CNN: Just Stop Digging

CNN is defending it's use of several liberal Democrats to ask questions for a conservative driven Republican primary. Um, I think the whole point was they wouldn't know a reasonable question from a typical conservative if it bit them. But that doesn't stop them from chewing off their Left arm with this response.

CNN also aired questions from supporters of Democratic candidates John Edwards and Barack Obama.

And that’s fine by the network, which is standing by its question selection process and lashing out at critics who say the debate demonstrated CNN’s liberal bias.

“We’re focused on the questions, not the questioners,” said Sam Feist, CNN’s political director.

Comments

[Aaron]

So, am I correct in that for the Dem debates, they get Dem questioners, and for the GOP debates, they get Dem questioners?

No wonder one side gets all softballs. I think the Dem questions to the GOP weren't too bad as questions go. Maybe the Dems should face GOP questions. It would make for better TV and harder questions, I think.

[Pantera]

I think the blogosphere is making a bigger deal out of this then they should have. The gay general shouldn't have been allowed, but I think the blogosphere is going a bit overboard in trying to find every comment the questioners have ever made. They asked pretty decent questions (excpet for the Paulian guy) and I we're going a bit to far in this.

On the positive note, this whole think makes the Communist News Network look ridiculous. Hah Hah.

[Choey]

Since this is a primary, why are Democrats participating at all? Shouldn't it be Republicans asking questions so they can determine who they want to vote for to be their candidate in the general election? The Dems should be kicked out entirely.

[templar knight]

When there are as many Republicans asking questions at the Democratic debates, then I will believe that CNN only focuses on the questions, not the questioners. I call CNN's explanation bullshit.

[holdfast]

It matters because if they get away with this, who knows what they'll try next? Even if the questions are good, it is useful to get the Clinton News Network's biases on the record for future reference.

[The Ace]

My, my, how things change in a week,

David Bohrman, CNN’s Washington bureau chief and executive producer of the debate, spoke to The Caucus from “an undisclosed location” where he and a team of six others were pouring over the entries.

So far, about 3,000 questions have been posted to YouTube, Mr. Bohrman said, and he expects to have about 5,000 videos at his disposal come Sunday, the contest deadline. That beats July’s Democratic YouTube debate, which pulled in about 3,000 videos.

Most questions online have been pulled from public viewing for review, but many of the remaining posts involve asking the candidates to defend their opposition to gay marriage and abortion. Those kinds of “lobbying grenades” would be disqualified by the CNN selection team, Mr. Bohrman said.

“There are quite a few things you might describe as Democratic ‘gotchas,’ and we are weeding those out,” Mr. Bohrman said. CNN wants to ensure that next Wednesday’s Republican event is “a debate of their party.”

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/11/21/sneak-peek-at-cnnyoutube-debate-videos/

[Mark]

The hypocrisy of this is breathtaking. The firestorm of controversy that would erupt if a conservative got in to a Democrat debate under false pretenses and asked a question of a Democrat candidate would be weeks long and the wailing and gnashing of teeth would be deafening.
Why any Republican candidate would agree to appear on that channel without Hilary style rigid pre-appearance conditions is a mystery to me.

[redherkey]

And we're to trust their objectivity because...???

Glenn Beck has to find another network, because CNN and Headline News just joined the other "bad" channels our Dish TV pretends aren't there. Time's too short in my day to waste on incompetent partisan hacks with college degrees of last resort.

[Dr. Kenneth Noisewater]

Two words:

Jeff Gannon.

[Ken Hahn]

I have to admit that from CNN's viewpoint the questions were perfect. To hyper-partisan Democrats having other Democrats ask the questions is simply logical. Why would anyone want anything else?

[Alan K. Henderson]

I say put an end to network-mediated debates. Have different policy organizations - NAACP, Brookings, Heritage, Cato, etc. - sponsor debates, and the newsies just sit back and report 'em.

[Terry Notus]

If Sam Feist is focused on the questions and not the questioners, why did we get a bio for Gen Kerr? "I served for 40 years..." The questioner was absolutely important.

[Daniel]

These aren't debates.

Not when questions and questioners are tooled for the job.

They think we're stupid.

Boy, are THEY in for a surprise.

[Stephen]

How have the YouTube debates been for CNN financially? Both debates have generated a ton of press (granted, a lot of it negative), so probably not that bad.

If they've been a success, do you think CNN will try to schedule a YouTube debate for the general election? I know the general election has a better defined schedule of three presidential debates, one veep debate, so CNN may not want to step on any toes.

But what if they do try to schedule one? Hillary would seemingly have nothing to lose by agreeing to it right away. But think what sort of position that puts the Republican candidate in: if he says "no," then he's afraid to debate Hillary and to take questions from the public. If he agrees, then he'll have to deal with a network that doesn't even try to include reasonable conservative questioners.

