The Vast Left-Wing/CNN Conspiracy (Even the San Francisco Chronicle gets it!)

The San Francisco Chronicle ^ | November 29 2007 | Joe Garofoli

[2ndDivisionVet]

Remember the gay retired brigadier general who chastised Republicans for their stance on gays in the military at Wednesday's CNN/YouTube debate? Turns out Keith Kerr was packing a partisan sword. He's served as a member of an advisory team on gay and lesbian issues to the Sen. Hillary Clinton Campaign.

In the words of CNN's debate crew: D'oh! And here's Anderson Cooper falling on his nonpartisan sword.

So how did this slip under CNN's radar? Maybe CNN could have checked its own website. Instead, they paid for Kerr's airfare and hotel to St. Petersburg for the debate.

This is a red-meat smorgasbord for the conservative blogosphere and media circles for whom CNN stands for Clinton News Network. Especially since it is the second time the Clinton campaign has been connected to a planted question/questioner recently. MSNBC's Joe Scarborough said "It is total crap to suggest that nobody at CNN knew" that was on a Clintonista. Hugh Hewitt said it was "premeditated mediocrity." And on his radio show Thursday, Hewitt even got Tom Brokaw (he's pushing a new book) to pile on his mainstream media bros.

The General wasn't the only YouTuber who's getting nicked for their partisan leanings. Remember Journey, who asked Sen. Fred Thompson and Rep. Ron Paul a question about abortion. After hearing their response, she posted HER response on her blog -- wearing a "John Edwards '08" T-shirt.

Let's get the ground rules straight here. Granted, it's not cool to allow campaign advisors like Kerr to get the mic. (Nor was it cool for CNN to give airtime to Grover Norquist, the ultimate insider.) But what's wrong with somebody who has chosen a side to ask a question?

Your thoughts on the ground rules for these user-generated debates/forums?

[2ndDivisionVet]

CNN is the Clinton News Network. At least in the old days, the liberal media would try and be subtle in their advocacy of the democrats! Now, they are so desperate to coronate Hillary and "defeat" George Bush (who ain't running!) that they'll do ANYTHING!! If Dan Rather had been more careful, Kerry might have been elected in 2004.

[ReluctantDragon]

I agree with you.

[Lokibob]

Look, perhaps I am wrong, but these are REPUBLICAN primaries. I am expected to decide on a REPUBLICAN candidate. I do not care to hear what democrats think a REPUBLICAN debate question should be.

I have not watched the democratic debates for 2 reasons. It would just get me mad, their blather, and 2, I would rather watch a test pattern on TV.

....Bob

[Earthdweller]

Bush is just a straw-man for the movement to bring down Capitalism and Christianity (see all organized religion). Know thy enemy.