The Plant

I think you are missing the point (at least my point). Its not the questions, per se, its the hypocrisy. You cannot argue that the questions asked were, if not Dem talking points, leaning towards Dem issues and geared towards Dem point of views and CNN knew what they were doing. This is the reason why the Dems didn't do the Fox debate - they claim Fox is biased. My point is, no one can now claim the reverse is not true - no one can now claim that CNN is unbiased. They are clearly biased. That's my point. I'm sick of hearing the Dems cry about Fox and never mention that CNN is the same thing only going in the other direction!

Uh - these debates don't belong to anyone Gribbet. If they belong to anyway it would be the American People.

Why are you guys afraid of some 80 year old gay guy anyway. He asked a question about gay rights. He got some boos from the crowd, the candidates largely ignored him and moved on.

Get a grip. I don't see how this guy's question got in the way of Republican deciding who they want to nominate.

Omigosh!! I though caucus's and forums and debates are to give the people a chance to ask questions of each candidate -- and I would like to see the democratic candidates get the same question Brig. General's asked as well. (I though Hillary waffled on this issue saying Don't Ask Don't Tell is Working )-- Even with the plants it was still pretty scripted staying away from Climate Change and other controversial issues -- it was certainly better than the last staged "Clinton" debate one with the stacked audience.
Have we gotten that divided that Dems and Republicans can only attend public forum of their own party -- what about the independents???

These debates are for Republicans to decide who they wish to nominate. If Clinton wants to pull this crap once she has the nomination of her party and it is down to the nominees debating, that is a different story

The Hillary goons are just getting started. They have months to go before they sleep.

I think Dems wimping out of the Fox sponsored debate was not cool. Agreed.

But today we are talking about a public forum where candidates for public office are interviewing with The People for election by The People to that Public Office.

If wingnuts are upset about The People asking questions of candidates, the wingnuts should rise up and demand NO MORE YouTubes debates. Here's an idea for wingnuts to consider - Loyalty Oaths for all those who would have the temerity to pose a question to a candidate.

BTW doesn't GWB just about script all his taxpayer funded "town hall" events? What is all this isolation from The People about anyway? Gues this is why we have Conservapedia.

All you Dems who say, "what's the big deal" - ask yourself, what's the big deal that the Dems refused to go on FoxNews? Its because you say Fox is biased against them. Now, think to yourself in an objective manner, do you think CNN acting in an "unbiased" way? If you honestly answer that question, you'll see its the same thing. It cuts both ways. Don't claim the Dems were right for not waiting to go on Fox (presumably to avoid getting asked "planted" and biased questions) only to turn around and say what CNN did was fine and "fair and balanced". It wasn't and you know it. CNN is clearly just as biased towards the Dems as you claim Fox is biased towards the Reps. Plain and simple.

Again, if Republicans wanted to ask Democrats "Republican" questions (I wonder what they would even be: "Why do you care about people who don't look like every Republican presidential candidate?" "Why do you care about science when this book over here tells us everything we need to know?") then I'm sure the Democrats would be happy to field them.

Seriously, what is a Republican/Democratic question anyway? This issue seems ridiculous.

I do not see the issue here. Yes this was a Republican debate, but it's an American election. Since when does the political party of a questioner have anything to do with asking a reasonable question? Are we now screening our debates like Bush screens his so called "public" appearances?

Was anyone at the debate asking questions NOT a plant of the Clinton News Network? What a sham, time to boycott CNN and MSNBC. I hope this backfires on the DEMs big time. Enough slanted news coverage can they actually ask fair questions from real UNDECIDED voters. CNN has NO credibility for the rest of the 2008 campaign, no more CNN debates, period!

Give me a break, Commander Guy.

The Democrats won't even go on Fox because of 'bias'.

The CNN questions were absurd, and almost equally absurd was the post debate panel of GOP primary voters, the first one who was voting for 'Edwards'.

CNN has very little credibility, and for a reason...

