Digging out more CNN/YouTube plants: Abortion questioner is declared Edwards supporter (and a slobbering Anderson Cooper fan); Log Cabin Republican questioner is declared Obama supporter; lead toy questioner is a prominent union activist for the Edwards-endorsing United Steelworkers
Welcome to Horticulture Journalism 101. (Keep scrolling down for new updates to this handy CNN/YouTube illustrated plant guide.)
Concerned Young Undecided Person “Journey” = John Edwards supporter “Journey”
***
Concerned Undecided Log Cabin Republican supporter David Cercone = Obama supporter David Cercone
***
Concerned Undecided Mom LeeAnn Anderson = Activist for the John Edwards-endorsing United Steelworkers union LeeAnn Anderson
***
Concerned Undecided Gay Military Retiree Brig. Gen. Keith H. Kerr = Hillary/Kerry supporter and anti-”Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” activist Keith H. Kerr
***
The best thing about Republicans agreeing to do the CNN/YouTube debate is that it created yet another invaluable opportunity to expose CNN’s abject incompetence.
Retired Brig. Gen./gays in the military lobbyist/Hillary-Kerry supporter Keith H. Kerr wasn’t the only plant at the CNN/YouTube debate. The plant uncovering is in full-swing over at Free Republic.
Example: “Journey,” a.k.a. “Paperserenade,” the girl who asked an abortion question, is a declared John Edwards supporter.
You couldn’t tell from the video that CNN aired, where she’s wearing a plain shirt:
But if you click through on her YouTube profile, you see her latest video in response to the candidates’ answers. And she’s prominently wearing…her John Edwards ’08 t-shirt:
In case CNN’s eyesight is impaired:
How, you ask, should CNN have known? Well, on her YouTube profile, this woman links to her personal blog, where her user profile makes her political leanings crystal clear:
Turns out “Journey/” “paperserenade” is also a big slobbering Anderson Cooper fan. She posted this video a month ago exulting that “Anderson Cooper said my name!” during a CNN viewer comment segment. She wrote, “Horrible video, but at least I’ve got some type of recording of this event that has made my week!:”
On her blog, she posted an Anderson Cooper segment from VH1 with the following comment: “Anderson officially had the Best Week Ever for the week of 10/26/07, and looked more delicious than a pic-i-nic basket while doing so. And lookie, I found the video and uploaded it to Youtube for y’all. 
”
“Delicious!”
***
Update: And another one…Brian McMurphy at SixMeatBuffet (hat tip See-Dubya) notes that David Cercone, the Pompano Beach, Florida, man who asked the question about Log Cabin Republicans, is a declared Obama supporter.
His video:
Hillary must have shared a bag of her fertilizer with CNN. And yeah, it stinks:
***
Update: And another one…via The Autopsy…The lead toy questioner, LeeAnn Anderson, who appears to be an ordinary mom concerned about her two children, whom she includes in her video, is a prominent Pittsburgh union activist–and aide to Leo Gerard, President of the American Steel Workers Union/John Edwards supporter.
Her video:
If you go to the United Steelworkers YouTube page, you’ll see that Ms. Anderson’s video question is the featured video…along with a John Edwards ’08 icon (click for full-size):
***
“Constructive incompetence” or “convenient ineptitude?”
You decide.
***
More: “Total crap.” Can’t argue with that.
Update: New – Muslim questioner was a former CAIR intern.
Update: CNN on the defensive. CNN’s Glenn Beck comments here.
Update: The foliage keeps blooming…a questioner working with Dick Durbin’s staff and a Richardson supporter masquerading as a Paulbot… and a former Jane Harman intern…and the “Blind Black Republican satirist” (a milder species, but still, all in the same family).
