Kerr, “Do you feel you got an answer to your question?”

Kerr replied, “With all due respect, I did not get an answer from the candidates.” Then, Kerr gave a small lecture: “American men and women in the military are professional enough to serve with gays and lesbians. For 42 years, I wore the army uniform on active duty, in the Reserve, and also for the state of California. I revealed I was a gay man after I retired. Today, ‘don't ask/don't tell’ is destructive to our military policy. Every day, the Department of Defense discharges two people, not for misconduct, not for the unit cohesion.”

CNN later apologized for the incident. "We regret this incident. CNN would not have used the general's question had we known that he was connected to any presidential candidates,” said David Bohrman, CNN senior vice president and executive producer of the debate.

In a CNN interview on Thursday morning, Kerr denied he was used as a “plant” by the Clinton campaign at the Republican debate. He said he is only listed as a member of Clinton’s gay steering committee and his appearance was a “private initiative of my own.”

In the last CNN/YouTube Democratic debate that aired November 15, Hillary Clinton was asked if she prefers “diamonds or pearls” and other questions focused on so-called “mommy issues” like healthcare and education.

None of the Republican candidates were asked any questions about education, healthcare or energy policy.

Most of the questions, handpicked from user submissions by debate organizers, focused on issues that have caused rancor within the GOP, like illegal immigration, abortion and religion. One question asked the candidates if they believed “every word” contained in the Bible.

The lightest-hearted question of the night was the last one. Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani was asked why he rooted for the Red Sox in the last World Series.

Here’s a list below of all of the questions asked in Wednesday’s debate in the order asked:

This is Ernie Nardi from Dyker Heights in Brooklyn, New York, with a question for the ex-Mayor Giuliani. Under your administration, as well as others, New York City was operated as a sanctuary city, aiding and abetting illegal aliens. I would like to know, if you become president of the United States, will you continue to aid and abet the flight of illegal aliens into this country?

There are thousands of people in Canada and Mexico waiting to come to America legally. They want to become American citizens. They want to be part of the American dream. Yet, there are those in the Senate that want to grant amnesty for those that come here illegally.Will you pledge tonight, if elected president, to veto any immigration bill that involves amnesty for those that have come here illegally?

Hammered by competition with imports, our family- owned business struggles each year to find seasonal workers. We've been working with a seasonal guest-worker program, the H2B program, bringing in and sending home workers every year. But with Congress failing to enact a comprehensive immigration and guest worker bill, I want to know whether I'll have a job next year. What are you going to do to keep these guest workers coming to the U.S. to save our business?

Governor Huckabee, while governor of Arkansas, you gave a illegal aliens a discount for college in Arkansas by allow them to pay lower in-state tuition rates. However, we have thousands of military members currently serving our country in Iraq with children at home. If these children chose to move to Arkansas to attend college, they would have to pay three times the tuition rate that illegal aliens pay. Would you support a federal law which would require any state that gives these tuition rates to illegal aliens to give the same rates to the children of our military members?

This question is for Ron Paul. I've met a lot of your supporters online, but I've noticed that a good number of them seem to buy into this conspiracy theory regarding the Council of Foreign Relations, and some plan to make a North American union by merging the United States with Canada and Mexico. These supporters of yours seem to think that you also believe in this theory. So my question to you is: Do you really believe in all this, or are people just putting words in your mouth?

My name is Sarah Lederach. I'm 18 years old. I'm from Scarsdale, Pennsylvania. And I'm a student at Penn State University. Often, I've heard both politicians and voters express their concern with providing a better future for their children. A concern of my generation is the trillions of dollars of national debt and what kind of responsibility we will have for that in the future. My question for you all is, if elected, what measures will you take to tackle the national debt and control spending?

I am Emily and I am from Los Angeles. The Republican Party once stood for limited government, which meant reduce federal spending because it cost less and we spent less.

However, over the past decade, real discretionary federal spending has in fact increased 40 percent, more than half of which has been non-defense related. So my question is: What are the names of the top three federal programs you would reduce in size in order to decrease

My name is Ronald Lanham from Mobile, Alabama. And I want you to tell me, do you support the elimination of the federal income tax in favor of a national retail sales tax, also known as the fair tax?

President Bush made a commitment when he ran for president in 2000 an 2004 that he would oppose and veto any tax increase that Congress sent him. My question to each of the candidates is: Would you promise to the people watching this right now, that you will oppose and veto any efforts to raise taxes as long as you're president?

Mmmmmm, nothing says delicious like cheap corn subsidized by the American taxpayer. For a lot of Americans, however, a bitter taste is left in their mouth when they learned about how the U.S. taxpayer bankrolls billions of dollars in farm subsidies that mostly go to large item business interests. I'm curious which candidate could label themselves fiscally responsible, will endorse the elimination of farm subsidies if they are elected president in 2008.

This is to Mayor Giuliani. Politico broke a story a few hours ago questioning your accounting of taxpayer dollars as mayor. They say that as mayor, the report says you took trips to the Hamptons and expensed the cost of your police detail to obscure city offices. One, is that true? And, if so, was it appropriate?

My name is LeeAnn Anderson and I am from Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, and these are my kids Evan and May. Maya is from China and we adopted him to give her a better life. We never dreamed that she would that she'd be exposed to lead after leaving China, and now we find trains like this that are covered with lead in our home. My question for the candidates are, what are you going to do to make sure that these kind of toys don't make their way into our homes and that we have safe toys that are made in America again and we keep jobs in America?

I'm Jay Fox, lifetime member of the NRA. Now, I am from a small town and as in any small time, we like our big guns. My question to you is: What is your opinion of gun control? And don't worry, you can answer however you like.

Mr. Giuliani, at a recent NRA convention, you stated that it's every American's right to be secure. Yet, on March 21 of the year 2000, The Boston Globe quoted you as saying, "Anyone wanting to own a gun should have to pass a written exam." Considering the Constitution grants us the right to bear arms as a means of protection, why do you believe that citizens should be required to pass an exam in order to exercise their right to protect themselves and their families?

I’m Eric Bentson from Phoenix, Arizona. Got a quick question for all you candidates. Any of you all want to tell us about your gun collection, roughly how many you own, what your favorite make, model and caliber is, if any of them require a tax stamp?

Hi, this is me and my son Prentiss. We're from Atlanta. I want to ask you guys a question (inaudible) every year. But what about the war going on in our country, black on black crime? Two hundred to 400 black men die yearly in one city alone. What are you going to do about that war? It feels like the (inaudible) is right outside.

Hi. My name is Journey. I'm from Texas. And this question is for all pro-life candidates. In the event that abortion becomes illegal and a woman obtains an abortion anyway, what should she be charged with, and what should her punishment be? What about the doctor who performs the abortion?

Hello, my name is AJ. I'm from Millstone, New Jersey. I would all of the candidates to give an answer on this. If hypothetically, Roe v. Wade was overturned, and the Congress passed a federal ban on all abortions and it came to your desk, would you sign it? Yes or no?

Hi. This is Tyler Overman from Memphis, Tennessee. And I have a quick question for those of you who would call yourselves Christian conservatives. The death penalty, what would Jesus do?

I am Joseph. I am from Dallas, Texas, and how you answer this question will tell us everything we need to know about you. Do you believe every word of this book? Specifically, this book that I am holding in my hand, do you believe this book?

Good evening, gentlemen. My name is Yasmin and I hail from Huntsville, Alabama. My question has to do with the current crisis in Iraq, as well as the U.S. efforts in Afghanistan. After living abroad, personally, in the Middle East for a year, I realized just how much damage the Iraq war and the perception of invasion has done to the image of America. What would you do as president to repair the image of America in the eyes of the Muslim world?

Hello, gentlemen. I'm Andrew, and I'm a college student from Seattle, Washington. Recently, Senator McCain has come out strongly against using waterboarding as an instrument of interrogation. My question for the rest of you is, considering that Mr. McCain is the only one with any firsthand knowledge on the subject, how can those of you sharing the stage with him disagree with his position?

Hello. My name is Buzz Brockway from Lawrenceville, Georgia. All the talk about the war in Iraq centers around how quickly we can get out. I think that's the wrong question. We need to make a permanent or long-term military commitment to the region. By staying in Iraq, we provide long-term stability to the region, we provide support for our allies, and we act as a deterrent to the trouble-makers in the region. Which presidential candidate will make a permanent of long-term military commitment to the people of Iraq?

Hi. My name is Sam Garcia. I'm from Colorado Springs, Colorado. The following question is for Rudy Giuliani. Mr. Giuliani, a while back, a friend and I were having a discussion about you and some of the other Republican candidates.He blatantly made this statement somewhere along the line: Rudy Giuliani is using September 11, 2001, to propel himself into the White House. My question to you is: How do you respond to this accusation and other accusations similar to it?

[Nick Anderson as Dick Cheney cartoon character] Will you grant your vice president as much power and influence as I've had? And remember, before you answer, I'm watching you.

My name's Keith Kerr, from Santa Rosa, California. I'm a retired brigadier general with 43 years of service. And I'm a graduate of the Special Forces Officer Course, the Commanding General Staff Course and the Army War College. And I'm an openly gay man. I want to know why you think that American men and women in uniform are not professional enough to serve with gays and lesbians.

Hi, my name is David Cercone. I'd like to ask all the candidates if they accept the support of the Log Cabin Republicans, and why should the Log Cabin Republicans support their candidacy?

This is Adam Florzak of Illinois. The national debt is now growing so quickly it will have increased by over half- million dollars in just the time it takes to ask this question. Over the years, politicians have borrowed just under $2 trillion from the Social Security trust fund to cover these massive budget deficits, and now the retirements of our generation are at risk. What will you do as president to help repay this money and restore the trust?

My name is Steve Nielson. And this question comes to you from Denver, Colorado. JFK's vision put a man on the moon from a nonexistent space program in about seven years. The new vision for space exploration has provided about 15 years for that same feat. Meanwhile, Congress is pulling funding for human-to-Mars research altogether. Is there a candidate amongst you willing to take a pledge on behalf of the Mars Society of sending an American to the surface of Mars by 2020? If not, what is your vision for human space exploration?

Hi, my name is David McMillan, and I'm from Los Angeles, California. On a variety of specific issues -- gay marriage, taxes, the death penalty, immigration, faith-based initiatives, school vouchers, school prayer -- many African Americans hold fairly conservative views. And yet, we overwhelmingly vote Democrat in most elections. So my question to any of the Republican candidates here is, why don't we vote for you?

Hello, my name is Leroy Brooks. I am from Houston, Texas and my question is for all the candidates. Whether this flag right here represents the symbol of racism, a symbol of political ideology, a symbol of Southern heritage -- or, is it something completely different?

Good evening. My name is Dr. Hank Campbell. I'm in Lake Worth, Florida. My question is our infrastructure. It's been estimated that to fix the bridges, the tunnels, the power grids, the water delivery systems in this country will be in excess of $2 trillion -- that is "t" for "trillion" -- and it is plural.Who among the candidates here is willing to step forward and begin to articulate the very difficult sacrifices which we need to make in order to start repairing America? Thank you.

Mark Strauss, Davenport, Iowa. This question is for Ron Paul. Mr. Paul, I think we both know that the Republican party is never going to give you the nomination. But I'm hoping that you're crazy like a fox like that and you're using this exposure to propel yourself into an independent run. My question is for Ron Paul: Mr. Paul, are you going to let America down by not running as an independent?

Giuliani, can you explain why you being a lifelong Yankees fan, that this year, after the Yankees lost everything, you rooted for the Red Sox in the postseason? Can you explain that position for me?

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Amanda Carpenter is the author of “The Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy's Dossier on Hillary Clinton,” published in October 2006.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Amanda Carpernter. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
I noticed that the retired General
served under the Clinton "don't ask, don't tell" policy, but now claims to be openly gay. Why didn't he go public while in the service and fight for his cause?

True or False?
Anderson Cooper made a clear statement that CNN did not know that the person submitting the question about gays was on Hillary Clinton's gay guidance panel. He explained this three times. You can take the position of thinking that CNN did know and that Cooper was lying. But the point at which you believe that everything Sean Hannity says is True and everything Anderson Cooper says is False, you are not making an objective judgment.

