Talk About Planted Questions!!

Update: How fitting. CNN pulls out someone not to simply ask a question about Iran, but with absolute moral authority given her son's service. And just as we learn that the IAEA has confirmed Iran's having installed 3,000 centrifuges. CNN works to undermine our ability to respond just as it may become critical. Great, just great! Thanks, CNN.

CNN rolled out a Catherine Jackson to ask a question about Iran given that her son served three tours in Iraq.

Now when have I heard that before? How about in May. Thank you Harry Reid.

"My son was in Iraq three times," said Catherine Jackson of Las Vegas. "I thank God he's home now. Enough is enough. We need to bring our troops home." Reid spokesman Jon Summers said Move America Forward was mischaracterizing Reid's position. "It's their right to make their feelings known, but most Nevadans agree with Senator Reid that it's time to change course in Iraq," he said.

Comments

[Ninjapirate]

Did they make it look like it was randomly chosen?

[Ron Coleman]

Okay, Dan -- how the heck did you do that?!

[clarice]

Great catch

[Jenfidel]

Why did his mother have to do all the talking for him--he's a grown man who did 3 tours???
Were his lips or tongue blown off in combat? (or just whatever "Mom" had left him of his b*lls)

[Dan Riehl]

"how the heck did you do that?!"

Well, it's either magic, or a gut feeling and Google! Thanks.

[Ali]

What an overt setup. Did you catch the Vegas working woman who somehow got lost in the question re: baby boomers? They cut away and you could hear the chick literally whispering the lines to her. Oh Lord, please let someone post the whole thing on youtube, wizbang, google vid, somewhere.

re: Mil and mom.
Yep, lovedddd that standing ovation btw. I forgot all about the bill for a second and all the seditious, treasonous treatment of Gen. Petraeus and our troops, no media reporting of good news, Scotty Beau, the activists burning flags and screwing up memorials in DC, attacks on troops since home, vacations taken on the hill when the troops needed funding, Kerry calling them dumb, sorry IAVA frauds, Reid's 'we've lost the war', Murtha re: Haditha, the traveling to Syria and other countries against the advice of State and the movie Redacted (spit)... breathe. Thought reading the question was great.

How the Sam Hill could he sit there while they spouted forth about Iran not being a threat for most of the responding candidates? Impossible.
Anybody that's even stateside talking to troops know the Iran's all over Iraq...

I recognize the mother from somewhere, it will come to me.

[JustADude]

One gal on Social Security I believe was reading from prepared notes

[old trooper]

Her question set my bull$hit detector off the scales too.

Watching Dems debate is like "watching wolves mating".
At the end they always get back to biting each other on the backside and the outcome
is the propigation of more damned wolves!

Look Out Sheep!

[LOL]

"One gal on Social Security I believe was reading from prepared notes"

Are you serious? God forbid someone do some writing a preparation before asking potential presidents important questions.

[Samir]

I think we should not invade Iran and that an invasion would be a costly mistake just like the Iraq debacle.

Support our troops: bring them home.

[Flip]

Well said, Samir.

While we're at it, let's support our firefighters: bring them out of burning buildings. And of course we need to support our cops: bring them off the streets of bad neighborhoods. Support our teachers: bring them out of underperforming schools. And for the love of God, support our leigslators: bring them out of Washington. If the best way to support our brave civil servants is to extract them from dangerous situations, let's just ignore the consequences of what they're fighting for and have everyone fold up their tents and come home already.

The "Support our troops: bring them home" line is nothing more than a disingenuous attempt by detractors to pretend they support the military, while crapping all over the mission for which those troops are putting their lives on the line every day.

If you abhor America's place in the world enough to believe that our current international struggles are unfounded, at least saddle up and own it. Admit that you don't support the troops, you don't support their mission, and you don't support your country's most vital policies.

[Broadsword]

Hey Samir, support your brain. Either pull it out of where it's stuck, or shove it in deeper. You'll come to the light either direction.

[No1Dad]

The woman who asked the Iran question was also shown clapping hysterically whenever any of the fringe candidates mentioned the "I" word: impeachment. I felt bad for the son. It kind of seemed like he'd been dragged along to the debate and used as a prop against his will. He looked almost in tears.

[BobInStamford]

The valiant rednecks think that GW can lose 3 wars at once. They sure give that former male cheerleader a lot of credit. Why not institute a draft then?