Update: Watch video of the disappearing plants. CNN cuts out Keith Kerr from the debate rebroadcast. Keep pulling those weeds…
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
 |
Palin-endorsed Deb Fischer wins Nebraska Senate primary; will face Bob Kerrey in November
May 16, 2012 11:02 AM by Doug Powers
46 Comments
Newt Gingrich: I’m ending my campaign, but seriously, think about the moon colony idea
May 2, 2012 04:39 PM by Doug Powers
78 Comments
CNN anchor astonishment after student in viral photo with Obama won’t say she’s voting for him
April 27, 2012 05:51 PM by Doug Powers
53 Comments
Romney sweeps Tuesday primaries; ‘Better America begins tonight’
April 24, 2012 10:34 PM by Doug Powers
109 Comments
“If I wanted America to fail” video goes viral, but Twitter suspends group’s account; Update: Account restored
April 23, 2012 08:34 PM by Michelle Malkin
66 Comments
Categories: 2008 campaign,GOP,Media Bias,YouTube
This is only he beginning folks. Just you wait and see what the Clintonistas will have up their sleeves once the general election campaigning starts.
You wonder why I think Clinton will make the ticket? Because she will figure out a way to do so. Did you see that pompous answer she gave to Katie Couric when she asked what she would do if she didn’t get the nomination? Clinton’s answer…”Oh, I will”. Wow. Such
confidencearrogance.Hillary Rotten Clinton is way too full of herself.
I never really expected the Republican CNN/You Tube debate to be anything but the joke it turned out to be.
Good grief! The Democrat CNN/You Tube debate had a talking snowman and other oddball things that should have been a clue as to how last night would go.
john, yes, hillary camp did the usual colonel clink……
#95 – What was Hillary’s comment on the matter? I didn’t catch anything on the news yet.
Oh, let me predict. It will be one of the following:
a. I know nothing.
b. It was probably the vast right wing conspiracy.
c. All of the above.
At least now the Republicans have a legitimate excuse NOT to do anymore debates with CNN. Unlike the coward Democrats who are too afraid to do one on FOXNews.
Cowards. All of them. Is this what we want for our country? A bunch of cowards who are scared of FOXNews? Imagine if they were confronted by real danger!
Of course, the questioner about abortion is a lesbian….
Ironic
*UPDATED* Listening the Rush Limbaugh radio program, it is revealed another questioner has connections to California Democrat Congresswoman, Jane Harmon to the CNN YouTube video submitted by Ted Faturos from Manhattan Beach, Ca on farm subsidies.
Also confirmed via Rush Limbaugh, General Kerr has appeared on CNN prior to last night’s debate.
on Assorted Babble by Suzie
For libs I think there are other options. Both Constructive ineptitude and Convenient incompetence seem to win them votes quite often.
It has been a busy day in my world today and I finally have had a chance to lurk and work. All I can say is “Holy Crap” what the heck is going on with these plants. I knew the retired one star was a plant, but this is plain dirty yellow journalism. Kudos to Michelle and those that took the time to alert us of this fraud. I really didn’t think the MSM good go any lower, I was wrong.
Hmmm….have the Republicans used plants at Dem debates?
Crickets chirping.
Considering the fawning nature of Dem debates thus far, I would be surprised if they did and if so, they failed to make an impact.
I for one do not believe for a second that CNN was in the dark. I think they went looking for these people. Cooper may not have known, but that only makes him look foolish today…
I was only joking yesterday when I posted about leftist activists and staffers of democrat congressmen would be allowed in.
Lo and behold.
suzieviews
check out the link I posted in #39 on Kerr …
I was going to add to what’s already been said in response to this, but enough has been said to show how completely ridiculous this comment is.
Again, it’s different state to state, but where I’m from, I’m allowed to vote in the Republican primary. And I’m a registered Democrat. Many states allow independents to vote in one primary as well.
So Democrats have every right to ask Republican candidates a question.
You know, I think Larry King is loving this the most. The Pooper
SCooper is getting hit hard.*UPDATE* More info on Ted Faturos at Jason Coleman’s blog. Ted Faturos a former intern for Democrat Congresswoman Jane Harman.
Rusty, Then why can’t Republicans ask the Democrats questions? Double Standards. YOu libs are all the same.
Rusty – The questioners pretended to be something they are not. Is that acceptable? Yes or no. Those are the only two acceptable answers.
I understand by your previous comments that the answer is that it is acceptable. You are welcome to change your position and condemn the behavior or I conclude you condone it. If you condone it, please don’t complain to me when something fails and it’s discovered that the person who had the position falsified a resume. You can’t have it both ways.
