More CNN/Youtune debate plants

[RadioFreeSeaLab]

http://michellemalkin.com/2007/11/29/digging-out-the-cnnyoutube-plants-abortion-questioner-is-edwards-supporter/

[Iain]

Was questioning only open to undecided or Republican voters?

[Brad Johnson]

I caught bits and pieces of it on the news this morning.  If Rudy haden't alienated gun owners already, he sure did it this time.

Brad

[RadioFreeSeaLab]

Was questioning only open to undecided or Republican voters?

Of course it's open to anyone.  The point is that CNN picked questions that don't have anything to do with anything.  The questions were all about "cliche conservative" issues, to quote Rush, who I normally don't like.
Gays in the military, farm subsidies, the confederate flag, what would jesus do? 
pfft. 

[Manedwolf]

I caught bits and pieces of it on the news this morning.  If Rudy haden't alienated gun owners already, he sure did it this time.

Brad

I saw the boos to his reply, yes. Reasonable restrictions? Like his tenure in NYC?

And of course he doesn't "own any guns"...he has bodyguards who have guns.

[El Tejon]

"Reasonable restrictions"=>ensuring that the vending machines at airports in which pistols and machine pistols are sold are tip proof so that the firearms are not injured.

[Iain]

Was questioning only open to undecided or Republican voters?

Of course it's open to anyone.  The point is that CNN picked questions that don't have anything to do with anything.  The questions were all about "cliche conservative" issues, to quote Rush, who I normally don't like.
Gays in the military, farm subsidies, the confederate flag, what would jesus do? 
pfft. 

That was a genuine question of mine, I'm not sure how your debates work. I read through the Malkin link, and a couple are dodgy I agree (trade unionist etc). But some girl who supports Edwards sending a question in whilst not wearing her Edwards t-shirt hardly constitutes a 'plant' if Edward's supporters are not barred from asking questions.

She did ask the abortion question. I expect that is why she is  top of the list, and seems to be the first one who Malkin 'outed'. Hardly an issue that doesn't have 'anything to do with anything' either.

[RadioFreeSeaLab]

Quite true.  But I think it's obvious that CNN picked some pretty stupid questions, in an attempt to make conservatives look bad.  For example, global warming, whether or not you believe it, is a big issue.  The democrats get a lot of questions about it at their debates.  Why no global warming questions at the republican debate?  Farm subsidies, gays in the military, the confederate flag, but no global warming questions?  Really?

[Iain]

Sorry, I edited whilst you were posting.

Without turning this into another GW thread - I expect a lot of the conservative types don't want to touch it at the moment. In fact if this debate was characterised by 'cliche conservative issues' and full of 'plants' I'm surprised there wasn't a GW question.

I don't know whether or not CNN picked those questions with motive other than to drag out what it sees as the big issues, and those are some pretty cliched, well worn topics. Divisive ones too.

[MechAg94]

I suspect you would get some version of "research is okay, but no action is warranted right now; and no Kyoto treaty" from most of the Repub candidates.  Any hint of "we have to take action on GW and regulate CO2 emissions" would probably be a negative.  Stuff about alternative fuels and nuke energy would probably go over well though.

[MechAg94]

Would it be better to simply give each candidate a 30 minute speech to address a list of issues?  Let them do a 10 minute follow up after everyone has spoken if they need to.

[RadioFreeSeaLab]

It would be better if they actually debated the issues.  Real issues.  It would be better if the candidates from both parties could answer a damn question.  Yes, or no first, then explain.

[camacho]

If Rudy haden't alienated gun owners already, he sure did it this time.

I think  for the majority of us Rudy is what he has always been: a gun-control, big city liberal. What I found more peculiar, is that Thompson said he owns guns but would not tell what kind. It sounded really phony and most of the audience probably got the idea that he owns nothing.

Then both Hunter and McCain went on to talk about their experience with firearms in the army, which showed fundamental lack of understanding of the Second Amendment (the questions was about that) which has nothing to do with soldiers carrying and shooting in the army.