According to the most respected unbiased study I could find (Univ of Chicago), gays and lesbians make up about 3-4 percent of the population. The percentage approaches the erroneously-reported 10 percent figure only in some select cities. It is not a big group of voters, but it carries clout beyond its numbers these days. And it is not a monolithic community. There are deeply religious gays, despite what Bible-thumpers would mandate, if they ruled the world. There are committed Republican gays. Many middle-class, quiet, professional gays frown upon the relatively few public 'flamers' in their community--who also have clout way beyond their numbers these days. But, 'gays in the military' was a rare issue where Bill Clinton had to back off, due to opposition from a huge majority of Americans, no matter what party. No, I don't trust CNN. It kow-towed to a Hillary-corp threat before the last Dem debate and threw her nothing but softballs, since she had lost the previous debate when she was asked tough questions. So, I could believe a 'plant' scenario. But, it doesn't make sense to me, that the 'plant' would stand up and shine a spotlight on the cozy relationship between liberal Dems and gay groups--if he were planted by Dems. I think this was a personal thing by Kerr, with some help, or a conspiracy by some group that really doesn't know how to play politics.

I'm sure all the Democratic candidates would be withdrawing after your three questions, so hopefully you'll just keep them to yourself.

Back to reality, I wouldn't care at alll if every question at a Democratic debate in which questions were solicited from the public were asked by Republicans. Why is that relevant?

A Democrat who supports Obama asked a question of the Republicans. Why is this surprising? Don't you suppose many of the questions for the Dem debate came from Republicans? I didn't see a requirement from CNN that you had to be a registered Republican to send in a question for last night's debate.

Re: Comments by The Commander Guy, DKNY, and Beth Foote: Who do you think you are fooling? You are Libs and Dems who, if the same thing happened to a Dem candidate, would be having "cat fits." Yes, it does make a difference who the questioner is, and you damn well know that it is. If not, why was there all the hullabaloo from “Dame Hillary” over Ted Koppel’s highly relevant questions to her? Let me ask the first three questions at the next Dem debate and they would all be finished (I was once a very active Dem, and believe me, I know them and where they are most vulnerable, especialy this year’s crop).

This was to be a debate, town hall style, between Republicans leading to a Republican primary. The agenda clearly is to inform Republican voters and caucus goers on each candidate’s position, demeanor, and abilities and inform everyone about candidates. All of the candidates should be available to answer any question.
That said when CNN decided to plant questioners with credentials such as alleged they moved from a news organization to a news managing organization. I suspect the good General has been paid by CNN for his past commentary and is certainly linked to another party and candidate. That’s not just wrong it is flat wrong.
CNN’s creditability is not questionable it is gone.

This is the same CNN that was "paid off" by Saddam Hussein in the 1990's to keep quiet about the mass murders and mass graves of the Iraqi people. This is the same CNN that shows videos of insurgents in Iraq killing American troops. It does not surprise anyone that CNN is not creditable when they state "they didn't know" that there were Democratic plants in the GOP debate. CNN has long been identified as either the "Communist News Network" or the "Clinton News Network". They are now more of an embaressment to true Journalistic Reporting; why Anderson Cooper stays with CNN is puzzling.

If you use a "plant" who pretends to be someone he or she is not, it is not clever; it is deceptive. Part of objective reporting means using discretion to ensure that various viewpoints are presented. Since time is limited, the responsible and unbiased thing to do is to poll questioners beforehand and choose questioners who are most representative of the audience present at the debate. It looks like CNN failed the sniff test at this debate. It is fine to bring certain issues to the forefront through editorial discretion. However, this should be clearly identified as "editorial". If you steer the questions being asked, it is no longer objective reporting. It is attempting to set an agenda. CNNs credibility is at stake. I don't think the risks that they took will offer the rewards they had hoped for.

Why is the identity of the questioner relevant? If the question is good, it is good. If the question is ridiculous or poorly phrased or unfairly phrased then say so and explain why. I don't follow this issue.

Great reporting but not surprising. Republicans are always held to a higher standard, which is good. However, it should go both ways, but the media allows Dems to get away with double talk (taking all sides of all issues). Could you imagine if Fox News hosted a debate and had conservatives planted in the audience??? Yet, no one in the media is shocked by the Clinton News Network (CNN) doing it!