Great work outing these individuals, Michelle (and husband). I’d love to see more dirt on these plants in the future, AND the guilty over at CNN (Anderson Cooper et al).
And just when we think CNN couldn’t get any lower…
Actually, this is the first debate I watched all year. If the previous debate didn’t have some questions from people who are obviously Republicans, I would be surprised.
And let me reiterate that using someone who actually works for a campaign is unacceptable.
Well Rusty, looks like your an honest lib, something that is very rare.
If Democrats have questions for Republican candidates, why can’t they just come out and ADMIT they are what they are?
Why is it that Dems have this psychological defect they have to lie, lie, LIE???????
Re #116:
“…where I’m from, I’m allowed to vote in the Republican primary. And I’m a registered Democrat.”
You mean that you can actually walk right in to the voting site, have the workers look up your name in the registered Democrats’ list, and receive a Republican primary ballot?
Which state is this?
Or, rather, do you have to “undeclare” (“unregister”) yourself prior to the primary election, in order to be able to choose whichever party’s primary ballot you wish?
(Which is the case in my home state – NH.)
Could you please let the rest of us know?
As of 8:45, according to her live-blogging, MM thought that the questions had been really good. They continued to be really good, even if you exclude the “plants.” So why all the whining? You either heard some useful back-and-forth among the candidates, or you didn’t. If you did, stop complaining, for pete’s sake.
The real joke on the Republicans is that the confederate flag guy and the Bible guy weren’t plants.
Considering the DNC’s new “flip-flop” website, if they found any right-wing plants, I believe we’d be hearing about it. I would be very surprised if there weren’t some Kos kids looking.
granite,
I believe 20 states currently have “open” primaries, meaning you can vote in any primary, regardless of party affiliation.
If you don’t see ethics issues at work here, I can’t help you.
The Bible guy was a Dem…that was very obvious last night.
#128 RyanInSanJose:
Do you mean regardless of current party registration, or regardless of past party affiliation?
I know my home state changed ~10-15 years ago, I believe, to its curent practice.
Up to 10-15 tyears ago, one had to be registered in a party, and then could vote only in that party’s primary.
There are quite a few “open primary” states. Here there is a list (if you trust Wikipedia, but in this case the info can be verified so it should be reasonably accurate).
However, if a Democrat chooses to vote in a Republican primary, he forgoes his chance to vote in the Democrat primary. There would be really only three reasons (that I can see) that someone would do this:
1) “Raiding” – Trying to select the weakest candidate from the other side in order to help ensure victory for the other party (never proven successful)
2) Person is truly independent
3) Person is from the other party and in the process of switching over or is dissatisfied with the choices presented by his own party.
Rusty, is there any reason you would vote in a Republican primary other than these reasons? (Not intended as a challenge, I’m truly curious.)
In SC we do not register by party affiliation. Voting in the opposing party’s primary is discouraged as unethical.
But the issue is that it was a “news” organization, ostensibly unbiased (bwhahahaha) doing this, not a political party – that is the tragedy. Of course, when you realize that CNN is simply a partisan wing of the Democrap party, then it all makes sense.
Yes, it is despicable.
Mrs. Malkin, excellent job on the Wilkow Majority…I love my sattelite radio.
The issue isn’t whether or not the questions were good. The issue is the unethical conduct of CNN and the Democratic party. As has been pointed out, there are open-primary states, that allow you to vote in a primary, regardless of your party affiliation (I have my own issues with that, but that’s another story). However, if you’re a democrat and want to ask a Republican candidate a question (how else can we convert them?), stand up and say it. Don’t pretend to be something you are not, just to ask a loaded question.
Why are these young woman that support John Edwards so butt ugly???
There is no planting going on. Hillary is not aware that there is involvement of her staff in the selection of questioners.
Of course, we all know that the above statements depend on “What the meaning of is is!”