[seeker_two]

camacho: I thought the same thing about Thompson's answer at first (see TFL for my post in L&P); but, after thinking about it, he gave the best answer of all. No way I would tell a room full of strangers exactly what I owned or where I kept them. However, I would be proud to tell them I AM a gun owner....

My final opinion on the CNN farce....the questions told us a lot about CNN & YouTube....but the answers told us a lot about the candidates. And, if the GOP has ANY testosterone & integrety left, they will sue CNN and demand a do-over with submitted questions reviewed by noted conservatives (Malkin, Dobbs, Beck, etc.)

[roo_ster]

Here's something I saw on instapundit:

    Last week, CNN's Anderson Cooper quipped in an interview with Townhall.com that campaign operatives are people too and that CNN wasnt worried if political partisans posed questions at the upcoming GOP debate he was moderating. We dont investigate the background of people asking questions (by submitting video clips). Its not our job, is how he put it.

    But now CNNs logo has egg splattered all over it, as it scrambles to explain how a co-chair of Hillary Clintons veterans committee was allowed to ask a video question on gays in the military at Wednesdays debate and was also flown by the network from California to the debate site in Florida so he could repeat his question to the candidates in person. CNN claims it verified retired Brig. Gen. Ketih Kerrs military status and checked his campaign contribution records, contradicting Mr. Coopers blas? attitudes. Still, they somehow missed his obvious connection to the Hillary campaign which any Google search would have turned up. CNN later airbrushed Mr. Kerrs question out of its rebroadcast of the debate, indicating that it apparently doesnt think campaign operatives are legitimate questioners at the networks debates.

    Now it appears that an amazing number of partisan figures posed many of the 30 questions at the GOP debate all the while pretending to be CNNs advertised undecided voters. Yasmin from Huntsville, Alabama turns out to be a former intern with the Council on American Islamic Relations, a group highly critical of Republicans. Blogger Michelle Malkin has identified other plants, including declared Obama supporter David Cercone, who asked a question about the pro-gay Log Cabin Republicans. A questioner who asked a hostile question about the pro-life views of GOP candidates turned out to be a diehard John Edwards supporter (and a slobbering online fan of Mr. Cooper). Yet another plant was LeeAnn Anderson, an activist with a union that has endorsed Mr. Edwards.

    It seems more plants are being uprooted with each passing day. Almost a third of the questioners seem to have some ties to Democratic causes or candidates. Another questioner worked with Democratic Senator Dick Durbins staff. A former intern with Democratic Rep. Jane Harman asked a question about farm subsidies. A questioner who purported to be a Ron Paul supporter turns out to be a Bill Richardson volunteer. David McMillan, a TV writer from Los Angeles, turns out to have several paens to John Edwards on his YouTube page and has attended Barack Obama fundraisers.

    Given CNNs professed goal to have ordinary Americans ask questions at their GOP debate, how likely is that it was purely by accident that so many of the videos CNN selected for use were not just from partisans, but people actively hostile to the GOPs messages and candidates?

"Undecided voters."  Right.  Also, the blonde* Edwards activist did not wear the shirt for her question.  It was on her web page.


* Gotta be specific, as there was more than one flack for Pony Boy.

[Stetson]

This debate was supposed to be for the Republican primaries.  Where the (R)'s decide who they want to be their candidate.  It would be like me going to the (D) primary debates and asking questions that are geared to the (R) political platforms.  "What are your views on Heller vs. DC?"  "What are your plans to implement a flat income tax and cut social welfare programs not intended for the Fed Gov?".  Either question would have been boo-ed by those attending and cause DailyKos members heads to explode.  Just like the ones in the debate.

The obviously planted questions i.e Gays in the military, were not from people who were undecided.  They were there to get a sound bite and nothing more.  It worked...

[Iain]

And, if the GOP has ANY testosterone & integrety left, they will sue CNN and demand a do-over with submitted questions reviewed by noted conservatives (Malkin, Dobbs, Beck, etc.)

Why?

You guys are doing your nuts in over some questions in a debate. What you seem to want is rigorously controlled 'debate' with pre-approved questions that will only tell us of the minor differences between the conservative stances that each man would take.