[Yoda]

"Why not institute a draft then?"

Only talk of this, from left is is.

[Bilby]

We'll know the revelation of more evidence they have a scripted talk show going on is damaging when they start screaming about alleged "swiftboating". If that doesn't work, and it still reflects badly on her campaign, Media Matters (one of the groups that helps set up these campaign narratives)or some other group says "Nothing to see here. Move all, folks." as they did with the staged event in the diner that they screwed up by not leaving a tip. They do those things hoping to get media attention. If they start complaining that the media is paying too much attention it's because they know it's negative attention for their cause.

[templar knight]

You liberals better hurry up and get us out of Iraq before we win. But it looks to be too late. Bwahahahahahahaaaaaaaa!

[Fred Beloit]

"My son was in Iraq three times," said Catherine Jackson of Las Vegas. "I thank God he's home now. Enough is enough." Nov 2007

"My son was in Iraq three times," said Catherine Jackson of Las Vegas. "I thank God he's home now. Enough is enough." May 2007

Great catch, Dan. The Dems should have saved this for a war during which we had a draft. Since her sonny boy is a VOLUNTEER, this statement is simply very funny or deranged, if one prefers.

[chris]

Win? Bwahahahahahahaaaaaaaa!

Babysitting the thankful-yet-lethal brown people costs lots of money.

[templar knight]

I have more bad news for you, chris/Boob. Sunni civilians in Bagdad are joining Iraqi security forces by the hundreds, and thousands, and Concerned Civilian Councils are kicking out the terrorists, identifying IEDs, capturing VBIEDs(20 vehicles with IEDs turned in to US authorities yesterday), and routing your buddies in AQI all over Iraq. And they are opening up schools....so girls can be educated, something else you and your buddies are against, and hospitals, and electrical substations, and roads and other infrastructure.

You are one pathetic bastard, chris, not wanting the brown people to live the kind of life they deserve. But that's ok, you've lost, and we're moving on to bigger and better things. It won't be long before even you losers will want to climb on the bandwagon with us winners, but I, for one, am going to shove your sorry ass off into the sewage ditch, where you belong.

[chris]

Bigger and better things? I eagerly await what new victories you 24%ers have in store for us! Keep killing/liberating those deserving brown people!

[templar knight]

"...I eagerly await what new victories you...."

Yes, you should, and if you have any sense will change your ignorant ways before it is too late for you, if it already isn't. But hope springs eternal in the human breast, so I guess even you can be rehabilitated after a swim in the sewage ditch. Haha!

[templar knight]

Oh, yeah, great job, Dan! You caught them again, and I myself remember the protest at Reid's office where Move America Forward had the monkey with the white flag. That was rich, it sure was. But not as rich as you catching CNN doing its 'monkey business'. Congrats! Now that's what you call journalism, folks.

[Capitalist Infidel]

What's with the vicious racism Chris is exhibiting? The left makes the kkk look like a bunch of boy scouts.

[chris]

Why not talk to some open-minded mouth-breathers at Tumbleweeds??

[dumbblonde]

Capitalist Infidel (gawd, I love that name!)

Chris doesn't understand that if he wishes to be taken seriously, he needs to demonstrate that he has enough brain power to come up with his own rational arguments, rather than trotting out the same old overused & faulty talking points and hateful, racist one-liners.

For the most part I tend to ignore his posts. They aren't worth the time it takes to read them, and certainly not worth the energy it takes to type out a response :)

There are others on this blog who can't resist taking him to task, however. It's great entertainment!

[chris]

Yeah, he's a real badass that 'Infidel'- serving shitty fajitas and nachos to the 'necks. Makin' a million $10.99 at a time.

[seekeronos]

"--- Yeah, he's a real badass that 'Infidel'- serving sh*tty fajitas and nachos to the 'necks. Makin' a million $10.99 at a time. ---"

And even if that is what he does... it sure is a fair stretch better than gulping down America's air while being a completely useless, irrelevant, and incredibly racist and ugly human being.

And that's not ugly as in your physical appearance - but the kind of ugly that goes down to the bones.

[chris]

Shouldn't you be praying for the dead heathens in Bangladesh? Jesus must really hate them to kill them like that.