Please try. Because I honestly don’t see it. Unless you believe that only uncommitted Republican voters should have been allowed to ask questions. Because otherwise, it seems like the question is either a good one, or it isn’t. Take the woman asking about lead in toys, for example. Is that not an issue parents who are potential GOP voters might care about? Why does it matter that she’s an Edwards supporter?
And I think a “YouTube” debate for Dems should absolutely feature questions from conservative viewers.
Embrace some complexity, folks! Don’t be so afraid of the ideas of the “other side.” Prove you’re better than the Dems–if you have to look at it in such unhelpful, zero-sum terms (and obviously you do on this site)–and let your candidates answer their questions without belly-aching about it.
If it weren’t for the Blogs John Kerry would be president today. What Dan Rather tried to do would have been successful in throwing the election. Here, the Blogs uncovered CNN’s attempt to make idiots of the republican nominees by exposing so quickly the hypocrisy of the plants. The question now is, will the republican candidates allow themselves to be used like this again?
Actually, I was wondering if she was even old enough to vote!
The Confederate flag guy is a Ron Paul supporter.
#137 kovaks…although I addressed my previous question to Rusty – please answer the question as to whether or not a person should be who they claim to be.
Yes or No would be appropriate answers.
What needs to happen in these debates is to ask the same questions to each party. The Dems never get asked any of this stuff and it is just assumed everybody knows their position so why ask. Imagine Obama or Richards or Hillary having to answer these questions. Instead they get crap about the environment and how quick can we get out of Iraq if you use every available commercial airliner, cargo ship and taxi.
Why not ask the Dems about the Fair Tax or indeed go ahead and ask them about abortion, even if we know what the answer is. Let’s quit assuming.
Plants’r'US
The Dems new name for 2007 & 2008
Thanks, I needed a laugh.
IMHO the whole debate format, and other debate formats of late, are beneath the dignity of our democratic system and belittle the office of president. Giving candidates 30 seconds to offer sound-bite responses to questions posed by media personalities or “average joe voters” adds nothing to the process. A real debate would have the candidates slugging it out defending their positions on issues they think are important and pointing out the problems with the other guys’.
Even without the plants in the audience, allowing the MSM to control the questions and format is ridiculous. Dan Rather is screaming about a conspiracy where the government and big business control the news (presumably led by the enigmatic “Kenneth”) but here we once again see the MSM choosing what issues get addressed.
No one except the left wing whackos and their MSM lackies would consider discussing gays in the military this year. It is not the issue it was in 1992.
Questions asking Rudy about rooting for the Red Sox and asking Hillary about diamonds or pearls are demeaning to the process. We can thank the Clintons for going on late night talk shows and answering questions about boxers or briefs for the mess we have now. It is a shame everyone else tolerates it.
Maybe we should send the DNC some Scott’s Weed Killer.
If you don’t see ethics issues at work here, I can’t help you.
And this, I think, is the real problem. Some people genuinely don’t understand ethics except as an intellectual excercise. A real understanding of ethics requires an intact feeling function. It requires one to posess empathy, compassion and groundedness in reality rather than only being concerned with furthering one’s agenda.
Out of 5000 submitted questions they chose 32 … (I don’t count the stupid Yankees question they allowed at the end for Rudy) … thus far they have proven at least 6 of those were people that are already committed to Democrats they support and/or work actively for … that’s 6 opportunities for questions to have come from people with a real interest in the Republican candidates that were denied (or hijacked) …
#134 Archon-
Well said.
I admit that I didn’t watch much of the debate because MM and other bloggers do such a great job of summarizing it so I can avoid the painful moments, but weren’t the questioners introduced as “undecided voters”?
What would the questions have been if CNN had not stacked the deck? The questions had a deliberate design. Make Republicans look like Bible believing, gay hating, corporate farm loving, anti immagration fanatics that no one could love in a million years.
What wasn’t aksed were important quesitons about security, the economy, illegal immigration and on and on.
Stacking the deck robs us of a real dialogue over issues that matter. CNN committed a crime agains the democratic process and they need to be called on it. We are loosing our very democracy.