If you are concerned about who questions about 'cliche conservative' issues will play in the media to the extent that you seem not to want them to be allowed to be asked (pre-screening would remove any questions about gays in the military or abortion whatever the back ground of the questioner) - maybe, just maybe, the problem is not with the question, but your terror of the public response to the answer. And maybe, just maybe that's because the answer is a problem.

Possibly I'm just used to more open debate in venues such as the BBC's Question Time, cos I tell you what, although you can guess at the questions each week, you cannot always guess at the audience response and I would not want to be a beleaguered  member of the government at one of those sessions.

I'd find it just as bizarre if this response had all come from Democrats to republican affiliated questioners in a democrat debate. I'd also find it bizarre if there was actually any proof that this initiative had come from more than just democrat-affiliated individuals because it wasn't really worth the effort.

[seeker_two]

And, if the GOP has ANY testosterone & integrety left, they will sue CNN and demand a do-over with submitted questions reviewed by noted conservatives (Malkin, Dobbs, Beck, etc.)

Why?

Two reasons.....

1. Being a Republican debate, the candidates are trying to win over the GOP base--particularly the conservative base. The candidates should be answering questions that concern the base (RKBA, tax reform, etc). When the primaries are over and the general election begins, then you can get into issues like gays in uniform and ancient flags.

2. CNN/YouTube advertised this debate as one where "regular people" who were likely voters in the GOP primaries. Not only did they violate this tenet by not vetting the questions or contributors properly, they went out of their way to ensure that Democrat-leaning operatives that had no intention of voting for a GOP candidate post questions and take opportunities from contributors who would vote in a GOP primary. CNN violated journalistic integrity, objectivity, and the basis for the debate. CNN needs to pay for those violations...

I'd like to see an open debate like Question Time. But I bet you'd be livid if the BBC stacked the deck against the debaters like CNN did.....

[Manedwolf]

Were they ALL plants? Now Malkin has found that the "Muslim questioner" was a CAIR intern.

[camacho]

c

amacho: I thought the same thing about Thompson's answer at first (see TFL for my post in L&P); but, after thinking about it, he gave the best answer of all. No way I would tell a room full of strangers exactly what I owned or where I kept them. However, I would be proud to tell them I AM a gun owner....

You could be right. What I found strange is that he kind of paused before answering and left an impression that he was not sure what to answer. It just stuck me that way, but in all fairness he has been like that with everything he answers. All in all, his campaign has been anything but stellar. When he entered the race I was excited about him as were many others but it has become now evident that Fred is not up to the job.

As to the You Tube debate, as bad as it was, I think it achieved what others did not do as well. It affirmed who really Romney and Rudy are, and it further propelled the candidate I support (Mike Huckabee). I admit I am biased here, but anytime Rudy and Romney are shown weak that's a good thing. We do not need any of them as the Republican nominee.

[LAK]

What they ought to do is allow the candidates to propose the questions to the other candidates - and speak from their own platform accordingly. In other words let the candidates actually have real debates. There can be a debate moderator to watch the clock as needed, and CNN etc get to broadcast it only.

---------------------------------

http://searchronpaul.com
http://ussliberty.org
http://ssunitedstates.org

[RadioFreeSeaLab]

What they ought to do is allow the candidates to propose the questions to the other candidates - and speak from their own platform accordingly. In other words let the candidates actually have real debates. There can be a debate moderator to watch the clock as needed, and CNN etc get to broadcast it only.

---------------------------------

http://searchronpaul.com
http://ussliberty.org
http://ssunitedstates.org

Exactly.
And maybe at the end, 30 minutes of audience questions, picked at random.

[MechAg94]

I am sure CNN could do a poll of "likely" voters or only Republican voters asking what their top 5 or 10 issues are, then set up questions based on those issues.  This ain't rocket science. 

I like the idea of asking each candidate to supply a few questions. 

The main issues is that CNN set this up saying it was "undecided" voters and questions/issues important to them when it was nothing of the kind. 

[ilbob]

Instead of this phony debate crap, let the candidates talk with each other and question each other on issues they think are important.

Let Ron Paul ask Rudy about gun control. Then let him repsond.

Let Tancredo ask McCain about illegals.