[rwilymz]

"God forbid someone do some writing a preparation before asking potential presidents important questions."

I'm with giggle-puss on this. "People" are not public speakers, and when they get up to axe a question on live tv before a national audience, 98% of non-public speakers are going to get nervous, ask the wrong question, get so mired in the words they've probably practiced a thousand times and make an ass of themselves.

That's why they write them down. I'd be very surprised if they weren't required to by the debate host. That's also why the "debate" host has folks in the crowd to keep things moving and to whisper the intended questions to the fumble-tongues when they advertise why they aren't stage actors.

But, of course, that doesn't discount the possibility that these things are *not* set up beforehand by soundbite-technicians.

"While we're at it, let's support our firefighters: bring them out of burning buildings."

I think this is the most cogent and effective response to these lightweights who issue the lame and soft-skulled bumper sticker responses to complex international politics.

Congratulations. But you're on notice: I may steal the outline.

"Babysitting the thankful-yet-lethal brown people costs lots of money."

Just like it did between 91 and 02.

And just like babysitting the yellow people has cost us out the wazoo from '53 onward.

And just like babysitting the white Balkans with their imported brown co-religionists has cost us since '94 and '99 in separate actions.

Not gonna get away from the cost, Chris. So you can put down the rug and stop sweeping madly at those aspects of US foreign policy that are inconvenient for your particular poisoned worldview.

[Sweetie]

Once you're beyond knee jerk liberalism the chris' of the world will never make sense again. We might as well be speaking different languages.

There's a song by the Old Crow Medicine Show about a guy from Utah that signs up for Vietnam. At the beginning of the song they describe the guy as 'catching catfish, and getting drunk'. In the chorus they write that he's fighting 'for an ideal, he doesn't know nothing about'. The guy fishing and drinking has a more solid grasp of freedom than the songwriter. I see a lot of this in art now - self fisking. And it's completely lost on the arts community. And this from a band that's built for flyover country - traditional acoustic/country music.

[Sly Bri]

Why is anyone surprised? After all, this is the "Clinton News Network" we are talking about.

[Samir]

I said it before, and I'll say it again. The Americans invade Iran at their own troops' peril.

[dumbblonde]

Yes, Samir, military action is always a risk, to all involved. So is firefighting, but we don't let the entire state of California burn (for example) in order to avoid any risk to our firefighters. There WILL be military confrontation with Iran. It remains to be seen whether the U.S. will be in an offensive or defensive position when it finally takes place. At any rate, an "invasion" of Iran by the U.S. is doubtful.

[Samir]

I am really talking about the troops in Iraq. I think if the Americans invade or aggress against Iran, they will pay for it in the blood of their troops in Iraq who would be sitting ducks in a counterstrike.

Plus, I think the Americans are bluffing, because they know oil prices would double and the leading western oil companies would go bankrupt.

I support the Iranians and the Russians and think they are smarter than the Americans. Nobody is buying the Americans' bluff.

[dumbblonde]

Well, time will tell. The Iranians are certainly more rabid than than the Americans. The Russians are certainly more underhanded than the Americans. Neither the Russian or Iranian government is answerable to its people in the way the American government is, and neither the Russian or Iranian government is held to the same high standards of behaviour by the international community that the United States is. Therefore, the governments of Russia and Iran are much less restrained in actions they take against other countries than the US government is.

Having said that, IF our government finally rediscovers its instinct for survival & develops the will to allow the U.S. military to do what it does best, there isn't a country on this planet that stands a chance against us.

[Samir]

The Americans are just needlessly wasting their resources if they really think some two-bit dictators are a threat to them. I think the Americans' foolish pride is their own worst enemy.

[dumbblonde]

Careful, Samir. You're contradicting yourself. First you state that you support the Iranians and Russians, who are smarter than the Americans, and that America takes action against big bad Iran at its own risk - now you say Iranians and Russians are two-bit dictators who aren't actually a threat to America anyway.

Up to this point I was taking you semi sort-of almost seriously. Oh well.

[Samir]

Not a problem, I am just rooting for the winning team. I am just saying that the Americans are their own worst enemy and it is they, not Iran, who will end up depleting USA's resources.

[rwilymz]

"The Americans invade Iran at their own troops' peril."
"I am really talking about the troops in Iraq."

This oughta be good.

"if the Americans invade or aggress against Iran..."