There were many biased questions asked during the Democratic CNN/YouTube debate as well. Here’s a link:
http://mediamatters.org/items/200711270007?offset=20&show=1
Here’s my favorite:
Sorry Rusty, no matter how much you try to twist things, I will never think Democrats have the right to select the Republican candidate. And just like you do here, these people are just instigators who try to make trouble.
jungatheart #146. I would respectfully disagree what is necessary to understand ethics. I’d suggest that even if a person has the attributes which you suggest, they still could completely miss “ethics”. To truly have ethics, you have to have absolutes and a source for those absolutes which is bigger than yourself. Otherwise, all ethics are “self based” and as such, then one can not say your ethics are wrong and mine are right? If the source is external and constant, then such a statement can be made with certainty.
As far as voting in primaries go, here in Texas, in the past they would stamp your voter registration card indicating which primary you voted in, and only let you participate in a runoff election if you had the same stamp. I’m not sure if they’re still doing that though.
That’s a legitimate question because every time a Democrat does enter office, our taxes DO go up. In fact, Clinton wasted NO time doing that when he got into office.
conservativesRus
I agree with you on the “self-based” aspect of ethics … but I think there are several levels of ethics we deal with … you are addressing “personal” ethics … which is an integral part of personal integrity and honesty … I believe we also deal with professional ethics in our chosen fields of work … CNN fails to abide by journalistic ethics … to me these are more “rules of conduct”" we call ethics …
of course … then we have the ultimate oxymorons … Polotical Ethics and Congressional Ethics …
conservativeRus: I don’t recall anyone in the YouTube debates (either one) having to claim to be anything other than a person with a question they’d like answered–did they? I didn’t assume that would-be questioners would be committed Republicans any more than I assumed the first debate’s questioners would be committed Dems. I didn’t watch all the debate last night, so I don’t know: did anyone actually lie about who they support, or claim to be a die-hard Republican when they actually aren’t? Not divulging that you support a particular candidate, especially if it isn’t germane to the question you’re asking, I don’t have a problem with.
Now if the questioners were some sort of campaign operatives, acting on behalf of their respective campaigns, and CNN knew and was abetting that, I’d consider that an ethical lapse. But that doesn’t really seem to be the case here.
They make Pretty Boy look prettier when they stand next to him! LOL!!
preview not working for me … should have been Political Ethics …
Ah yes, Media Matters…the organization that Hillary Clinton admitted to helping “start”. Yeah, tell me THAT wasn’t a plant.
Sorry, but can’t believe anything is legit if Hillary’s been involved in this org. I heard it myself. She admitted to it.
In fairness, I agree that this question sounds biased.
That said, though, I don’t believe this really hurts the democratic candidates to ask it. If anything, doesn’t it give them the golden opportunity to show that they’re “not tax-and-spend”?
In thinking about it, it’s not that loaded. It’s almost rhetorical. Which candidate would be inclined to say “why, yes, taxes will go up”. However, I’d like to see how all of Hillary’s programs would be funded considering even she herself admits that America cannot afford her ideas.
So you are buying CNN’s proclaimed ignorance with regards to General Kerr?
conservativesRus #152 I don’t think we disagree but I don’t completely understand what you’re saying. I think a person who has empathy and compassion accepts that there is an “other” and if there are to be rules, they must apply to the me and the other. I happen to believe in something bigger than myself but don’t think a person has to believe that in order to understand ethics. I believe there is something in all of us that knows the Truth, with a capital T, and as evidence of this I ask how a lie detector test could work if this weren’t true. In order for it to work there must be an other inside of us that reacts to a lie and values the truth. You might rightfully argue that that which lives in us is externally based and I would have no objection. Again, I don’t think we have a fundamental disagreement.
OK people. Use the plants debate to advance the Republican side…but no whining. [I'm assuming most here are Repubs] I watched and aside from a few [really]dopey questions, most were reasonable. The candidates [except for Ronny]acquitted themselves well
and
. I’d have liked more on certain subjects but that’s life. Very good to concentrate on dumping on Hillary’s guy. It’s all moot if we don’t defeat her next year so concentrate on that.
I think this is a good issue to pound the Dems with…do not lose sight of that as the goal.
jungatheart #162. You are right, we are not at all on opposite sides here – I think we’re making a minor differentiation when the major one is that indeed there were ethical problems with some of the questioners/host/broadcaster.