My own spotting of possible CNN editorializing would lie in the selection of the question on whether the candidates accepted Biblical inerrancy---did they believe, literally, every word in the Bible? I would not want this country run by any person who thinks that allegory---check out "Revelations"---is a literal statement of fact, and I expect most Americans feel that way and that CNN intended clarifying who's who.

As I said in the previous column
on this subject it was a mistake to allow CNN to choose the questions. I hope this is the last time the Republicans go to CNN.

say it ain't so
A politician manipulating the media for political gain? Only a Clinton could stoop so low. Of course I’m just kidding, but there is a point buried in last night’s shenanigans. Was the general lying? Was he who he said he was? Is he gay? What about gays in the military? We know the general was probably a plant. We know CNN was duped. They apologized right away. How about focusing on issues surrounding homosexuality in America instead of just thinking of clever names for Hillary.

Joe: He was afraid of reprisals. That’s the point. He doesn’t want other people serving our country to live in such fear.

Only a moron
would believe that CNN wasn't fully aware of the background of the questioners. Michelle Malkin disclosed that all were democrat campaign operatives. Maybe the GOP isn't smart enough to organize their debates. Maybe this is one where one of the smarter candidates should have sat out. If the Republicans go back to the leftist media for a debate, they deserve the mockery of a form that they will get.

i just
don't understand why republican candidates would go on a cnn debate period. cnn is inhabited with stupid, evil democrats. they are dyed in the wool democrat activist. let rush limbaugh ask dem candidates questions to get any substantial questions asked of dems... and to say they didn't know is ridiculous....and why weren't there any questions that we care about, like why are dems so against winning in iraq or why aren't they patiotic or why do they hate america.

Media complicity exposed again
I am shocked, shocked!

Fortunately, this instance is so egregious that it should further expose the duplicity of Dems and their 'win-at-all-cost' minions.

No spoonfed softballs? Oh, the horrors!
Many here act like everyone is supposed to agree with you to the degree that any question that does not must be "liberal bias".

The party needs to stop drinking its own bathwater. It's time they get out into the real world and understand how to appeal to the majority of Americans if they ever hope to regain power.

The hot seat
It was a good forum.
I preferred it to "journalist" generated questions.
You want softball questions? I don't.

I don't think the Dems need to subject themselves to this kind of forum in the primaries, but I do hope to see it repeated in the general campaign, when we have two nominees.

I see no problem.
All the candidates had to do, was answer the questions, in the best manner possible. The front runners waffled, studdered and gave little to no direct answers. It is the weakness of the republican party candidates. They offer no direction, no plan, but do offer more of the same.

The funniest moment, was Romney's claim of national security for not answering the question about torture. Sound familiar? I guess he already thinks he is president.

Just what the public wants, another Bush. I don't think so.

My problem with the debate structure
is that the moderators want you to think they are not biased. If they passionate about their beliefs then they would be in a different line of work. The fact that they think it does not show demonstrates how dumb they are; the fact that they tell us they are impartial shows how dumb they think WE are.

My suggestion is that the each candidate should bring one person to the debates, That person's job would be to ask questions that point out the weak areas of the opponent and highlight strengths of their guy. No pretense of fairness; just a level playing ground for all. The candidate would be judged not only on his own performance, but also by the quality of the person he chooses to support him.

Gee, What A Surprise!
The questioners at the CNN Democrat debate turn out to be Democratic campaign workers. The questioners at the CNN Republican debate turn out to be Democratic campaign workers. CNN is asking how they 'slipped by'. They slipped by because Anderson Crapper and that entire network are in the tank for the Democratic Party. They are hacks, not journalists. But even with the hostile, loaded questions one thing was starkly obvious; the Republican candidates can talk intelligently about the issues and differ greatly on many of their answers. They can ad lib and even make jokes. The flat, dull monotony of the Democratic debate stands in stark contrast. There were no "human rights is more important than National security" gaffes at last nights debate, unless you want to parse the lunatic ravings of Ron Paul. So, despite the CNN bias that was a pretty good show.

What's the problem?
TheEngineer is right. These guys are running for President of the United States not Homeroom Mother. I learned more about them from the hard questions they get from hostile CNN audiences than I'm likely to learn about the Dem candidates in their kiss-kiss events on the same network. It may even work to their advantage when Hill or B Hussain Obama takes that first heater later on and responds with the deer-in-the-headlights stare.

Last night, the Republicans did okay. Huck did good with the Bible question, Rudy got to the meat of the 'make the world love us again' question, and John M showed again that he's an in-your-face fighter. Mit is still the best all 'round. Where's the downside?

what's good for the goose, etc.

Perhaps it is time for those "brave" Democrats to appear on Fox News.

what's good for the goose, etc.

Perhaps it is time for those "brave" Democrats to debate on Fox News.

innane format
the questions were innane.

the debate format is a waste of time for both sides. it is nothing more than talking points and whether they looked good answering the questions.

neither side has a good straight talking candidate.

the entire campaign is worthy of a homecoming king/queen event, not the president of the US.

the gay general looked idiotic. if you do not like the policy, then don't serve.

the concern for how we look to the muslim world. the right answer, "I'm not running to serve the muslim world. i am running to serve the US. US interests are my top priority over whatever the muslim world thinks"

instead, they try to PC their way through everything. same is true on the Dem side.

why does everyone believe that everything is a federal issue or problem?

For joe_america @ 08:53
Wesley Who didn't fight for his cause, because he's basically like Joe Who (Canada's ex-PM Joe Clark)--a wimpy, hapless loser--in a uniform.

There is
absolutely no doubt. Anderson Cooper was lying & Keith Kerr was lying.
The people splattered on utube are ask everything about their political stance beforehand.

CNN is the headquarters for the communist(democrat)party.
CNN works hand in hand with the communists--led by Hillary & other pigs of her stripe.

There is
absolutely no doubt that CNN was lying & Keith Kerr was also lying.
The questioners are asked their political stance beforehand.

CNN is the communists headquarters--plugging Hillary.

JohnLemski, I see no problem, either
Of course, it's all in the eye of the beholder. I have watched only two of the debates; one Democrat and one Republican. I've seen enough to make my decision.

JohnLemski writes: "It is the weakness of the republican party candidates." I see it just the opposite, Mr. Lamb-ski/sheep-ski.

Once again the Democrats have offered a pathetic group of weak-kneed, limp-wristed, leftists - one of whom will get the nomination and carry on in the tradition of Al Gore and John Kerry - losers.

I would LOVE the opportunity to vote for a MAINSTREAM-America-type of Democrat. I guess they no longer exist. Once again, the Party of Pelosi-Reid-Soros-Huffington has left me no choice but to vote AGAINST them.

Whichever Republican survives the protracted primary process will get my vote. It's the only protest I have left against a once-great-Party that has become irreparably corrupt and corrupted.

Only Democrat voters are that dumb!
There are two kinds of Democrats: The evil ones and the stupid ones. By and large, those Democrats who get elected are just plain evil. Those who vote for them are just plain dumb. (In the case of Ted Kennedy, he falls into both categories.)That Democrats get duped so easily by OBVIOUS idiocy like these left-wing plants is PROOF of these facts.

What's worse is this general was interviewed this morning and claimed to be an "independent" and wasn't on the Clinton campaign staff! "Oh, just ignore the man behind the curtain!" Your freakin' name shows up on "Hillary Clinton for President" letterhead, you monumental fool! Only other Democrats would be so DUMB as to actually believe that he's not a member of the Klinton Klux Klan staff!

One of you moron Democrats ended up calling the Michael Graham talk show this morning claiming to be a lawyer. She actually said that just because he as listed as a member of the Clinton stearing committee doesn't really mean he's a member of that Clinton stearing committee. Riiiight! It's all just some "vast right wing conspiracy", huh? Someone snuck into the Clinton headquarters and forged those document, right?

Seriously, how DUMB are you people?

99% of this nation's problems will be solved within ONE election cycle if we only mandate IQ testing at the polls, denying morons (nearly all of which would vote Democrat) the privilege of voting.

cnn makes me want to puke
If I were to go down to my local cnn office and ransack it, would my sincere apology be sufficient to offset the damage done?

pandm
So are you saying that Kerr was not a general, or that he’s not gay?


cnn
cnn is to clinton as pravda was to the kremlin.

The question begs, how would the so called "Fairness Doctrine" apply to cnn?

American Made
People should try to by American Made products first. Our government should make fair trade really fair. If the factory would not be allowed to opertate in the US because it pollutes and abuses workers then they should not be able to seel products in the US. That would create change, ignoring them and buying the crap does not. So just buy american. Try www americansworking dot com for a directory of American Made products

Here's the problem
Okay, all you morons on the left . . . all you minions sent here to TH to load up the message board . . . here is the problem . . . and I tell you this at the risk of wasting my breath because up 'til now you've shown no compunction for logic, reason, fair play, or common sense.

The problem with the debate last night is that you have an obviously hostile network selecting obviously hostile questions, not to mention having a known Clinton supporter/steering committee member allowed to ask a question AND who was also allowed to follow up and lecture the candidates. And don't give me this HORSES**T that they didn't know? If you don't know, then it only shows their incompetence, but I don't believe that crap for a second.

Okay, I don't have a problem with people being asked tough questions. But as pointed out in the article, all of these questions were asked to get Republican candidates to talk strictly about topics that are near and dear to the hearts of DEMOCRATS.

The F&*%ing Democrat Cowards won't even agree to go on Fox News for crying out loud. Hillary Clinton got ONE tough question about illegal immigration driver's licenses and she starts accusing Tim Russert of being part of the VAST RIGHT-WING CONSPIRICY.

What happened last night has nothing to do with the Republican Primaries. It has everything to do with CNN being complicit in attempting to tar Republicans with their usual stereotypes for the general election. Gays in the military?!?! Is THAT the most important thing facing our country? The comfederate battle flag? This is more up the alley of the leftist/democrat PC police.

The fact the you idiots don't get this explains very clearly why this country is going to S**T.

"possible CNN editorializing"
Gee, lilly, so good of you to almost kinda, sorta notice it.

MikeR/pandm
Just a drive bye here "So are you saying that Kerr was not a general, or that he’s not gay? "

I think the problem here is that Gen. Kerr is a log Cabin Republican. I know most extremists here don't believe it but Hillary has strong and growing Republican support. That said adios

CNN
Becomes more irrelevant every day. This is the same network who broadcast a Dick Cheney speech with a red X over Cheney’s face. There was audible laughter from the control room. But THEY KNEW NOTHING ABOUT IT! At least GOP Candidates have guts enough to debate on CNN, but Liberal Cowards won’t debate on FOX.

mikeR
Neither,, He denied being a party of Hiilary's workers.
Did you read the follow up questioning?
It is in the news!

beowulfe
Gee once again that freedom and democracy thing gets in the way. Yes our nation could be saved if only you could get to decide who can vote and who can’t. I thought it was only the liberals who want to destroy our country.

Largecaliber: What damage was done by CNN that you feel ransacking their office is an appropriate metaphor?

pandm
Yes I read the question. Did you read my original comment? I often fantasize about a forum where we debate the issues instead of engage in name calling.

After having read every word of...
...Miss Carpenter's column, I have come to the conclusion that the questions were, although poorly articulated, almost all legitimate.

The more precise question is: Why weren't ALL of these subjects addressed with questions to the democrat candidates in their YouTube debate? I certainly would have liked to have heard their answers!

--Slow-pitch Softballs versus Fast-pitch Hardballs--

TBC :>(

Adults v. Children
Some of those questions were those one would ask an adult candidate, and not ask a child running for office. I think we can take it as a compliment that the GOP are regarded as the adults.

Here's why the fury
About 2 weeks ago, CNN held a national debate for the Democrat party candidates. After that debate, conservative bloggers noted that several of the questions were asked by Democrat party operatives.

http://hotair.com/archives/2007/11/16/random-questioner-at- debate-was-arkansas-democratic-party-officer-in-2003/

Now, CNN holds a national debate for the Republican party candidates... and we discover, shortly after, that several of the questions were asked by Democrat party operatives.

Clearly, this is planned, but by whom?

