Hillary co-chair allowed to ask questions at CNN Republican debate

[Stylerod]

Strange that there are no threads about this here or by Ron B. But it seems a Hillary plant was allowed by CNN to ask questions during the Rep. debates. I'm guessing if this happened on Fox, but to the Democrats , we would have had a 3 page thread about it already.

'Gay question' general linked to Clinton

By: Kenneth P. Vogel
Nov 28, 2007 11:53 PM EST
Brig. Gen. Keith Kerr
[b]CNN did not identify the questioner as being associated with Hillary


The retired general who asked about gays and lesbians serving in the military at the CNN/YouTube Republican debate on Wednesday is a co-chair of Hillary Clinton's National Military Veterans group.

Retired Brig. Gen. Keith H. Kerr was named a co-chair of the group this month, according to a campaign press release.

He was also active in John F. Kerry's 2004 campaign for president.

Kerr asked candidates “why you think that American men and women in uniform are not professional enough to serve with gays and lesbians.”

After the debate former Education Secretary Bill Bennett, said on a CNN panel that he was being told Kerr was involved with the Democratic presidential campaign of Clinton, a New York senator.

CNN anchor Anderson Cooper, who moderated the debate and the panel, said that if that was the case, CNN should have identified Kerr as such.(yeah, right! -Stylerod)

David Bohrman, a CNN senior vice president and executive producer of the debate, later said: "We regret this, and apologize to the Republican candidates. We never would have used the general's question had we known that he was connected to any presidential candidate." (sure.... )

Kerr told CNN that he had not done work for the Clinton campaign, and CNN verified before the debate that he had not contributed money to any candidate, the broadcaster said in a blog post after the debate.

Kerry told CNN he is a member of the Log Cabin Republicans and was representing no one other than himself, CNN said.

On Thursday, Clinton campaing spokesman Phil Singer said the retired general "is not a campaign employee and was not acting on behalf of the campaign."

A Nov. 11 press release retrieved from the website of the non-partisan magazine Campaigns & Elections lists Kerr as one of nearly 50 co-chairs of “Veterans and Military Retirees for Hillary."

Clinton’s campaign did not respond to an e-mail asking about Kerr’s role in her campaign or whether he was acting on behalf of the campaign.

Kerr also was on 2004 Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry’s National Veterans Steering Committee, according to a campaign press release retrieved from the website of George Washington University.

And Kerr appears to be an active opponent of the U.S. military’s current stance on gays and lesbians serving the military, the so-called “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy.

He appeared on the now-defunct CNN partner network CNNfn in Dec. 2003 to discuss the tenth anniversary of the policy. According to a transcript, he called it “a tremendous waste of personnel, a tremendous waste of financial resources for the United States.”

Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-Calif.), the ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee, got first crack at Kerr’s question. He said he thought having openly gay men and lesbian women in the military “would be bad for unit cohesion.”

Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, answering next, basically agreed.

Cooper then singled out former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, who in 1994 said he looked forward to the day gays and lesbians could serve openly in the military.

Romney said times have changed. Though he said he laughed when he first heard talk of the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy, and didn’t think it would work, he said: “You know what? It’s been there now for 15 years and it seems to have worked.”

Cooper then turned to Kerr and asked whether he felt he got an answer to his question.

Kerr responded: “With all due respect, I did not get an answer from the candidates. American men and women in the military are professional enough to serve with gays and lesbians.... Today, don’t ask, don’t tell is destructive to our military policy.”

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), a decorated Vietnam veteran, got the last word on "don't ask, don't tell."

He said high-ranking military officials “almost unanimously, they tell me that this present policy is working. That we have the best military in history, we have the bravest, most professional, best-prepared and that this policy ought to be continued because it’s working.”

[6SpeedTA95]

This is absurd and yet not surprising. I'm ok with the tough questioning but rest assured this will only go one way, and thats the direction that makes republicans look bad. They will not make any such mistakes during a democrat debate.

[JaJae]

Another example of their clear institutional bias. They even allowed him to give a speech from the audience. I find it hard to believe nobody at CNN Googled his name and found out he was an employee of Hillary.

They have to be more careful. People were willing to ignore their institutional bias before they were supporting Hillary. But now they're treading on thin ice.

[Stylerod]

So far 4 Democratic plants have been found during this debate! Too funny!!!



Concerned Undecided Gay Military Retiree Brig. Gen. Keith H. Kerr = Hillary/Kerry Co-Chair and supporter.


Concerned Undecided Mom LeeAnn Anderson = Activist for the John Edwards-endorsing United Steelworkers union LeeAnn Anderson



Concerned Undecided Log Cabin Republican supporter David Cercone = Obama supporter David Cercone


Concerned Young Undecided Person “Journey” = John Edwards supporter “Journey”

[Donkey®]

Jesus Christ you guys need a new hobby. Who cares if questions are planted? Who cares whom the questioner supports? A question is a question. IT is common political practice that opposing parties place people @ debates and q&a sessions of the opposition.

[DosEquis]

I thought something to be fishy as soon as they let the general go on his rant. I also thought it to be poor taste to go off on a rant like he did. He should pose the question, and if they only answer it half assed at best...then thats how they answered it.

[Dylith]

Journey = question about the punishment for abortions
David Cercone = question about Log Cabin Republicans
LeeAnn Anderson = question about toys with lead in them

Not the types of questions that I would ask a candidate to be sure. I don't even particularly care about the answers to any of them, but can you explain to me why you personally disliked each question?