I agree that the recognition of “other” is necessary. My point though is just that even if I recognize “other”, the rules have to be consistent with respect to the “other” and the only place that can happen is for something external to be the definition.
I have to agree with the individual who suggested that both party candidates get asked the same questions. It this way we can all see the differences, and make valid choices unencumbered by the games being played by the news media.
#156
Get a clue!
The plants are often described as “undecided voters”!
conservativesRus #164 I should have asked this right away; what is this external thing? Are we talking about God?
As you can tell by my screen name, I’m a big fan of Carl Jung and he and I believe that the place for any change to happen is in the individual. I believe that responsibility for my life lies within me. It’s possible what you consider external, I think is internal and I’m not going to get too worked up if we disagree about the address of our boss.
In a sense they were becuase CNN selected the questioners they felt would reflect badly on conservatives as a whole.
Consider this the political spectrum (with _ & * the extremes.):
…………….Left………..Center………..Right…………….
__———————+++++++++++##########**
During a Republican PRIMARY debate the questions are supposed to come some from the +’s, some from the *’s but the vasdt majority should come from the #’s.
CNN skewed the demographics so that you got questions from (and only of interest to) the left and on issues of substance they selected the loons of the extreme right over ‘average’ members. Not all of them fit in this category, but more than enough to prove it to have been deliberate.
This has been going on for YEARS!
I’m happy that the internet and bloggers have finally busted their game.
Maybe these slanted news organizations will change their ways before the debates are 1 vs 1.
Yeah, I don’t know about that one. Granted. Especially since they gave him so much air time. But I suspect that’s more of a gay thing than a Clinton thing. And that truly does seem like an issue of not particular interest to your average Republican voter.
My original point, though, is that there’s nothing inherently wrong with Democrats asking questions to the GOP candidates, just as there should be nothing wrong with Republicans asking questions of the Dems. If the candidates last night had to field some interesting questions from some closet liberals!, I just don’t understand the outrage.
Again, to use the lead toys example, for any takers: what about that woman’s background makes her question any less relevant?
Kovacs
Kerr worked in Kerry’s campaign, is working in official capacities in Clinton’s Campaign, and has appeared multiple times on CNN programs … so how can CNN not know anything about him? …
Your right it’s full disclosure D.L.#171 Next time the candidates should answer the questions like this. “This is where everyone plays gotcha” and leave.
What, no questions like: “do you like diamonds or pearls”? How about do you like a revolver or automatic?! CNN has lost all credibility as a news organization. The FCC and Election commission should investigate them as being a democratic-socialist organization and prevented from airing any campaign material 45 days before the next election.
This was just reported on CNS news:
Sen. Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign played no part in and had no knowledge of a question asked by one of her advisors in the Nov. 28 Republican presidential debate that has sparked a firestorm of criticism from conservatives, according to the activist group affiliated with the questioner.
————————————
Notice the parsing. It doesn’t say that Hillary Clinton had no part, only her presidential campaign had no part. Based upon past experience with the Clintons this is a very carefully crafted answer that leaves many possibilities open. She “may” have plausible deniability, but what about Bill and the Clinton News Network?
The GOP candidates continue to dance to the tune that Big Media calls for them. Romney, Giuliani, all of them, are desperate to please the mainstream media and they continue to pretend that it’s 1958 and the media are professionals. Duncan Hunter was the only candidate who refused to accept the phony multi-culti question by Yasmin(?), the Muslim girl from Alabama(?). They need to pull their heads out into the fresh air.
If they’re going to have Chris Matthews as a moderator, if they’re going to let YouTube and CNN frame their campaigns, they’re going to lose.
I found Journey’s attempted gotcha particularly nauseating….”I know, I’ll make all the big bad men look really really mean by forcing them to admit that they’d put a sweet little girl like me in jail for doing what we all know is my right…”
The best debate recap
HERE
I love how Dems are out en masse explaining this away as no big deal.