Is it possible that Democrat party operatives are so very good at constructing questions that they manage to get themselves included, not once, but several times, during each debate?

That's not impossible, but it's so unlikely (the only good writers are D party operatives? pulleeeez) that Occam's Razor requires we accept the simpler explanation, which is:

CNN is working hand-in-glove with the Democrat party.

If the debate is thus skewed by partisan considerations, shouldn't we be told?

Anderson Cooper may have been kept in the dark by his bosses, I can't say. But it's as plain as the nose in the middle of my face (which is VERY plain) that CNN is cooperating with the Democrats, to make sure all debates, whether D or R, are filled with D talking points.

Shouldn't they tell us?

Of course, this is nothing new, the other networks (except Fox) are just as cooperative with the Democrats. It's just so very obvious now.

i am sorry
but the whining over the retired general is just silly.

first, he is obviously a patriot and had a legitimate question but...

if in fact he was a plant of hilary's, which i doubt, it was a great political trick.


desu
the questions asked were more about the left's stereotypes of Republicans than any "perceived weaknesses" of the candidates. Poot is right on.

The point everyone seems to be missing..
Contrary to the mindnumbingly innane responses from the "what's wrong with letting a Communist ask a question at a Republican primary debate?" crowd is that those asking the questions are NOT the intended audience for the debate!

Those questions were not "legitimate" questions. They were not questions Republican primary voters care about one bit. They wasted time taking questions from DNC plants about subjects that NOBODY except for kooky commies -- who AREN'T going to vote in the Republican primaries -- care about. These primary debates -- Republican, Democrat, or otherwise -- are only for PRIMARY VOTERS!

Having a DNC plant ask some idiotic question about gays in the military is no less stupid than having an RNC plant ask the Klinton Klux Klan about the Rose Lawfirm billing documents. Not a single Democrat primary voter cares one bit that Hillary Clinton committed several felonies and got away with them due to a legal technicality (hence the reason they are incapable of casting a responsible vote), nor do any Republican primary voters care one bit about gays in the military.

And THAT is why this is such a big deal.

It's not surprising that you left winged kooks don't get this important point. It all goes back to my assertion about who should and should not be able to vote.

Swill
Debates are like swill--they have some nourishment value but I sure would rather select from another menu. This proposition is false: "If one debate is good, then 10 debates would be better". When I was in Viet Nam, we got a message from "on high" that said "If you work one more hour per day, you could reduce your staff by 10%". I concluded from that, if we worked 10 more hours per day, we could all go home. Just like more debates, my extrapolation was false.

If the press were not 95% Democrat...
...the Democrats would never win a national election.

Evan Thomas of Newsweek bragged before the 2004 election that press support was worth 15 percentage points in the general election. I don't think he's far wrong, but even if it were only 10%, that's more than the margin by which the D candidates have won since Roosevelt.

Democrats cannot win on a level playing field.

MikeR
Read desu's 10:57 AM post, a good description of the partisan damage done by cnn, hence my use of the ransacking metaphor.

If your okay with politics turning real ugly, I'm more than equipped to meet the challenge, but I really would rather see civility prevail.

Debates vs. Showcasing
If any of you so-called "liberal-progressives" could leave your bias and tunnel vision behind for a moment, maybe you could have watched the Republican debate held on (gasp -- horrors!) Fox News. The candidates were asked REAL questions, even ones that might be embarrassing to some of their not-very-conservative stances. Compare that to your ridiculous Dimocrap showcases with audience and moderators alike drooling and falling all over themselves to lob ridiculous softball questions so each could present his/her vision of a utopian America. And the Fox News people would certainly conduct themselves more professionally than the likes of Keith Oberman, who does everything short of spitting on his desk when "reporting" on anything that doesn't advocate turning our country into France.

Beowulf:
Hear! Hear!

Watch when the Democrats...
...start voting in the Republican primaries, like they did back in 2000.

They actually think this is appropriate -- that the Democrats get to choose who they're going to run against. Worse, if you watch their faces when busting them about it, you'll see they're actually PROUD of how clever they're being. When Richard Nixon hired plants to haze Edmund Muskie in 1972, that was evil... but for some reason, it's not evil when Democrats do something similar.

Democrats cannot win elections on a level playing field. They have to cheat.

RE: MikeR
Apparently my last response to you got lost.

Democracy and freedom can only last as long as those who vote allow it to last. Thus the reason why we ALREADY prohibit many from voting (to the disappointment of the Democratic Party). Children, convicted felons, people who are not US citizens, dead people, family pets, and imaginary people, though Democrats desperately WISH they could legally vote, cannot, all for very good reasons.

In fact, the Founders of this great nation thought that not everyone should be able to vote. Instead, though, of only making land ownership the requirement, I only want a more intelligent requirement -- the capacity to cast a responsible vote.

Only a fellow morons (read: Democrats) could actually think allowing morons to vote is somehow "protecting" freedom and democracy.

So, Robert...
...you think Evan Thomas is truly an idiot?

Because all I did was compare HIS assessment against the actual margins of D victories.

Feel free to write him and tell him what you think. Of course, he's the one who's earned the national platform, while you've earned...?

In your heart u know Huckabee Won!!
Huckabee won Hands down. He is the most articulate, humble, real candidate out of all of them-after all the verbal stumbles of the Bush presidency we have finally discovered someone who can communicate republican principles with wit & wisdom. McCain came out ok. Romney just got a beating..wow..definitely NOT his night. I wonder what Hugh Hewitt and all those who were so ready to give Romney the mantle of conservatism are doing after this one. HUCKABEE is a force to be contended with, and tonight he showed WHY he is on the rise in Iowa. The Underdog is poised to take a bite out of Rudy McRomney on Jan 3rd. The others were all a distant..3rd...Duncan Hunter had some ok stuff and Fred is frankly coming across as kinda like..hey man ..someone please pick me for VP so I can sport my hot wife around DC. And what was with the INQUISTION Style question the crackpot youtuber asked about the Bible(As if he has ever read it)(and all the man on man gay questions...and the rebel flag...weird..there had to be some better questions that those...but wow did the gays in the military question make Romney look like a TOTAL flip flopper...what a bad night for him.

Misrepresentation is the issue here
not the questions. All questions are legit regardless who asks them.

What we have is a perfect illustration of liberal character, nothing more. Most liberals are spineless people that use lies and deceit to either promote their agenda or undermine and personally destroy others.

You even see this same technique on blogs. Bloggers using conservative sounding names or profiling themselves as a Republican only to spew liberal agenda.

He who picks the ground for the battle..
...wins the battle.

This is why we object to CNN actually PLANNING the topics for discussion in cooperation with the Democrat party.

If I were one of the R candidates, I would proceed to boycott CNN for the next 20 years.

Of course, NBC, CBS, ABC, and MSNBC are also cooperating directly with the Democrat National Committee, and only casually attempting to veil it. So we might consider boycotting them as well.

Democrats cannot win elections on a level playing field. They have to cheat.

RE: Robert
So I take it you flunked litteracy in school?

It was NOT -- N-O-T -- a legitimate question simply because it is NOT -- N-O-T -- a question even ONE Republican primary voters cares even the SLIGHTEST about. It is no more legitimate than asking the candidates what they got for Christmas when they were 7-years-old.

These debates are for ONE AND ONLY purpose: to let the primary voters know where the candidates stand on issues that are important to them.

If you SERIOUSLY believe that ANY Republican primary voter in the HISTORY of Republican primaries would rank gays in the military among their top 100 most important issues, then you really aren't too smart.

The question was nothing more than a distraction by the DNC.

Robert
out of 10,000 questions submitted to you tube, the ones chosen by CNN are not about legitimacy. They are about CNN's agenda. Your comment about John Wayne movies is a clear indicator that you not only buy into the CNN stereotypes but promote them.

MikeR
Correction, that would be poot's 10:47 post, second paragraph. I'm including the spell check 'you're' in the correction.

Re: My 11:33 post.

beowulfe
flunked "litteracy" school? That's prety funy.

I'm so glad that the right wing
has never used the media to get a point across. These criticisms are coming from people like you all who didn't say a word when Bush organized his "Town Hall" meetings across the country by stacking them with phoney questions designed to make him look good and audiences who were loyal to the Right or just plain operatives.

There are so many hypocrites posting here - It's amazing to me that you suddenly are outraged.

The Bush "Town Hall" meetings were never publicized as staged, pre-written events, and the so-called "liberal media" networks that broadcast them pretended they were spontaneous, honest debates as well.

You guys just amaze me.

Uh huh.
"flunked "litteracy" school? That's prety funy."

Nuff said.

military lovin' dogg
You must have just spilled your latte on you laptop - or maybe you haven't yet awaken.

RE: MLD
What wikipedia obviously forgot to mention is that Clark was FIRED from his job by none other than Bill Clinton himself because he was caught on several occations yucking it up with the leaders of those we were currently engaged in a war with.

Selective outrage? Hardly
touj, ever the vicious accuser, writes: "These criticisms are coming from people like you all who didn't say a word when Bush organized his "Town Hall" meetings across the country by stacking them with phoney questions designed to make him look good and audiences who were loyal to the Right or just plain operatives."

What you claim, never happened. There were hoots and catcalls from the Left over military questioners rehearsing their questions in advance of a Presidential visit, but that's not the same as planting partisan questions. There were also these silly comments about one -- ONE! -- reporter in the press corps that some Leftists didn't think deserved to be there -- as though Helen Thomas DOES deserve to be there.

You know what? I found the notion that someone in the Bush administration allowed ONE unqualified journalist access to the floor for personal reasons distasteful. Not scandalous, not outrageous -- distasteful.

I find CNN pretending to be impartial while coordinating campaign strategy with the Democrats dishonest and outrageous.

And I believe my standards are consistent.

Oh, and I find touj's repetitive false accusations of hypocricy tiresome and vicious. Again, being consistent and accurate.

largecaliber
That makes more sense since desu's 10:57 AM post, is supportive of CNN and does not describe any damage being done. Poot’s comments, once we filter out the derogatory, still don’t amount to that much damage. In essence, the republicans get dealt hard balls while the democrats get the soft ones. It’s not fair. Fortunately this is not a homerun derby. The campaign should be decided on the issues. As for civility and sticking to the issues, no one wants that more than me. For example, the question was about gays in the military and society at large. It may not be the most important question we face, but it’s the one thing we are not addressing here.

Beowulfe; I am well aware of the voting restrictions and support them all, but that is not what you are saying. You claim that there are “two kinds of Democrats: The evil ones and the stupid ones” and you propose that they not be allowed to vote. Like your obsession with communism, this is not based in logic but emotionalism. Don’t be coy; your lack of rationality is considered a virtue around here.

military loving duke (I mean dogg)
you're an idiot.

Don't blame CNN
The Republican candidates ought to have shine by sticking to their principles; like when Mitt Romney when said, "he absolutely supports farm subsidies."

The homosexual issue is divisive, like it is the abortion issue. How hard it is to identify them as Democratic red herrings?

Republicans ought to have made clear that were NOT running on the issues of gays in the military and abortion.

Why do Republicans allow the Democrats to set the agenda? Always!

Republicans ought to make clear they are not the Party of the stupid. Weak dollar, War, Energy Independence, Taxation, Illegal Immigration, the North-American Union.

Those are the issues for the Presidency; abortion and gayhood are cultural, society at large issues, that would evolve as society evolves. Republicans ought not to join the left wing elites in a top-down engineering of society.

They ought to have smelled a rat when the questions about those issues failed to appear.

Why, did not even one of them question the questioners about this? What a lost opportunity to stick it to CNN.

If Democrats win we won't have a strong military; gays in it, or not.

Question to Dem candidate
"Hi, I'm an undecided Democrat from Dennis, MA, and my question is this: Since every socialist experiment in 20th century Europe, not to mention Asia, failed miserably and all the nations who tried them are now systematically attempting to take advantage of the free market to solve social problems effectively, why are you all proposing solutions that rely on omniscient government to solve social problems? Why aren't we joining the rest of the world in recognizing the futility of central planning?"

Think that's fair? Think that was actually written by a Democrat?

Think maybe 8 more questions in that vein would be a good idea?