[Stylerod]

Originally Posted by Donkey®

Jesus Christ you guys need a new hobby. Who cares if questions are planted? Who cares whom the questioner supports? A question is a question. IT is common political practice that opposing parties place people @ debates and q&a sessions of the opposition.

David Bohrman

David Bohrman, a CNN senior vice president and executive producer of the debate, later said: "We regret this, and apologize to the Republican candidates. We never would have used the general's question had we known that he was connected to any presidential candidate."

I realize it's ok with you that this happened to Republicans. God forbid, if Dems had the backbone to debate on the most watched news station in the US, this would have happened to the Dems.

[Scrum]

I'm not sure why people think this really matters?

Were the questions they asked somehow unfair?

[Donkey®]

Originally Posted by Stylerod

David Bohrman



I realize it's ok with you that this happened to Republicans. God forbid, if Dems had the backbone to debate on the most watched news station in the US, this would have happened to the Dems.

Why do I care if CNN buckles under pressure to the whiners? They were completely valid questions. I don't care who debates where. People already know where their candidates stand on the issues.

[DosEquis]

Originally Posted by Scrum

I'm not sure why people think this really matters?

Were the questions they asked somehow unfair?

I dont think the question was unfair, but to allow the general to go on his rant was something I don't think they should have done and could be considered by some to be unfair. He was there to attack them on the issue and they should be there to just ask questions.

On a side note, i felt like the debate was about who was the bigger tough guy on national security, the border, and gays. Romney looked like a complete bag of dicks. Their answer for social security was bullshit also. They stole 2 trillion dollars from the fund and their answer is "get rid of it so we can't steal from it anymore". How about paying that shit back instead of pumping hundreds of billions in to foreign countries.

Not one of those candidates looks decent to me..other than maybe Ron Paul..and he kind of had a tough night.

[AVengeance]

This should be a pretty clear indication of what I've been saying for months. The Dems are going to win, and it's already been decided. It doesn't get much more blatant than Democrat plants being the questions asked.

Donkey: it's not so much the questions that got asked, but the ones that got passed over. These "plants" ask specific questions that have been planned in advanced, in order to elicit a specific range of responses. It's dishonest to have allowed those questions, when there were REAL people with REAL questions that should have been the ones to get asked and answered.

[Stylerod]

Originally Posted by Donkey®

Why do I care if CNN buckles under pressure to the whiners? They were completely valid questions. I don't care who debates where. People already know where their candidates stand on the issues.

Those questions are for the debates between Dems and Reps. These debates are to weed out who a REPUBLICAN wants to vote for. Not for Democrats, who already have no intention of voting for them, to get airtime.

[Observer]

But, but, but...Hillary doesn't allow "plants"!!

How can anyone take her seriously?! Either her supporters are totally ignorant, or they just don't care that their candidate lies out both sides of her mouth every time she opens it!

I've been analyzing her for years. When she talks, she NEVER is forthright on any issue. She talks and talks and talks without taking a definite stand on anything. That must be a technique they teach in law school as I know quite a few lawyers who do that. Nothing against lawyers, just stating an "observation"!

[Donkey®]

Originally Posted by Stylerod

Those questions are for the debates between Dems and Reps. These debates are to weed out who a REPUBLICAN wants to vote for. Not for Democrats, who already have no intention of voting for them, to get airtime.

If a Republican had asked those questions there would be no problem with them? That's just stupid. Let's focus on the actual questions and not where they came from...because it doesn't matter.

[JaJae]

Originally Posted by Donkey®

Jesus Christ you guys need a new hobby. Who cares if questions are planted? Who cares whom the questioner supports? A question is a question. IT is common political practice that opposing parties place people @ debates and q&a sessions of the opposition.

Does the same principle apply to Democrats not going on Fox News?

[JaJae]

Originally Posted by Donkey®

If a Republican had asked those questions there would be no problem with them? That's just stupid. Let's focus on the actual questions and not where they came from...because it doesn't matter.

It's not whether a Republican asked them or not, it's how they were presented.

For example: "I'm a General, here's my resume. I want to know why you think the men and women in uniform aren't professional enough..."

It's a loaded, biased question from a liberal in the Hillary camp designed to trip up the candidates. It would take a screener all of 30 seconds to watch his question and Google his name to figure that out. I can only assume this was done, hence the reason they FLEW him to the debate and allowed him to give a speech.

The problem is the clear institutional bias at CNN. It's one thing to have Russert or Cooper ask a tough question, it's another to take a "random" or "independent" person and poise their attack question as from an undecided, when in reality he works for someone from the other side. It's been going on for quite some time and the liberals of America have mostly ignored it or pretended it didn't exist. But recently because of who they support the internet liberals do care. And to me it's quite fascinating to see so many people spin a 180 on CNN's media bias as if this is something new.

[Dylith]

Originally Posted by JaJae

Does the same principle apply to Democrats not going on Fox News?

They didn't have to show up for the CNN debate did they?

[Dylith]

Originally Posted by JaJae

It's not whether a Republican asked them or not, it's how they were presented.

For example: "I'm a General, here's my resume. I want to know why you think the men and women in uniform aren't professional enough..."

It's a loaded, biased question from a liberal in the Hillary camp designed to trip up the candidates. It would take a screener all of 30 seconds to watch his question and Google his name to figure that out. I can only assume this was done, hence the reason they FLEW him to the debate and allowed him to give a speech.

The problem is the clear institutional bias at CNN. It's one thing to have Russert or Cooper ask a tough question, it's another to take a "random" or "independent" person and poise their attack question as from an undecided, when in reality he works for someone from the other side.

I very much agree that his question was quite loaded, but can you explain to me why you personally disliked the other three?