Typical BS.
it is the fact they hid who they were, they were cloaked as either ‘undecided’ or ‘republicans’. if you are truly thinking this is above aboard for a dem to interject into a repub debate, then you should understand the need for openness and honesty about who you really are and what happens to be your political view. it isn’t the questions per se, it is the subterfuge!!!
Subterfuge — deceit..hence, the idea from all repub’s is that dems are deceitful liars. Now we have proof.
That was pretty good
Libs would get really upset if I opened an office proclaiming to be anything I wasn’t – whether it be dentist or veterinarian, both things I could do 80% of the job and nobody would know. But apparently if they do the same thing, it’s ok.
Geez you just can’t make this stuff up.
What’s it going to take to get this on the MSM?
Maybe if a Republican activist masquerades as a liberal and asks a
randomplanted question at a Democrat debate, oh wait, we can’t do that until after the writers strike.Hey CNN, once and for all, just come out and admit it… you’re a bunch of liberals. The part that irks me the most about the MSM, and liberals in general, is that they simply will not come out and say who they really are. Its like they’re ashamed of it.
180+ entries and counting? A rather large response for Michelle’s site in a little over 12 hours.
Michelle said:
My gut tells me that this horticulture phenomenon will also be a major response to exit-poll questioning in 2008, as to why so many Republican voters turned out.
WOW! Just look at the number of trackbacks on this.
Well done.
PBBoilermaker #179, Does B.S. stand for Barbara Steisand?
It seems to me this early in the game that Hillary’s team, and her media enablers, feel she cannot win without cheating. We should expect much, more more of course.
Further, this format diminishes the stature of the presidency. IMHO, this also benefits Hillary — as in, “What the heck, ‘I’ll be part of history and vote to elect the first female president’.” — irregardless of what her stance and competence might be on truly serious issues.
Rush was right today; in part the choice of questions seemed designed to reinforce silly Republican stereotypes (of bigotry, homophobia, etc.).
Uh, sure. They both mean the same thing to me.
John Gibson just gave Michelle much deserved investigative props for this story on his “My Word” segment.
CNN and the DNC made Goebbels smile last night.
CNN responds with this pathetic response:
legitmate and relevant.. right, to liberal democrats NOT republicans!!! oh CommieNewsNetwork.. stop the spin..
Well, CNN has certainly gone out of its way to condescend to those of us who value ethics instead of the fine art of deceit.
They use decided democrat operatives in the democrat debate as undecided voters. They use decided democrat operatives in the Republican debate. But it is we, who have a vested interest and want our substantive interests debated among the candidates for OUR party who are taking the discredited low-road approach.
Ok, gotcha. So the next democrat debate they are going to let a bunch of Republicans demand straight-forward answers from the candidates on illegal immigration, confiscatory taxes, 2nd Amendment rights, failed education because of extreme education union influence, school choice, maintaining our sovereignty, supporting our troops, Islamic influence in the democrat ranks including their pandering to CAIR, failed social programs, privatizing social security, redistribution of wealth, failure of immigrants to assimilate, the sanctity of marriage and family. You know, the substantive issues that we care about most.
Michelle it’s just not fair..last time I had to spend 3 or 4 hours sweating in front of a search engine to figure out who those people were.
The HillBots jumped so hard and fast it wasn’t even a contest and they drug their personal parts all around the room showing them off like theirs is unique or something.
I mean last time I had to work at it to put together a list to send around to everyone and let them shout out how the room was packed.
And this time they made it so durn easy even “major female bloggers” can do this stuff without any help.
What is gonna be left for us army of davids types to do?
This Kerr guy may bot even REALLY be a General, could some of you military persons check this article out and respond?
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=23698
Well, that’s skirting (ahem, pant-suiting) the whole issue, isn’t it?
CNN acts as though they did nothing wrong. Unbelievable! No ethics is exactly right. Next time why not let the Hill and her comrads line up and ask the questions and make sure that they ask when the Republicans stopped beating their wives about a hundred times. That sould be fair. What a farce CNN is.
How about someone who is a regular shill on CNN and has in not “undecided?”
CNN wants to frame the debate to meet their worldview, and doesn’t mind being deceitful about it.