I find this discussion tiresome, The way Democrats squalled like 4-year-olds who lost their Tonka truck when ABC presented ONE program that assigned equal blame for 9/11 to Democrat and Republican administrations, illustrates what we all know -- that Democrats wouldn't be willing to live for a week under the circumstances they've been dishing out to Republicans for the last 50 years.

Infants.

Half an hour
was all I could take of that silliness.

If I were going to have a "reality show" (it was not a debate) generated by YouTube, I would prefer that it be moderated by the Animaniacs. They are also available on YouTube and are a lot more intelligent than any of the people I saw during the time I was tuned in.

P.S. to Romney: DO SOMETHING ABOUT YOUR HAIR!

The jokes continue
MLD recites his talking points nicely: "...from Ohio to Florida, Republicans have been busted cheating in national and local elections. "

"Have been busted" translates to "have been wildly accused by hard-core leftists, without a single shred of evidence.

Here's the ruling of Judge Sanders Sauls, the judge who actually heard the Democrats' case in Florida court, claiming that the Republicans had cheated. The judge was a Carter appointee, by the way:

"There is no credible statistical evidence and no other competent substantial evidence to establish by a preponderance a reasonable probability that the results of the statewide election in the state of Florida would be different from the result which has been certified by the state elections canvassing commission,'' the judge said in his ruling.



``The court further finds and concludes the evidence does not establish any illegality, dishonesty, gross negligence, improper influence, coercion or fraud in the balloting and counting processes...'"

Busted, indeed.

Oh, and you know all those black votes that got discarded in Florida? Follow-up research unearthed the fact that ballots cast by Republicans were 55 TIMES MORE LIKELY to be discarded than ballots cast by Democrats in those counties. The fact that black ballots were statistically more likely to be discarded turned out to be caused by an intervening variable, that the cheating AGAINST REPUBLICANS took place in counties that were predominantly black. The ballots of white Republicans were far more likely to be discarded than the ballots of black Democrats. Oh -- and the election supervisor in every one of the counties in the Civil Rights Commission's study was black, and all but one were Democrats (the one ezception was Independent.)

Seems like it was the Democrats who got busted, actually...

Touj said

"These criticisms are coming from people like you all who didn't say a word when Bush organized his "Town Hall" meetings across the country by stacking them with phoney questions designed to make him look good and audiences who were loyal to the Right or just plain operatives."

Inkling said: "What you claim, never happened."

That's a bald lie, Inkling. It not only happened once it was de rigeur for the Bush Camp. This is verifiable, and all of the denial in Right wing-ville isn't going to change it.




Many of the questions
... seem to be what I'd expect -- not "tough," but simply internally biased, in the "Have you stopped beating your wife?" vein. (Plus the usual "Only gun nuts favor Second Amendment rights" question.) Can't get too worked up about that. It IS an education on the candidates to see how they handle such "questions," which are really carefully selected statements.

However, I didn't watch the debate. So I'm left with more information about CNN's editorial staff than anything else.

Note on the gay general's question: it was not legitimate, because the ability to live in close quarters with an openly gay person is not a criterion of professionalism -- for the military or for any other line of work. He could have asked this question differently, and had a legitimate query. But he chose instead to prejudice the debate with a false premise that delegitimized his question. The question merited not a direct answer, but a criticism of its logic and tendentiousness.

Whatever. I cannot properly express how tedious and nauseating I find this whole, idiotically extended process. November 2008, where are you?

Touj said

"These criticisms are coming from people like you all who didn't say a word when Bush organized his "Town Hall" meetings across the country by stacking them with phoney questions designed to make him look good and audiences who were loyal to the Right or just plain operatives."

Inkling said: "What you claim, never happened."

That's a bald lie, Inkling. It not only happened once it was de rigeur for the Bush Camp. This is verifiable, and all of the denial in Right wing-ville isn't going to change it.




Since I caught a couple of leftie lies..
...it's become de rigeur to accuse me of lying at every opportunity. That's how propagandists hide the fact that they've been caught in the act.

touj accused me of lying about the fact -- and fact it is -- that the Left's claims about Bush fixing town hall meetings were illusory. I discussed the two instances about which I'm very familiar; touj didn't even make the attempt to provide contrary facts, or contrary instances.

Sorry, fella, you lose again. Propagandists don't fare well in the internet culture, it's far too easy to spot them and show them up for what they are.




Sorry, MLD
Changing the subject only works if I let you do it.

The judge ruled as he did without the Republicans even having to present a case -- because there was NO evidence of Republican cheating. None. The Democrats made the charges, but couldn't even present enough of a case for them to make a Democrat judge require the Republicans to argue.

The facts are the facts. In Florida, in 2000, the Democrats cynically and deliberately undermined the public's confidence in the voting process in a vain attempt to change the outcome of an election THEY KNEW THEY HAD LOST. Any attempt to say otherwise is just so much Democrat lying...

As for Ohio, the claims are laughable. The Democrats lost by 150,000 votes, and all they could offer as an excuse was that the President of a company that made voting machines happened to be a Republican.

I recommend everybody here to read Hugh Hewitt's book entitled "If It's Not Chose, They Can't Cheat." He documents Democrat election-fixing through the years. Tammany Hall, the Prendergast machine, the Daley machine, the Rizzo machine, the Connelly machine -- ALL DEMOCRATS. There's never been a comparable Republican corruption machine in the history of the nation.

Military Lovin' %$#@-for-Brains Writes
"A known CLINTON supporter asked a question - oh my! For now on, vet all questions that might require a thought and an answer..."
Poot's Response:
Go back and reread my post. In the first paragraph I admitted that "I tell you this at the risk of wasting my breath because up 'til now you've shown no compunction for logic, reason, fair play, or common sense."
The problem is you idiot leftists are either too dumb to get the points being made or you're deflecting from the point because you have no valid arguments. Okay, I'm going to type REEAALLYY SLOWLY so you can keep up.
The point being made here isn't that the questions were tough or that it matters who is asking them. The point is that the questions were irrelevant to selecting the Republican nominee. As mentioned in earlier posts, Republicans couldn't care less about promoting the militant gay agenda of turning our fighting forces into their own little social laboratory.
The point is that the questions selected were not intended to help Republicans choose their best candidate for the general election. They were chosen to play "gotcha" politics. That's fine if you're a Democrat who has no intention of voting Republican in the first place. The point is that it was a waste of time.
The second point is that the Democrats are not treated to the same idiocy. They won't go on Fox News where I GUARANTEE you they would be asked honest questions by ADULT moderators.
Finally, the third point is that this is a clear indication of many things: 1) yes, there is leftist bias at CNN and other networks. 2) no, leftists and their allies have no shame or sense of responsibility to do anything above board and honestly. 3) leftists will do anything, ANYTHING to win. 4) There is NO intellectual honesty on the left. Period. The Ends Justify the Means. This is the motto of the left.

Oops on the title
Hewitt's book is entitled, "If it's not CLOSE, they can't cheat."

Anderson Cooper lying?
Lilly thinks that the only way we can say CNN was partisan in the debates is if we assert that Anderson Cooper is LYING. That's hilariously wrong.

Possibility one: Somebody at CNN other than Anderson Cooper selected the questioners, and didn't tell Cooper how they did it, so Cooper was telling the truth when he said he didn't know.

Possibility two: Whoever picked the questions at CNN is a partisan Democrat who naturally was drawn to questions highlighting Democrat talking points, so Cooper was telling the truth when he said nobody knew.

Possibility three: Cooper WAS lying (I actually don't believe this, but it's possible.)

Of course, you should read my post of 11:26 AM to see just how widespread is the Democrat influence on CNN's question selection. No less than FOUR of the questioners turn out to be partisan Democrats, and can be seem to be so simply by viewing their web pages. And this, after three DNC plants were detected two weeks ago during CNN's debate among Democrat candidates.

Give it up, lilly. We've known for years that the networks work hand-in-glove with the Democrats during election season. If it weren't so, you folks would never win a national election.

poot
Good post.

And you are right. It is a waste of cyber-space to talk logic and common sense to MLD. He does in fact have #$%& for brains.

MLD
The claim is that Bush produced his own questioners. If the best you can come up with to prove it is a single line, without citation, saying that a few individuals were thrown out of a rally, then I guess I win.

inkling
These sources include articles from the NY Times, Blogs, and Fox news about the phoney "Town Hall" set up meetings that were paid for with taxpayer money.

I also included an incident about Fred Thompasons campaign staff planting a question to McCain.

You are simple a liar and worse, a hypocrite.

http://www.infowars.com/articles/ps/propaganda_town_hall_me eting_invites.htm

http://www.truthout.org/cgi-bin/artman/exec/view.cgi/37/955 5

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/04/08/1346227

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9D07E5D8123A F933A15751C0A9639C8B6

http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2007Oct21/0,4670,McCainThompso nDonor,00.html

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,153720,00.html

Stay under the covers
You people are as scared as GWB. If it weren't for your greed I doubt you'd ever get out of bed. Fear, greed and god, the three primary values of Fox News and Conservatives, can only result as we've seen, in irrationality and incompetence. React, don't think. Thinking probably hurts too much I love reading paranoid blogs like townhall and drudge. If you poured all the intellect on this site into a tub you wouldn't even get the bottom of your feet weet.

Planted Questions by CNN
While most of the questions on debates are reviewed for submission, how did this one slip by?

But, in all fairness, it was a valid question that should have received a direct answer.


inkling
You know you're wasting your time with lilly, right?

If someone said it rained 10 inches, and another person said No, it only rained 8 inches -- in lillyworld, the second person was calling the first a liar, and not only that, was asserting, against all observation and reason, that it didn't rain AT ALL, and not only that, was insisting that there's no such thing as rain, and we should sell our umbrellas to enrich ourselves further over the poor people.

No, that's not the point
poot's right about a lot, but wrong about this:

"The point is that the questions selected were not intended to help Republicans choose their best candidate for the general election. They were chosen to play "gotcha" politics. That's fine if you're a Democrat who has no intention of voting Republican in the first place. The point is that it was a waste of time."

It's not a waste of time at all. It's a concerted attempt by the Democrats to have the election decided on the basis of the issues as the Democrats define them.

The outcome of most elections is decided by a large plurality, about 20% of the vote count, who decide who to vote for late in the game on the basis of sound bites and general impressions. If the Democrats get to choose the sound bites and control the impressions, they win the majority of those.

That's why the Democrats go to all the trouble of playing these little games. They wouldn't do it if they were just interested in gotchas; they do it because they can sway elections that way.

It's another instance of how people with no moral character can ruin a republic. The system we have presupposes players of good will and sound moral character, and the men who created it, knew it and said so. Without those, the system collapses around our ears.

Democrats cannot win fair elections. They have to cheat.

spmosher
Do you think all this gnashing of teeth and moaning is an attempt to cover up the embarrassing responses to the question?

military lovin' dogg
In combat, you want someone who's got your back, not checking out your behind - or maybe you really want to be "lovin" the military ... dogg.

Inkling said
"Democrats cannot win fair elections. They have to cheat."

Gee, does anybody remember Watergate, swiftboating, McCain's "illegitmate black child", the 43 people Clinton "murdered", Ohio, Florida, the Rkansas Project?

Inkling, you are not only a liar and a hypocrite, you are a whiner.

Wah - Wah - wah!

Dyerje et.al.
It's interesting to me that for all the babies who like to attack Lilly, not one has ever been able to dispute her research. All the attacks are like yours, they are just general, mud-slinging assaults that are totally meaningless.

If Lilly is so constantly wrong, why are you and the rest of your lynch mob never able to counter her arguments or statements with facts?

This is a joke, right?
We're talking here of CNN allowing three DNC plants to ask questions at a Democrat debate, and then four partisan Democrats to ask questions at a Republican debate, one of whom was a member of Clinton's steering committee.

And touj is accusing me of "lying" (which he doesn't even attempt to prove) and "hypocricy" -- and what's his evidence?

That President Bush held a rally at which he only invited Republicans.

Go ahead, read all the news stories touj posted. That's the WHOLE CHARGE -- that Bush only invited Republicans to a rally about Social Security reform.

