Posted on 12/01/2007 2:34:00 AM PST by Enchante
It was bad enough that CNN handed the microphone over to an official, Gen. Kerr of a Hillary Clinton campaign committee to conduct an extended rebuttal of Republican candidates.
But bloggers are continuing to dig in to and are exposing some pretty damning evidence that CNN slanted the questioning via activist proxies. A setting that was supposed to be about undecided Republicans (a primary debate) getting to know the candidates turned out to be a litany of gotcha videos from liberal activists.
Some problems were apparent at the start. For instance, CNN declared that it had selected twenty-four "undecided Republican voters" at the University of Tampa. That was an eye-roller. I went to the University of Tampa, and I think you would be hard pressed to even find twenty-four Republicans there, unless you brought in the ROTC department.
My suspicions were quickly confirmed. One of those "Republicans" was not pleased with any of the candidates but found common ground with that great conservative thinker John Edwards. I think this is where John Stossel might cry "give me a break". She was one of the folks whom CNN also used for that gee-wiz happiness meter shown after the debate to demonstrate what Republican voters thought of the candidates [cough].
Another questioner named Mark Strauss of Iowa asked Ron Paul to run as an Independent. Wasn't it a little bit of a tip off to CNN producers that Strauss is not interested in Republican issues when his question was nothing more than an encouragement for a candidate to leave the party?
But clearly, CNN likes the idea of a Republican candidate taking Republican voters to the Independent block for the general election. In case you missed it, Nader did this to Gore and Gore lost. Perot did it to Bush, Sr. and Bush lost. Wonder what CNN might have had in mind by promoting this idea at the debate and selecting it out of thousands of questions that actually would have mattered to Republicans?
Strauss was not randomly chosen as CNN presented a previous video of his at the Democrats' debate. There is a history between him and CNN. So the "we did not know" defense shouldn't play here any more than it does in the case of Gen. Kerr who had been on CNN previously.
Strauss's website is easy enough to find. He writes there:
In October 2006, Governor Mitt Romney of Massachusetts came to my door in Iowa, yes, at my house. He was there walking up and down the street with Robby Smith campaigning with him. Man, did he pick the wrong door. What is the Governor of MA doing in IA, with a young rookie running for state house? He is a Republican first-American second...hopefully not our next "decider".
Strauss uses the term "decider" as a pejorative against Republican President George Bush and other Republicans throughout his website.
Mitt asked me what I woud [sic] do in Iraq. I proceeded to explain how we need to get not only the effected nations in the region involved, but strike meaningful discussion and secure true resilution [sic] with the world thru the U.N.. Mitt laughed and called the U.N. a joke. This is the man that wants to be President. Don't we already have a decider in office that considers the other world leaders a joke? I then said "I have no use for you, get off my property", and I closed the door. This guy cannot be elected into office in 08.
Wow! His fair minded openness to Republican candidates is just oozing off the page.
As mentioned previously, Strauss had a question for the Democrats at their debate. He asked a reasonable straight forward question about healthcare for seniors.
To the Republicans, he brags about kicking one off his lawn and asked another to leave the Party. And in doing so is encouraging a situation that would take Republican votes in the general election.
I cannot imagine a much more unfair venue than the debate-hoodwink that CNN launched on the Republican Party. Every Republican candidate should make sure it is the last time CNN gets a shot at such cheap tactics.
Ray Robison is proprietor of Ray Robison: Pointing out the Obvious to the Oblivious.
What’s amusing is that Strauss must not realize that Ron Paul has repeatedly called for termination of American funding of the United Nations.
CNN sucks.
Creepy CNN and their teacher's pets - the dems - get the softballs from kiss-up dems.
We get the gotchas from dem liars and CNN fools. Yeah, we're charmed...NOT.
When you choose to play on enemy turf by their rules and let them be the referees, what do you expect?
I’m sick to death of the spineless Pubbies allowing themselves to be defined/defiled by the Leftist MSM over and over again.
We need to impress on each candidate that they are running for OUR approval, NOT the approval of the MSM. The first candidate who comes out swinging against the MSM and openly runs against not only the Dems/Libs but their henchmen in the MSM (Because it is the reality) gets my vote.
Playing footsie with the MSM to try and get favorable (or at least less unfavorable) press is a fools errand.
I would call Straus a liar on two counts: pretending to be a republican, and secondly, I don’t believe Mitt Romney going door to door would throw his arms up in the air and say “This conversation’s over.” Politicians are to smooth for that. Straus is a liar.
Should Hillary show up at my door, I can assure you she would be told to leave, I have no questions for her, not that she would answer anyway.
Of course they think they are making the best decisions based on what’s available to them.
Do you ever wonder why/how we always get two candidates who differ primarily in style and a handful of social issues, but the fundamental wishes of the great majority of the American people are always dismissed and seldom if ever enacted? Immigration “reform” ring a bell?
A large part of the corruption of the process whereby we get the candidates is the power of the MSM to frame the public debate along lines favorable to the Socialist viewpoint. You need look no further than this latest CNN abortion (oops, I mean “debate”) to see this in action.
Yes, the blogosphere is upending the supposed impartiality and legitimacy of the “debate”, but while this all makes us feel good and vindicated the truth of the situation makes little headway against the overall effects of the Leftist MSM, except to those who CHOOSE to become aware and actively seek out the truth. The great majority who simply absorb their news from their surroundings without putting any effort into it will hear very little about this episode and will care even less.
Only a candidate who actively runs against the MSM will have the power to show them for who they are, because it will be a centerpiece of their campaign. Only by making the MSM’s bias and perfidy an integral part of the campaign will the truth be unavoidable.
“Realistic” ring a bell?
If you like that, then you'll like this:Romney calls global body a 'failure'
I really do blame the victims. They were lazy and spineless. They shouldn’t have agreed to debate on CNN in the first place, and if it was the only venue, they should have insisted that the RNC participate in the scripting; after all, it is a REPUBLICAN primary.
And, the only answer to those stupid questions is: “What the hell kind of stupid question is that? Don’t you think Republican voters are interested in real issues, not the inane BS being presented here, Mr. Cooper?”
I look forward to CNN being required to run credits for these repeat guests. I wonder when Looter Guy and Green Hat Guy will start making appearances.
LOL!
Regarding the Strauss jerk, he is from Davenport, Iowa and our local paper had a piece about him following the debate. He does not even vote and he is not even registered to vote. He is just a self serving jackass.
I probably am overreacting but I would like to see some reaction from our candidates. Other than McCain, I haven’t heard any other candidate speak to the CNN issue or condemn their actions. I have sat through almost eight years of the Bush administration acting passively toward the MSM and, by God, I don’t want to see our current crop of candidates do the same.
He is a great-great-great-grandson of the founder of the Vanderbilt forturne, Cornelius Vanderbilt (1794-1877), for whom Vanderbilt University is named, and the great-great-grandson of William Henry ("The public be damned!") Vanderbilt (1821-1885).
The line goes:
I. Cornelius Vanderbilt (1794-1877)
II. William Henry Vanderbilt (1821-1885)
III. Cornelius Vanderbilt II (1843-1899)
IV. Reginald Claypoole Vanderbilt (1880-1925)
V. Gloria Vanderbilt (b. 1924)
VI. Anderson Cooper (b. 1967)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.