"Agress"? Izzat a word?

"they will pay for it in the blood of their troops in Iraq who would be sitting ducks in a counterstrike."

So let's see if I have this right.

The US has troops now in Iraq and A'stan, and right between them sits Iran. In this scenario, we invade Iran and Iran will counterstrike against US troops in Iraq ... who know **nothing** of the invasion of Iran and are taken completely by surprise.

Izzat what you're trying to sell, there, Herr Bismark? Iran can overpower US forces in Iraq, who completely conquered officially organized military capacity in Iraq in 7 weeks? And Iran -- who couldn't defeat the Iraqi military in a ten-year war -- will defeat Iraq's defeaters?

Or is this irresistable "counterstrike" going to come from the ragtag militias supplied by the Iranians, who have trouble keeping their casualty rates lower than 15:1 against the Americans, who aren't even using both hands?

No, skippy, Iran will face pretty much the same military consequences Iraq faced: large portions of the "regular" army will defect or give up almost immediately, and only the "elite" forces will remain to fight -- the modern version of the Persian "immortals". ...who aren't.

"I think the Americans are bluffing, because they know oil prices would double and the leading western oil companies would go bankrupt."

You need to take a course or two in economics.

While the price/bbl of petroleum would indeed skyrocket, the US oil companies would hardly go bankrupt. One of the biggest complaints against US oil companies right now is that they are reaping huge profits on the artifically high price of crude -- it costs US companies no more to drill oil than it ever did [about $20/bbl], but because the world commodity price is set by a non-US-controlled cartel, US oil companies are gaining profits hand over fist when they sell it to the refineries at $95/bbl. Of course, they aren't making near as much as the OPEC-owned state oil companies, whose costs to drill are around $5/bbl.

...and it should probably be said at this point that one of the reasons that OPEC has increased the price of crude is because the US knocked three oil-states -- Iraq, Yemen and Libya -- out of the panislamist terrorism game by invading Iraq 4-1/2 years ago, and the remaining oil states who actively support terrorism are having to cough up more cash and materiel. And the main oil-state supporting panislamist terrorism now is [coff coff] **Iran**.

Without Iran supplying money and weapons to panislamist hooligans, the price of crude oil would be left to market forces rather than artifical prices set for jihad-funding.

If OPEC wants to drive western oil companies out of business, they'd drop the price of oil to around $15/bbl, at which price no western oil company could compete, and then buy up the remains.

"Nobody is buying the Americans' bluff."

Careful, there, skippy. Bush is a loose cannon, remember. To listen to all his detractors and tear-stained critics, he's set on world domination. You can't ignore that type of guy. Not and have any expectation of reaching your next birthday.

But if his "bluff" is indeed just a bluff, then all of his detractors and tear-stained critics were incorrect about him in the first place.

Hmmmm.... I don't see an intellectual "out" for you, here. Either you're wrong **now** about him bluffing, or you were wrong **before** about him being the grasping, imperialist Junior Caesar.

In either event, you were wrong.

"The Americans are just needlessly wasting their resources if they really think some two-bit dictators are a threat to them."

And after you take a few courses in economics, you should probably take a few in History as well.

In the course of History, the biggest challenge to nations/kingdoms/empires that have "superpower" status of their time is not the equal and opposite superpowers, but the young, upstarts who have little/nothing to lose by taking on the king of the hill. Eventually, as History shows over and over and over again, the superpower gets tired of defending itself against repeated small-time attacks on it fringes and interests, and it rationalizes why those attacks aren't worth responding to. And when that happens, those "two-bit dictators" and the challenges they bring multiply, and it becomes a shark being devoured by pirhana. One pirhana -- nothing, if it's eliminated. A hundred pirhana -- fatal.

One two-bit dictator is nothing if his challenge is eliminated. If it isn't, then he will create more challenges, and so will all the others who learned that the US is not stopping challenges to its position.

"I am just saying that the Americans are their own worst enemy"

The Americans are indeed their own worst enemy. But not for the reasons you allude to.

Most Americans are like you: Historically illiterate. And many are confirmed in the New Age-y solipsism that believes that all mankind is the same all over, and that these other people are, in fact, just like the New Age-y imbeciles. The New Age-y cretins believe that all anyone wants is peace and brotherhood and cooperative, arm-in-arm strolls into some idyllic future and the best way to start is by a world-wide Group Hug.