I don't think I can come up with words to describe how silly it is of touj to attempt to compare the two situations. OF COURSE the President can hold partisan rallies. It happens every time the President runs for re-election. Hey, I imagine only conservatives showed up at the President's speech to the Heritage Foundation, too. (http://www.heritage.org/Press/Commentary/bush111103.cfm) Was that another instance of Republican plants?

Honestly, touj, the venom you muster over such ordinary things.

Admit it: Democrats cheat, Republicans don't. If what you produced is the best evidence you can come up with, you'd better admit that it's a fact.

lilly's "research?"
touj seems to have clipped the words from an effective rebuttal of some mindless liberal here, and reposted them as propaganda:

"It's interesting to me that for all the babies who like to attack Lilly, not one has ever been able to dispute her research."

I've never seen lilly post research that was relevant to any point that was germane to any discussion we've held here. Whenever she does offer research, it's supporting either an irrelevancy or an attempt to change the subject (which, in addition to character assassination, is the only way liberals know how to debate.)

She certainly produced no research for today's post. All she said was "You think Anderson Cooper's always lying, and you think Sean Hannity never is."

Seems to me, touj, that if you're going to pretend to be persuaded by research, you should at least wait until some has been presented...

Trolls
Suprises me the number of trolls on this site.

I have the debate recorded and will watch it tonight after reading the reviews.

Some of the questions in the article seem very legitimate and deserve good answers.

The question about military personel being "professional enough" is exactly like asking someone if they have stopped beating their wife, or asking a doctor if he still kills his patients.

I think the don't ask don't tell policy is wrong. We should ask and we should decline their enlistment. If they lie, and they are caught engaging in homosexual acts, then give them a dishonorable discharge.


Wow, touj is a female
I guess I should have know from the shape of your FONT, right? Idiot. (Oh, horrors, I've called a WOMAN an idiot. What an abusive, violent male I am...)

touj's repetition of her propaganda line: "You know that it wasn't about "plants" from CNN - you're lying again, or you didn't read the whole story."

I don't lie. Please go read my post from 11:26 AM if you don't understand my point about CNN manipulating the debates. And by the way -- you might want to think about the distinction between "CNN plants" and "CNN allowed DNC plants". Those are two very different statements. I made the latter, you accused me of the former.

I do sometimes err, and I often generalize. The claim "Democrats cheat, Republicans don't" is an exaggeration of a valid point. Richard Nixon did cheat some (35 years ago) and several folks in South Carolina launched slimy attacks against several Republican primary candidates. But one can point to any major time period since the Civil War and discover a large-scale, Democrat-dominated, corrupt political machine controlling some major city, and there's no comparable Republican entity. Dead voters, bus-loads of illegal immigrants, paid professional voters voting 10 or 15 times each, rigged ballots, etc. are common Democrat tricks, and we see these shenanigans in every election.


The_Shadow
In what way is the question about military personnel being "professional enough" exactly like asking someone if they have stopped beating their wife, or asking a doctor if he still kills his patients?


MLD can't really be that stupid...
...or could he?

"Inkling, since you have a new found respect for the judiciary, and since we all know that a $40 million investigation into the Clintons never came up with credible evidence - including a failed impeachment attempt, do you now agree that the Clintons were improperly accussed - or do you pick and choose the investigations that suit your causes?"

No evidence? FAILED impeachemnt?

Point in fact, an entire ROOM was dedicated to the dozens of boxes filled with documentation proving Clinton did, in fact, commit perjury and obstruction of justice.

Point number two: The impeachment didn't fail. Slick Willy became the first elected president in history to be impeached. Furthermore, he was disbarred and can no longer plea a case before the Supreme Court...FOREVER! In fact, the case against Slick Willy was so strong that ALL NINE of the Supreme Court justices -- INCLUDING THE TWO HE NOMINATED -- boycotted his State of the Union Address following his impeachment!

And finally, the ONLY reason Hill Clinton isn't sitting in a prison cell right now is because of a legal technicality. Google "Rose Lawfirm billing documents" if you don't believe me.

Inkling:
"As for Ohio, the claims are laughable. The Democrats lost by 150,000 votes, and all they could offer as an excuse was that the President of a company that made voting machines happened to be a Republican."

What's worse is that in 2004, not even ONE Diebold voting machine was even used in Ohio.

So, if 2 libs run, vote for the (R)?
Talk show hosts and coservative comentators have allowed George Soros to choose the Republican candidates for Bill Clinton's wife to run against, refusing to stand by their principles in discussing Guiliani, McCain, Romney and others.

Now they are all upset and indignant because CNN is choosing the issues the candidates will discuss.

What they should be doing is getting off their lazy duffs and doing a Kerry job on every one of these Republicans, going back over their sorry, miserable histories, instead of acting like little worthless doormats. Talk show hosts are now clear: if two liberals run, vote for the one with the (R).






MikeR
Using "professional enough" is grade school logical fallacy - petitio principii....otherwise known as "begging the question".

For instance....if I asked MLD, "Do you think you will ever be smart enough to become a conservative?"


Silliness of the left.
Several posts by the resident Townhall kooky commies refer to the "townhall style" Bush rallies with planted questions, as if it is even comparable.

Those were freakin' Bush rallies, whose purpose was nothing more than to cheer on Bush. Who cares if there were plants?

And lest you think I'm a hypocrite, I say the same thing about the plants at the Clinton rallies.

Heck, I don't even care about the Democrat plants at the Democratic primary debates!

As I've stated REPEATEDLY, these debates are supposed to aid PRIMARY VOTERS into deciding for whom they will vote! Democratic plants at Democratic debates is a bug "well DUH!" There you have Democratic primary voters asking questions on issues they care about.

On the other hand, having Democratic plants at a Republican primary debate is a COMPLETELY DIFFERENT issue than Democratic plants at a Democratic primary debate, and is CERTAINLY different from Republican plants at a freakin' Republican rally!

Next you morons will regurgitate your "Who cares if Dan Rather is biased to the left! You have Rush!" As if a news REPORTER is the same thing as a news ANALYST!

this whole discussion is absurd
first what is up with some conservatives and their victimization mentality.

they would win all elections if it weren't for
the clintons
the liberal media
the aclu
the activist judges
the george soro's
the unions
the education system.

whining about how everything is against them.

take responsiblity for yourselves instead of blaming others.

as for the planted questions, even if hilary was behind it (vast left wing conspiracy again??) so what.

plant someone in the next democrat debate.

i mean its not like this is immoral in any shape or form.

its politics with the major leaguers. get over it

"calm.Touj"
Actually, I've countered lilly with facts on a number of occasions. I even sometimes agree with her.

You do seem to go straight to the pejorative personal attacks before knowing other posters better.

I can recommend this: if you want to accuse others of wild unreason and trotting out the lynch mobs -- and there are plenty of right-wingers who have earned such accusations at TH, as well as left-wingers -- don't resort to that tactic yourself.

CalmTouj
Inking Revival is just one of many libs who sit at TH allday and issue snaky, trollish comments. So many libs come here that an uninformed reader would think TH is a libsite. Either they cannot stand the thought of other people having views diametrically opposed to them, or they are so bored and have so much time on thier hands that TH is just sport for them. In any event they contribute to the advertising dollars of TH.

Want to see something fascinating?
Seriously, this is something else. Hotair.com put together a video illustrating how many of the questioners at the last Democrat debate were known political activists, and were known by leading Democrats. And notice how Blitzer keeps repeating the phrase "undecided voter."

http://hotair.com/archives/2007/11/29/at-cnn-november-is-pl anting-season/

Democrats sending plants to ask Democrats questions, not such a scandal, right? But then, two weeks later, we have the same network allowing Democrat activists ask the Republicans questions. This is not a coincidence.

The point is that CNN seems to be intent on helping the Democrat National Committee orchestrate the election. If the Democrats get to ask the questions, then the Democrats get to choose the issues for the debate, and they'll choose Democrat issues.

Boycott CNN.

Ron Paul wins again
Of course, Ron Paul wins the post debate polling again. Who else could win other than Ron Paul? Ron Paul's standing as the champion of the debates is becoming automatic, it's spontaneous. Ron Paul's honesty and integrity has become ubiquitous. Even though CNN limits his input, Ron Paul still wins. Ron Paul could stand on the stage and not say a single word the entire debate and still win the post debate polling just on the fact of his long established principles of freedom, integrity, and honesty.

Icedog
Not in this case. Kerr said, “American men and women in the military are professional enough to serve with gays and lesbians.” Using your example would produce the statement "I think MLD is smart enough to become a conservative."

That’s what I wanted The_Shadow to realize. In a question form, consider the following: Do you think the troops are up to the challenge ahead of them? That is a legitimate question. The matter of gays in the military is a legitimate topic. I’m not offering an opinion either way (although I support it). I’m just saying let’s debate it.



RE: MLD
"Republican nonsense - if he committed perjury why - unlike Scooter Libby, was he not hauled into a coutry and charged and convicted..."

Because he was president.

Point in fact, NOT EVEN ONE -- Democrat OR Republican -- Senator ever even ENTERED the room dedicated to holding the evidence against Clinton. The Senate voted against removing him from office NOT because he was, in fact, guilty (he was proven guilty, and in a plea accepted to pay a fine and lose his law license), but because of politics.

Finally, the senate is not involved in any "sentencing". The ONLY thing the senate had to vote on was whether to remove Clinton from office.

And comparing the Libby case to Clinton's impeachment is amusing.

Starr was originally assigned to investigate the Whitewater scandal, where he got at least 11 convictions relating to that. He got pulled into the Monica mess after SCOTUS ruled that Clinton could be sued for sexual harrassment, which, by the way, was ALSO proven, and Slick Willy settled with his accuser with a big payoff.

Fitzgerald, however, was assigned to investigate the "outing" of a supposed "covert CIA agent." Fitzy is on record admitting that he knew who the "outer" was after less than 7 days of investigating (it was Richard Armitage, OPPONENT of the Iraq war), and also that no crime had been committed, owing to the fact that Plame was NOT a "covert CIA agent", but a desk jockey in Quantico. Yet he persisted in his witch hunt were he didn't even ACCUSE anyone of the outing, instead opting to accuse some low-level twit of giving testimony that disagreed with that of a reporter who HERSELF admitted she lied during questioning.

"Impeachment - like indictment, means nothing"

Keep repeating that if it helps you sleep at night. Just remember: William Jefferson Clinton is the only elected president in history to ever be impeached for High Crimes and Misdemeanors.

What the left-wing whackos don't...
...understand is that most of us independant voters will punish them at the polls next year. CNN or the Clinton Nuts Network should pat their slimy anti-American backs while they can. Republicans get asked questions about Islamic Terrorist groups, Abortion, Faith and what torture is. The Democratic liberal Party can't even answer a simple question regarding Drivers Licenses for illegal aliens! Remember a debate or two ago when Hillary Clinton was asked whether she liked "diamonds or pearls?" If any of you trolling left-wing whackos really care about this country... leave your ridiculous party!

MikeR
Not so, his exact question was, "I want to know why you think that American men and women in uniform are not professional enough to serve with gays and lesbians?"

This is not a statement...and it is definitely an example of "begging the question". Using my prior example, it would be more accurately worded as, "Why do you think MLD is not smart enough to become a conservative?" It's a loaded question and a grade school tactic. I would expect much better from a retired general, but he is a liberal, so.......





RE: MLD
"Who cares if Dan Rather is left wing - as long as he performs his job as he's supposed to. It's interesting - the only two jobs where Republicans check political ID at the door is teacher and journalist - as if professionals can't do their job without allowing their PERSONAL feelings to interfere."

Um, no, see, this is why I continue to point out that we are, in fact, far smarter than you ever could dream of being. We don't care for whom someone votes if they can do their job. We care when their politics interferes with their job, and is IRREFUTABLY the case with Dan Blather. His EXTREME anti-Republican bigotry led DIRECTLY to his making a fool out of himself and CBS in the whole "Forged Memogate". There really is only one of two choices on that case:

1) Dan Rather KNEW the document was forged, and didn't care, so long as it made Bush look bad.

or 2) He is so blinded by his ideology that he is incapable of doing his job and checking his sources when it comes to attacking Republicans.