[JMH]

Oh, seems like CNN is improving. I mean, for the Democratic debate, they only let Hillary plant questions. For the Republican debate, they let Hillary, Obama, and Edwards all plant questions. I think Edwards even got two plants. Much more inclusive.

Maybe for the next debate, they can let Hugo Chavez and Mullah Omar plant some questions.

[Tom]

I haven't watched CNN since they high-lighted videos of Al-Qaeda snipers killing our soldiers. The suits at CNN are just sick.

[Fat Man]

Now you understand why the Dems would not allow Fox to run a debate.

[paul]

This is the nightmare scenario when hrc get's the nomination.

Every bootlicker in the democratic universe will be trying to win her favor. CNN/Google was played by the own employees, who are dem/clinton loyalists.

It's going to be impossible for hillary to 'cook the soup', if every one of her assistant/sycophantic 'chefs' is sprinkling in a dash of salt.

I thought the 'cult of personality' around bill was disturbing, but the dems were just warming up. Lose two close elections and they become crazier than gore. God forbid things get better in Iraq, otherwise they might start self-immolation.

[LOL]

"The hypocrisy of this is breathtaking. The firestorm of controversy that would erupt if a conservative got in to a Democrat debate under false pretenses and asked a question of a Democrat candidate would be weeks long and the wailing and gnashing of teeth would be deafening."

This already happened at the Dem Youtube debate. It's not surprising you missed it though, since nothing much was made of it.

[MarsVsHollywood]

"This already happened at the Dem Youtube debate. It's not surprising you missed it though, since nothing much was made of it."

I can has link plz?

[Jabba the Tutt]

"We focused on the questions, not the questioners." Oh? Didn't CNN advertise that the questioners would be undecided? Doesn't that imply a focus on the questioners? And CNN wouldn't know the concerns of conservatives, the people who will be voting to determine the GOP's Presidential candidate and this is a GOP Presidential candidate's debate, right? CNN could have brought on conservatives to pick the questions. CNN wouldn't know a conservative question if it came up and bit them in the butt.

People have given Anderson Cooper a pass on this. But Cooper was on with Glenn Beck and he said he thought the questions were 'Republican' questions. So, Cooper knew about the questions ahead of time or he was fibbing to Glenn Beck. Cooper implied that he vetted the questions. CNN/Google flew in a half a dozen or more questioners to be at the debate. So, of all the questions, of all the questioners, of all the accepted questions, and of the number of questioners flown in, Cooper picked the Gay General to stand up and give a speech.

Anderson Cooper is on the hook for this atrocity. CNN is the Clinton News Network. That means viciously partisan, stumbling incompetence and low-down dirty tricks. Cooper's in the middle of it.

[Broadsword]

If either the ancient Greeks or St. Thomas Aquinas were organizing the debates, the Dems would be asked qustions challenging their assumptions about large government as the de facto solution for problems. The Repubs would get questions challenging their emphasis on individual responsibility and initiative. In other terems, each would be asked to explain the best arguments for the other sides' positions. "Not holdin' muh breath heah Boss."

[Fen]

When there are as many Republicans asking questions at the Democratic debates, then I will believe that CNN only focuses on the questions, not the questioners. I call CNN's explanation bullshit.

Exactly. "Mistakes" by the liberal-biased MSM always lean against the GOP and in favor of the Dems.

[PersonFromPorlock]

I suppose the questions asked were OK but we might want to consider the questions that *weren't* asked. For instance, nobody asked Thompson about his tax plan, which might have raised an issue the Dems want desperately to avoid.

CNN's penchant for picking Democratic party activists out of a supposedly random sample, who then ask questions about topics dear to the Democratic heart, keeps the Democratic agenda on (and the Republican agenda off) the screen. I doubt this happens by accident.

Of course, the effective Democratic control of the debates' content would matter more if the debates were serious.

[paul]

"I thought the 'cult of personality' around bill was disturbing, but the dems were just warming up. Lose two close elections and they become crazier than gore. God forbid things get better in Iraq, otherwise they might start self-immolation."

ok..instead of self immolation they have gone on to homicide bombing.

do not elect her, her supporters have been drinking koolaid for too long, and now they are looking some stronger stuff. A complete divorce from reality, brought to you by the dnc.

[LOL]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f-mnPz4lCwI&eurl=http://sadlyno.com/

wow its amazing how ignorant wingers are. Look how ignorant they look in real life too!

[-asx-]

If the Republicans can't face a 20 year old Democrat chick, how can they face the terrorists?

There, that comparison should reveal how stupid TWO of your right-wing talking points are.