But, simpletons that you are, you don't realize that up to three-fourths of the world are roughly a millenium behind you in idealism, and they're still operating on the philosophies that create those two-bit dictators in the first place. They no more want to cooperate with the American Left than they want to cooperate with the Bull in the China Shoppe Bush, and his quest for world domination. ...unless, of course, that "quest" is just a bluff.

"it is they, not Iran, who will end up depleting USA's resources."

Back we go to your grand ignorance of economics.

The US is a largely capitalist economy. We generate money. With money, we can buy "resources". Most of the world is still operating on some pigeon-economics cobbled together from dictatorial fiat [see el Heffe Hugo en la Venezuela] and whatever-it-takes to deal with the western capitalisms. They don't generate money simply by profit-motive. They generate money by robbing people or other nations.

As long as the US is capitalist, it will have money to fund wars. We can outspend any other nation or collection of nations on the planet. "Resources" is not the issue; the stomach for self-defense before self-defense becomes a literal matter of survival ... that is the issue.

But this speaks more to your duel-grand ignorance of History and the patterns formed on its pages.

[Samir]

QQ more.

[Samir]

The era of American imperialism will come to an end, God willing.

[rwilymz]

"The era of American imperialism will come to an end, God willing."

And if you want to see it, you only need to hop into your Wayback Machine and set it for 1902 so you can see the surrender of the First Philipine Republic to the American forces in Manila.

What simpletons today ascribe to "empire" is -- on the X-Y graph of traditional international influence peddling -- a departure along axis Z. Foreigners like money and they're willing to do what they can to acquire it. And when they do business with the US, they are called, by limp-noodle post-modern socialists, part of the "empire".

Yet how often does Cuba and NKorea whine to the world press about being left out? If you're included your part of the conspiracy; if you're left out, you've had "economic war" declared against you ...

I mean, consistency has never been a boon companion among the idiot class, but, seriously, if you can't do better than this you really need to go back to watching Captain Planet.

[Sewing Susie]

The time to deal with Ahma-nutjob and his aspirations for nuclear weapons is before the mushroom clouds appear over Tel Aviv and Washington DC, not after.

[dumbblonde]

"The era of American imperialism will come to an end, God willing."

There ya go, Samir. Way to FINALLY put your cards on the table and state your position clearly, for cryin' out loud. Now wasn't that easy? Couldn't you have done that in the first place, instead of just trotting out a bunch of scattershot, contradictory nonsense?

(BTW, don't ya mean "Allah"?)

[Samir]

What was contradictory about my commentary? Please let me know so I can go over it with you.

[rwilymz]

You didn't give "commentary". Nothing you provided shows the depth of analysis necessary to qualify for that term.

However, if you were running a bumper-sticker factory, and all you were interested in were soggy chestnuts and toothless saws ... well, you've got that covered.

If you want to know where you are contradictory ... my first question would be "contradictory of *what*"?

Yourself? or reality?

I've explained in some amount of detail how your mewling has contradicted reality. I don't particularly care about your betterment as a human being; apparently the blonde does -- she'll have to answer to that part.

[dumbblonde]

"I don't particularly care about your betterment as a human being; apparently the blonde does"

Huh? Where the hell did that come from?

I knew from the beginning (or at least I thought I knew) Samir's position and ideology. He didn't have the nerve to come out and state it, though - instead he chose to hide behind a smattering of nonsense talking points - and he couldn't keep his arguments straight. It took him awhile, but he finally got around to coming clean, with a statement right out of a Bin Laden speech - and of course the necessary "god willing".

Now he's going to try "discussion" again, but I already got what I wanted out of him, so I'm done here.

I could care less about his or anyone else's "betterment." I just like to see a person's cards on the table.

[rwilymz]

"I could care less about his or anyone else's "betterment." "

Okay, there you have it, guy. No one cares about you. Just whether or not you have the ability to talk in a straight line.

Stop dancing around the rhetoric long enough to take a stand. Or indulge your inner-jihadist. Your choice.

[Samir]

My critics have turned out to be just a couple of internet tough guys and cannot back up their inaccurate assertion that my commentary is contradictory.

If this is how its hawks act with one another, we just may see the arrogant American empire end sooner than I had hoped. :) :)