The thing is, this wasn't even his first, or even most eggregious, example of made up stories designed to defame Republicans. One of the most significant "Rathergates" had to do with a "documentary" he did about Vietnam veterans coming back from the war with serious mental illnesses. It turned out that something like 9 out of 10 of the guys he interviewed and showed in the documentary either never went to Vietnam or were never even members of the military at all. It's not like that stuff is tough to verify. The Department of Defense records like that are open to the public, ferchrissake!

Either Dan Rather is a liar or his ideology interferes with his ability to report the news, and THAT is the issue we have with the kooky commie media.

Hypocrisy
To those who are offended by Hillary's planted question, they may want to sit down, if they are not already. The Bush presidency has been one long stage handled plant and staged photo op. He, back in 03, had his handlers tell a group of troops what questions to ask him and then the world saw the beforehand tampering. Then his FEMA pretends to have a news conference, only problem was it was a plant too. Then there was also, before all this, Bush having a guy fly him onto an aircraft carrier, which had to sail our five miles from the San Diego Harbor, to land for another photo op. There's much more.

Icedog
I understand. Asking the candidates in that manner is what I would consider a loaded question. It is a legitimate area of inquiry; so yes, Kerr should have done better.

The lies just never stop
We're here discussing CNN allowing Dem activists and Dem campaign plants to ask questions at a Republican debate (just two weeks after they allowed known Dem activists to ask all the questions at the Democrat debate, posing as "undecided voters"). The issue is that CNN appears to be shilling for the Democrats, while claiming to be objective.

And one liberal post after another tries to bring up Republicans "fixing" photo ops and such.

They illustrate, time after time, how incapable Democrats are of either thinking or of telling the truth.

Here are a few instances from Taft's version of the DNC Talking Point of the Day:

"[Bush] back in 03, had his handlers tell a group of troops what questions to ask him and then the world saw the beforehand tampering."

Debunked thoroughly. The troops simply rehearsed their questions beforehand. They were not given the questions by anybody.

"Then his FEMA pretends to have a news conference"

Had nothing to do with either the President or Republican politics. Some stupid bureaucrat about 9 levels removed from the Presidency was covering his flanks, and got caught.

"Bush having a guy fly him onto an aircraft carrier, which had to sail our five miles from the San Diego Harbor, to land for another photo op."

Gee, yes. Presidents do arrange photo ops. They arrange partisan rallies, too; we've already covered that today.

And meanwhile, we're ignoring the point: CNN cooperates with the Democrats in a partisan attempt to control the election.

Just how do Presidential photo ops relate to that? Stop changing the subject, Taft: CNN is cooperating with the Democrat party. It's obvious, and Presidential photo ops have nothing to do with that.

CNN
ink wants people to stop watching Glenn Beck. Even stupid people accidentally say something smart. Good job.

True To Form!!!
First of all, there is no comparison whatsoever between Clinton and Pres. Bush and planted questions. The C's are dishonest, manipulators, socialists, anti American and immoral. Now, concerning the Debate? last night. We got what was expected from CNN. Those so called unbiased questions were not. The general had no right giving his gay rights agenda speech during the debate. Anderson Cooper should have shut him up right after he answered AC's question. CNN should have known he was a plant and they did. The Bible question was way out there and totally rediculous,(every word in the Bible?). The corn question was a plant as he was involved in Jane Harmons campaign. She is a Dem. Congresswoman from CA. CNN manipulated the political process last night. Shame on them. Let's see who did they get there marching orders from? Hm! The whole thing was a sham!!!

Before all Huckabee supporters...
get too excited, his pro amnesty agenda will stop his bid to become President. Last night Huckabee said that "we should not punish the children of illegal aliens... and that even though they are here illegally themselves, we should give them American tax dollars for college scholarships."

Really? We punish American children everyday for mistakes their parents make. If a couple sells drugs and are sent to prison, their children suffer. If a childs parent (like Drew Petersen, kills his wife, allegedly, the child is punished when his father goes to jail, they become orphans.) Parents make bad decisions all the time! Kids many times suffer the consenquences!

Plus Romney made a good point, he told Huckabee that "it wasn't HIS money to give away." It's our money. American tax-payers, for Americans.

I wish some of you cons would stop
playing the VICTIM card.

OOhhhhh, MEDIA BIAS!! CNN is SHILLING for the dems! Unlevel playing field!! OOhhhhhhh....that Anderson Cooper is GAY....and a liberal! HE can't moderate a proper conservative debate!!

Poor me! Help! My candidates can't answer the question properly unless it's presented in the way that Michael Medved & OxyContin-popping Rush Limbaugh would phrase it! That damned liberal mainsteam media BIAS! Oh poor me, poor me.....

Ink
Did you see the post above by JPK blasting you for being a liberal troll?!?

I had to reread it, am I missing something?

Reply to Will
Conservatives don't whine, we leave that to the limp wristed liberal Daily Kos reading Anderson Cooper loving don't ask don't tell bloggers like you Will.

Hillary "Tim ... (starting to shrill) this is where people say gotcha, (all he asked her was if she was for drivers licenses before she was against them)I I I I I I ... "

Rush & Sean are admittedly conservative, but you hypocrites never admit that all except Dobbs is a liberal on CNN. CNBC, NBC, ABC and CBS are all liberal left-wing stations.

Will, if you were half the man Ann Coulter was you would know that.

True To Form!!!
First of all, there is no comparison whatsoever between Clinton and Pres. Bush and planted questions. The C's are dishonest, manipulators, socialists, anti American and immoral. Now, concerning the Debate? last night. We got what was expected from CNN. Those so called unbiased questions were not. The general had no right giving his gay rights agenda speech during the debate. Anderson Cooper should have shut him up right after he answered AC's question. CNN should have known he was a plant and they did. The Bible question was way out there and totally rediculous,(every word in the Bible?). The corn question was a plant as he was involved in Jane Harmons campaign. She is a Dem. Congresswoman from CA. CNN manipulated the political process last night. Shame on them. Let's see who did they get there marching orders from? Hm! The whole thing was a sham!!!

Yes, we would be.
will shrieks: "Let's take a analogous situation. Let's say somebody from the Huckabee campaign planted a question about the morality of late-term abortions into a democratic debate. Would TH.com & all of you be OUTRAGED that the Huckabee campaign "interfered"."

That's not exactly a comparable situation, but let's take it as stated. I WOULD, in fact, be disappointed in Mr. Huckabee and his campaign for interfering with the Democrat primaries. Deciding on the Democrat candidate is for Democrats.

But you know, of course, that that will never happen -- not because Huckabee is so very honest (although I think he is), but because there isn't any network that's cooperating with the Republican National Committee to set the tone of the national debate entirely in RNC terms.

There IS, however, a network cooperating with the Democrat National Committee to set the tone of the national debate entirely in Democrat terms. (Er... make that SIX networks. ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, TBS, CNN. And that's just TV.)

This is, of course, a distortion of the democratic process. The press is expected to act as a more or less equal-opportunity truth detector; not that all players have to be completely objective, mind you, but there ought to be voices on all sides of any issue. The problem we face today is that liberals have blocked conservatives from obtaining jobs in certain industries for the last 35 years, and now, predictably, they control the market in those areas. One of them is news reporting. This threatens the proper functioning of the republic.

Democrats would never win a national election if this were not so. If they had not distorted news reporting, the parties in the US would be one hard-core conservative, one moderate, and the liberals would be on the fringe like the libertarians.

Ice, yeah, I saw that.
Pretty funny, actually. I don't remember who JPK is.

Hey, how does one get their nick to link to their blog site here? Does the blog have to be a Townhall blog for that to work? I ask, because I'm in the process of bringing up a political blog site, and I'd like to tout it here if I can.

ink, etc
Some of you are taking a dishonest position.

That, somehow, it is "illegitimate" if a question is planted....& yet LEGITIMATE (not "shrieking", ink, they're just caps) if a conservative asks the very SAME QUESTION.

I don't care if Marion Barry, high in crack, asked the question. They should pick the best questions regardless of who asked or planted them. And good con candidates should be able to turn a "liberally"-spun question to their own advantage (Dennis Praeger does this all the time on his radio show). Yes, from the outside looking in, you all do sound like you're playing the victim.

Will
Legitimate question my _ _ s. Before you go back to posting at the KOS, please understand that conservatives are as breathtakingly stupid as liberals. The guy was not there to ask a "legitimate" question. He was there to disrupt the proceedings, which he so competently did, and in which case, CNN so incompetently didn't stop him.

Pick the best question? Pahleeeezzzz!

Are you Hillary's "Gay Plant" here at TH?

Poor will: the liberal cry babies

are so used to playing the victim that they can't tell the difference between playing the victim and stating fact.

He actually wonders about the dems planting this guy?? Why on earth would any dem do that?

It's not like HELLary hasn't planted questioners at her own speeches to be sure she gets to say what she wants... Ummmmm?




correction
"Conseratives are NOT as breathtakingly stupid as Liberals"

It's not just a job........
Since when does an intelligent person wish to dicuss their sex life at work?

A dear friend was a WW II and Korean War Vet USMC.
We met in 1971 in Puerto Rico. No doubt that he was a flaming queen!

He was proud of his service,and would gently explain that defending his country was more important that his sexuality.




Will, yes there IS a difference
Read the posts on this topic. Who is asking the question DOES matter.

Before you continue reading, turn your brain to the 'On' position, or get your mommy over to help you comprehend any multi-syllable words:

The Republican primary debates are for Republican -- and ONLY Republican -- primary voters.

The same is said of the Democratic primary debates and Democratic primary voters.

In that YouTube format, it was SUPPOSED to be people actually interested in voting in the Republican primary asking questions on issues that are important to them. Instead you have DNC operatives hijacking a Republican debate to play "gotcha" politics and monopolizing debate time with waste-of-time questions on issues that exactly ZERO ACTUAL Republicans have any interest in.

Save the opposite party plants for the general election debates where they belong.

CNN does it again
Seriously, 4 confirmed Democrat plants and a slew of kooks designed to sell their caricature of the Conservatives and Fly-Over Country. CNN's arrogance and dishonesty knows no bounds.

I was sorry I couldn't hear more responses from Fred Thompson and Duncan Hunter. They answered questions like whole-package Republicans - fiscal conservatism, law-enforcement, national security, respect for life, and respect for marriage.

Duncan Hunter strays a little bit off the Free Trade reservation when it comes to China. Yet, China obviously does not practice Free Trade and deserves a hard smack-down for the gross inhumanity the People's Party practices in their marketplace.

Fred Thompson needs to get more animated so that HOW her says things causes WHAT he's said to STICK in people's minds.

Mike Huckabee's such a likable guy, but he seems far too caught up in being liked. All you have to do is play the sympathy card with this guy and he opens up the purse-strings and ignores the rule of law. He doesn't respect that such money belongs to the tax-payer, not the government.

Mitt and Rudy were too busy trying to bash each other to prove their chops to me.

Ron Paul has some very serious concerns that need to be addressed. The sad part is he's a complete crackpot on just about every other issue and discredits the ones that he's right on.

Tom Tancredo's already done his job - the immigration issue is at a boiling point and someone's going to step up and stifle the flow of illegal immigrants, drugs, and guns coming up from Mexico. Tom's just not going to be that guy.

RE: Robert
If gays in the military is ACTUALLY on your list of top 100...heck, even top 100,000,000 issues...then you are either a moron, not a Republican, or BOTH. (I'm guessing option number 3.)

And, no, I'm sorry to have to bring this up YET AGAIN, it was NOT a "national audience". The audience was presumptive Republican primary voters.

DNC plants have no more business asking stupid questions at a Republican primary debate than RNC plants have asking stupid questions at a Democratic primary debate.

I would be dollars to donuts if some RNC plant at a Democratic primary debate asked Hillary Clinton a question about those Rose Lawfirm billing documents, you be all up in arms screaming about "mudslinging" and "underhanded tactics". And guess what? I'D AGREE WITH YOU in that case. Such a question...such a QUESTIONER... has NO business in such a forum.

And those who don't realize these very basic notions are among those that I am talking about when I say that there are those who should be prohibited by law from voting due to the fact that they are INCAPABLE of casting a responsible vote.

Next you'll be telling us that "If you were a tree, what kind of tree would you be?" constitutes a "good question" in a primary debate.

Listen people.....
Gays are not fighting for the RIGHT to have sex while on the military battlefield or in the showers!

Gays just want the "right" to be open about their lives IF ASKED.

Example: Just assume YOU are gay, TH poster (for the sake of argument) & in the military...& somebody asks you what your significant other is doing for Christmas. We have weird rules where the straight soldier can answer this question, yet the gay soldier can't...

Besides, the British have allowed gays to openly serve for years now. Our military IS fighting with openly gay soldiers & nobody cares much (except sensitive evangelicals at home). This is a bizzare religious-instigated non-issue.

I thought the debate was great !!!

I see the balance of ethics quite clearly.

The Republicans are the big fat guys on the teeter-totters, throwing unethical Democrats out of the park.

Bravo liberals... you lose :)


The LGBT community........
like the social conservatives after March 1998, is protected in the public and private sector by federal law and the "born that way" theory was debunked nearly twenty years ago. Stop whining......Secondly, I fail to see the disastrous consequences of allowing nonpartisan questions in a partisan environment. Those individuals with a command of the issues that can assimilate and process information on their feet demonstrate superior reasoning characteristics to any of the current Democrat presidential contenders. When these pusillanimous candidates of the Democrat Party come before the conservative networks and or forums, at only that point will they be considered viable candidates for the mantle of the presidency.

military dogg breath
you are such an idiot it's useless to reply to you

Robert out of touch ?

Starship troopers?

Gays do serve openly... It should be "don't ask, don't touch". The policy allows the military to toss Gays who are predators, that's it!

We had Gay marines with us in the 80's, well before this policy. They went to their bars, we went to our. Commanders and troops did not care then, and do not care now! I never witnessed any discrimination toward Gays.

This is a made-up Democrat controversy. The military dealt with this decades ago.

Join up yourself and see if you're discriminated against... you won't be.

beowulfe
No dear, it's still a freeish country.

Let the left make fools of themselves OK?

Personally, I would give a left or right boob to see a Hildabeat /Coulter debate!

Dog And Pony Show

All it was missing was Dolly Parton.

The candidates appear on those things because they are smart enough to know that the American electorate is stupid enough to consider such venal crud enlightening.

Furthermore, allowing a bunch of Democrat party shills (CNN) to chose the questions - no matter WHO asks them - demeans the electoral process even more than it already has been demeaned.

In order to win public office in this benighted country (thanks to the public "school" system)a candidate MUST be a demagogue.


wulf says:
"I would be dollars to donuts if some RNC plant at a Democratic primary debate asked Hillary Clinton a question about those Rose Lawfirm billing documents, you be all up in arms screaming about "mudslinging" and "underhanded tactics". And guess what? I'D AGREE WITH YOU in that case. Such a question...such a QUESTIONER... has NO business in such a forum."

What nonsense! No one asked questions of a personal nature or about Warpublican scandal - and believe me, they could (You say you support the rule of law, so how do you feel about Scooter...) - these were strictly issue questions - you and won't deal with that truth...

Gays in the military
question was a plant. When was the last time the republican candidates discuss this issue?

Robert wrote:

"BTW in about 20 or so years not only will gays serve openly but the entire "male/female" barrier will be down in the US miltiary"

Dream on, will never happen. Besides, Robert, by then you will be to old to serve anyway.


Carlos: wobbie.. COMPLETELY out of touch

with REALITY...

He is absolutely delusional... with a fixed FALSE belief that is RESISTANT to REASON or confrontation with ACTUALY FACTS, and is so much so that he actually expects us to believe OUTRAGEOUS statements.






Judi says:
"First of all, there is no comparison whatsoever between Clinton and Pres. Bush and planted questions. "

You're correct. When the White House wants to plant a sotry, they pay journalists - such as Armstrong Williams, to do it for them. The plant PHONY journalists - such as Jeff Gannon, to ask the right questions at White House press conferences. They pay actors to PRETEND their journalists asking questions at administration press conferences. Bottom line, asking a question about gays in the military is completely legit - caught - once again, looking like thugs, haters, racists or homophobes, Warpublicans change the conversation - let's talk about Clinton plants - because it's not the QUESTION, it's who asks it! To illustrate Warpublican BS, just see how the war in Iraq became repositioned about lowering the murder rate in Baghdad (the surge is working!) - and you see how these second rate Joe Gerbils try to always dodge the truth...
That's why - even as America recognizes that security is up in Iraq - they still want the troops home NOW - and still think that the war has been a failure...

NY Dog: You ARE kidding... right?


"Not a shred of proof has surfaced that those documents were forged..."

"Attacking Republicans? Bush being AWOL from the Guard was a story that EVERYONE knew."


Please.... Pa-lease, tell us you're kidding...

You can't possibly mean that... right? No way!

You're just trying to get some silly debate going... righ?



Whew, that's what I thought.

(And btw, Blather's entire family is completely against his lawsuit. He's on his own. )







wulf says:
""Impeachment - like indictment, means nothing"

Keep repeating that if it helps you sleep at night. Just remember: William Jefferson Clinton is the only elected president in history to ever be impeached for High Crimes and Misdemeanors."

And yet he left office more popular than Ronald Reagan - and is FAR more popular than George Bush - a president many consider to be the worse in US history. That's who YOU back.

beowulfe
the amazing thing about rather and the forged documents. They were typed on a machine that had not yet been invented. One would think the dims would do their homework better. But as usual the facts conveniently screw up their evidence. CBS might not employ fact checkers however there are those on the internet more than capable of exposing frauds

They should "pick the best question?"
The problem is, to a partisan shilling for the Democrat National Committee, the "best question" is the one that forces all candidates, whether Democrat or Republican, to pander to the DNC's talking points.

When 6 out of 7 major news networks behave this way, what the electorate gets is "the best question" as perceived by only one side in the debate.

Only a liberal would pretend that this is an acceptable condition in a free society. Conservatives would deplore it if the shoe were on the other foot, and all the opinions were conservative. We actually believe in robust debate. Liberals don't; their 2nd favorite tactic is finding ways to prevent any point of view other than theirs from being heard.

I read over the questions asked the candidates in the Republican debate last night. I'm absolutely without doubt that less than half the shills have been exposed. A huge percentage of those questions were written by staffers at the DNC.

anne
I thought you had a dnr list. If you can't follow your own rules how are we supposed to maintain our respect for you.

CNN/Youtube Debate Flash Polls
These were taken of debate viewers immediately following the debate:

Florida:
--------
Huckabee: 44%
Giulani: 18%
Romney: 13%
McCain: 10%
Thompson: 5%
Paul: 4%
Hunter: 1%
Tancredo: 1%
Rest: undecided

Iowa:
------
Huckabee: 32%
Romney: 16%
Giuliani: 12%
McCain: 10%
Thompson: 7%
Paul: 6%
Tancredo: 2%
Hunter: 0%
Rest: undecided

He may not have money, but if his voice is heard the voters flock to their shepherd. How appropriate for a pastor and a visionary.

The problem with the questions asked
is not that they were stupid (as GOPers claim) or that they were tough (as Dems claim). The problem with the questions asked is that they failed to address the issues that REPUBLICAN PRIMARY VOTERS were interested in. In other words, they did not speak to the relevant audience.

CNN is interested, above all, in creating high ratings for their shows. They know full well that far more Dems than Republicans were watching their debate. So they served up questions in areas of contention within the Republican party (illegal immigration, the Bible, abortion and gays in the military). This delighted Dems and put off Republicans. But this caused the debate to FAIL in its 'real' purpose: to inform GOP PRIMARY VOTERS on where candidates stand on issues that ARE IMPORTANT TO THEM!!

As the author here stated, there were NO QUESTIONS about education, healthcare or energy policy. Why not? These are the things the 'proper' audience wanted to hear about. But that would have had a secondary effect of putting off Dems and lowering the show's ratings.

So they didn't do that.

Robert
Stuff a sock int already!

You have no lines in this play, and haven't made a lick of sense on these posts.

Other polling
The poll taken right before the debate in Florida, between Sunday and Monday night:

Rudy Giuliani (26%)
Mike Huckabee (17%)
John McCain (13%)
Mitt Romney (12%)
Fred Thompson (9%)
Ron Paul (3%)
Duncan Hunter (1%)
Tom Tancredo (1%)
Undecided (18%)

...you can expect those numbers to climb for Huckabee. And have you seen the latest results from South Carolina?

Romney: 17%
Thompson: 15%
Huckabee: 13%
McCain: 11%
Giuliani: 9%

That's a significant upswing for Huck. Never mind that Huckabee also now ties/leads Iowa.

I've made no secret that I've been cheerleading for Giuliani's downfall. I'm happy to say it looks like that's happening. His last real hope is New Hampshire, and even there he's way behind Romney (33 to 16), and is doggedly fighting McCain for 2nd (another matchup I hope he falls behind in, which is easily possible despite his pouring extra money into the state).

Giuliani -- the only one who can beat Hillary? Hardly. And what's more: we don't want him!

Robert
It wouldn't surprise me if Huckabee got either the number 1 or number 2 slot. It's not a 2-man race yet, but I think there's a huge difference for Giuliani between being 2nd and 3rd in New Hampshire. If 2nd, I think he holds Florida. If 3rd, I think he's over and done, and it narrows down to Romney and Huckabee, with a possible resurgence by McCain (however much an outside chance) if he gets 2nd.

Additionally, I think Fred Thompson no longer stands a chance to win the election, but rather only offers the possibility of playing, ironically, spoiler of all things to both Huck and Romney in favor of Giuliani.

Giuliani's strategy has been to ignore the early states and bank on Super Tuesday, but as the primaries near and people become more attuned to what's happening, and see the early voting states, given the trends it would require that the northern states' polls are not moved whatsoever by early results. I don't find that likely.

Two things...
1. Congress botched Vietnam, not our military; granted, each CNC who presided over the conflict made errors along the way, but the military, left to its own devices, could have proved that a military operation COULD have prevailed. How many battles did we lose in Nam? We 'lost the war,'if you will, when Congress declared we were defeated. The current situation in the ME only draws a comparison to the Viet Nam War in that regard. If you think the military is incompetent and should be disbanded as a useless tool of America, go live somewhere else where there is little or no active military force to protect that nation and its interests. It would be interesting to see how people with this attitude would like living in some South American or African province where rogue militants are the closest thing a country has to a military. Personally, I'd rather have the USMC, Nat'l Guard, or any of our branches of the Armed Forces watching my back.

2. Why didn't anyone rebut the General's question by asking how he felt discriminated against by the current policy regarding gender preferences? It's a shame that things were so tough for Gen. Kerr that he couldn't get past the lowly rank of brigadier general as a gay man. I guess we hetero white males should feel so ashamed for our blatant homophobia and insensitivity that we should all sign a petition to make Kerr 'Supreme Ruler of All the Universe,' to make up for all the obstacles we put in his way to achieve success in his military career. I'm not saying he maybe didn't have it rough, but Good Lord, why debase the service for allowing you to become one of its elite?

inkling_revival re: your 1:21 PM post
Excellent point. I stand corrected.

Robert
People like me? What does that mean, exactly? Also, this is likely the only acknowledgment you'll ever get from me on this site. I've been around here long enough to know that most of what you put up here is pure BS.

stoic patriot
All I can say is: I'm glad we're witnessing the erosion of Iowa & New Hampshire in the nominating process. It's always bugged me that these 2 small unimportant little states had such sway in the primaries. I am from California, so naturally I believe that the largest & most populous & important states in the union should have the largest chunk in controlling the nomination process.

I think Rudy can easily lose Iowa & New Hampshire & still have tons of money & support to coast him through the Florida & California primaries and the states that really (should) matter.


roberto: No one caaaaaarrrres!

Bye bye now! :-)






Clinton vs. Giuliani
CNN VS FOX

CNN is no mor for Clinton then fox is for Rudy.

Both networks are a joke!

David: Please IGNORE roberto!

He's on the top of our DNRR (Do Not Read or Respond) List.

He's an incompetent, brain-dead idiot.




roberto's flaws aren't in his logic...

because he had NONE!

His flaws are in his basic (failed) attempt at trying to think...

What a loser!




treasonous repugs: Ah, Get banned again?





Yet another screen name? Just how many is this?



Anne
Thanks. I realize that. I'm expecting the typical 'Chickenhawk' reply that I get whenever I post comments like the one above. I even put a challenge on TH awhile back that I'd go to the recruiter's office with our dear long unheard from Kimberly if she wanted to prove to me that I only wanted to be an armchair soldier. Though I half did that to see what her reply would be, I will be enlisting in the Army at age 40 (hope to get rotary-wing training and be a Warrant Officer as quickly I can prove I'm qualified for the promotions). I don't think most who volunteer to serve our country do it because they are warmongers, want recognition for their service, or are too dumb to do anything else (at least I hope not, with a master's degree finished by the time I sign on the dotted line). I think some of us truly believe we have been called upon to serve our country, and we will do it to the best of our ability to help protect our families and our way of life. Sorry to ramble on--- just stopped by to say thanks. Best wishes for a Merry Christmas and a Happy 2008.

David: What a great post! Thank you!


You do make me proud. And congratulations! You must keep us posted.

You know we'll all be behind you 100% and you'll be in our thoughts and prayers....


Don't forget to keep us posted. :-)

And a Blessed Merry Christmas to you as well.



Sorry I was away
Robert, last time I seen you out here you were trying to pass yourself off as prior military.

I figured you might of been the janitor at the base exchange.

Treasonous Repug wrote:

"your right. you guys like your gays in bathroom stalls. hahaha"

Who are you? Must be another dibbling liberal whose only comments are of no relavence.

katy ????
katy the mean old lady writes: Thursday, November, 29, 2007 5:59 PM

"Personally, I would give a left or right boob to see a Hildabeat /Coulter debate!"

Hmmm, I thought that *all* boobs were left...

LIlly, MLD, etc.
The kleig lights on the CNN set were still warm when the bloggers starting to identify the dem plants in the questioners. Anderson Cooper and the CNN "professionals" failed miserably in their responsibility to provide the electorate with a professional debate. Have we already forgotten the stink after Hillary's front-loading of questions?

Pathetic.

religouslib writes:
"... the whining over the retired general is just silly.

first, he is obviously a patriot and had a legitimate question but...

if in fact he was a plant of hilary's, which i doubt, it was a great political trick."

He was a plant and it is only a great political trick if you get away it!

Pathetic!

joe_america
first, he says he was not a plant but some republicans never believe retired military personel , they would rather smear them if they disagree with republican talking points.

secondly, exactly what is immoral or unethical in planting a question in your opponents debate.

it seems some republicans are just upset they didn't think of it first.

joe_america
i mean if republican contenders can't handle a question from a retired general they shouldn't be running because other leaders of the world are going to be much tougher on them than the old general was.

Robert
I will never reply to you again, so read this carefully. My uncle is the one who gave me all of the information I need for Warrant Officer and aviation training. He's been regular Army since 1972. So YOU may want to understand a little about the Army Aviation Warrant program. On short notice, here's the quickest link I could scrounge up:

http://usmilitary.about.com/od/armytrng/ss/rotarypilot_6.ht m

Try reading a little once in awhile. It's good exercise for your brain. Give me your contact information, and I get back in touch with you again when I am a Warrant Officer in the United States Army. A little more humility and a little less insolence will help you win friends and gain influence... just a helpful hint. I'm proud to serve my country. Apparently YOU are not. That's the transparency in your post that has most of the people here doubt half the things you post, particularly about being a Naval officer.

Prior military
I was active duty in the US Army, JAGC, back in the pre-Clinton days. Among my other duties as a Special Assistant United States Attorney in the Eastern District of Virginia, Trial Counsel (prosecutor), and Senior Defense Counsel, I served as Recorder (administrative prosecutor) in administrative elimination boards involving allegedly gay soldiers attached to the Military District of Washington (MDW). Interesting cases, to say the least. Times have certainly changed since the first Gulf War.

My biggest recollection of military service? I loved it! There are no finer people in the United States of America then those who choose to serve their country in the Armed Services. The absolute best, bar none. When I hear Democrats, liberals, etc., make disparaging remarks or passing off ridiculous anti-war slogans, it disappoints me. US Army troops are 100% dedicated to their mission and they require similar dedication and support from the American citizenry. I support the US Army, their mission and the United States. Oh well, call me crazy....

USMC Lt.
I wanted to take the time to let you know I read your post to me on Coulter's thread. I'm not sure why a company that loves all animals would line cages with the NYT, but it has been resolved. No longer will parakeets, love birds, finches, and macaws be subjected to that filth. NEVER AGAIN!!!

writing on the wall
After reading all the questions, it sounded such a well-rounded debate. (right) Not one question from UBL though?

Religious lib strikes the typical pose: "secondly, exactly what is immoral or unethical in planting a question in your opponents debate?" --- Lets see, that after Democrats canceled a debate sponsored by fox on the grounds they thought Fox would be biased. Go figure.

Rockhead J. Squirrel writes:
The fake...
is here and he is

Robert

Good News About Youtube Debate
Hillary Clinton supporters got to ask two questions at the Republican Youtube debate. This is a tremendous improvement over debates where Clinton supporters (ie reporters) got to ask ALL the questions.

WATCH YOURSELF ROBERT
Robert writes: Thursday, November, 29, 2007 10:46 PM
The fake...
.....USMC Lt. writes: Thursday, November, 29, 2007 10:19
...

is here.

Robert


DID YOU FIND YOUR ACCOUNT DELETED THIS MORNING, ROBERT????

DO YOU KNOW WHY IT WAS DELETED, ROBERT????

IT WAS DELETED BECAUSE OF ALL OF YOUR PREVIOUS POSTS SAYING WHAT YOU JUST POSTED AT 10:46 PM, ABOUT MY SON, ROBERT.

DON'T BELIEVE ME? GO LOOK AT ALL THE DAYS UP TO TODAY WHERE YOU KNOW YOU POSTED.
EVERYTHING THAT YOU'VE POSTED IN ANY THREAD BEFORE YOUR LITTE "WIFI" TEST IN THIS ONE IS GONE, ROBERT.

LEAVE THE Lt. ALONE OR YOUR ACCOUNT WILL BE GONE AGAIN IN THE MORNING, ROBERT.
AND NEXT TIME THEY'LL BLOCK YOUR IP ADDRESS, SO YOU WON'T BE ABLE TO GET BACK IN.

Lumberjack7392
BmanIII made a brief appearance on the Coulter thread, and left you a post. Thought you should know!

Marines' Dad
Better to hold your tongue and have people think you're an idiot than to open your mouth and remove all doubt applies in his situation... or substitute horse's arse. It fits the bill either way. Have a Merry Christmas, and pass along my thanks to your son. I have a cousin who just became a Corporal in the USMC. He loves his job and can't imagine wanting to do anything else since he joined the Corps.

Another blatant lie by Robert
Robert writes: Thursday, November, 29, 2007 11:04 PM
No...
Marines' Dad writes: Thursday, November, 29, 2007 10:58 PM
...

I didnt find anything wrong with my account.

Sorry

Robert


Oh really?? Then why did you have to test your connection?

Go back and look for you past posts liar. They're not there anymore.

I KNOW. I LOOKED AFTER THE TH MODERATORS TOLD ME THEY'D DELETED YOUR ACCOUNT. THEY'RE NOT THERE.

CARE TO TRY ANOTHER LIE ROBERT??

LEAVE MY SON ALONE OR YOU'RE TOAST AND YOU WON'T GET BACK ON NEXT TIME!!

David, Thanks for the advise
David writes: Thursday, November, 29, 2007 11:11 PM
Marines' Dad
Better to hold your tongue and have people think you're an idiot than to open your mouth and remove all doubt applies in his situation... or substitute horse's arse. It fits the bill either way. Have a Merry Christmas, and pass along my thanks to your son. I have a cousin who just became a Corporal in the USMC. He loves his job and can't imagine wanting to do anything else since he joined the Corps.


But I've already written back to the moderators to let them know that Robert found a way to get back into their site.
I won't stand for him saying the things he does about my son. If he wants to debate my son on the subject of the thread, FINE, have at it.

BUT I WILL NOT LET HIM MAKE HIS UNPROVOKED ATTACKS ANY LONGER. I'VE HAD IT WITH THAT CRAP.

Marine's Dad
Karma will ultimately not be kind to the people who live their lives with so much hatred and contempt for others. Regardless of whether the moderators do anything about posters who try to compensate for a lack of manhood or lack of friends by constantly tearing other people down thread after thread unprovoked (or consistently bad-mouthing his commander, should he indeed be what he claims to be), their fate will eventually catch up with them.

It's amazing, isn't it? I comment at least 50/50 on the article in question in my first post on TH in quite awhile, then state that I am proudly willing to commit to serve, and looking forward to answering the call at this point in my life, and I get attacked for it by a fellow patriot. Even 'tr' was willing to commend the effort (which earned him respect in my book). It really can open ones eyes to who or what the real problem in this country must be. Calling it a night... have a good one.

I don't give a rats rear end
What you have. Leave the Lieutenant alone.

Rockhead J. Squirrel writes:
early next year I am on to my new assignment

Testing flying the helicopter rides at Target Stores.

usmc lt
for reasons that defy all understanding some of these libs always question anothers service to this country. We are expected to accept everything that he who shall not be mentioned posts but he feels obligated to snipe at everyone or take snippets of what others post as those that proves his arguments. Better to just list him amongst your don not respond. I thank you for your service and hope all is well and that you keep safe. It must be hard especially at this time of year to be away from family but duty calls. It's men like you who make us all proud to be americans

Left boob,Right Boob!
Yo bros! Was I referring to a floppy and aged appendage?

Please call for my lawyer, my will, and an eraser.

I just want to see a Coulter /Hildabeast debate!

Touj on lilly
Touj. writes: Thursday, November, 29, 2007 1:29 PM
Dyerje et.al.
It's interesting to me that for all the babies who like to attack Lilly, not one has ever been able to dispute her research. All the attacks are like yours, they are just general, mud-slinging assaults that are totally meaningless.

If Lilly is so constantly wrong, why are you and the rest of your lynch mob never able to counter her arguments or statements with facts?
---------
You're discussing a woman that once described how brown-skinned men make her warm as justification for her opinions, and she also mentioned Blacks are just lazy. Great research there.

religiouslib
religiouslib writes: Thursday, November, 29, 2007 10:06
joe_america
i mean if republican contenders can't handle a question from a retired general they shouldn't be running because other leaders of the world are going to be much tougher on them than the old general was.
-----------------
I'm not sure what you're implying here?

Are you stating someone's courage is measured by their ability to stave off political rhetorical assassinations? Or that working off of the premise of believing the word of CNN when they stated they wanted to host a debate vice a Democratic commercial using known agents of the liberal candidates to pose leading questions? Or do you approve of defacing Christ on a political debate to acquire the best light for your party? Or are you suggesting that the panelists should just be tough guys?

If the latter, you're going to see a pretty interesting situation the first time Hillary has to stand up to anyone on the international scene. She can't even debate in public without pulling the "I'm a girl" card.

Also, old general? Looked pretty young for me. Omar Bradley; now there was an old general.

CNN: The News as Turner Sees It.
I admit I didn't watch this debate since I'm in class from 1730-2330, M-F, but I can guess the outcome based on the last CNN-sponsored "town hall"... The Democrats get simple, neutral questions but the Republicans get ones like "would you nuke Iran"! I'm sure they "didn't know" the persons posing (oops! I mean posting) questions were biased. Hey, Dems, wanna make up for it? Debate on Fox! {insert democratic excuses here} Whassa matter? Afraid to get some real questions from Fox moderators vice being spoon-fed by Wolfie?

So what if there were plants?
Do we have so little confidence in our favorite GOP candidate that we can't trust him to give a good answer to a hostile questioner?

Amanda,what kind of questions you think our nominee will get in the general election campaign without you there to mollycoddle them ???

I frankly thought they all answered the nefarious plants' questions pretty well. Whats all the handwringing about?




And question you we will