Blogs For Victory » More Post-Debate Fallout For CNN

Murtha: The Surge Is Working Democrats Get Most Cold Dead Cash

106 Comments

1. Joe | November 30th, 2007 at 3:09 pm

I still don’t understand what is the issue? Do you want fluff questions? I would love to see Republicans ask the Dems questions at the next debate. In fact, every debate should be like that.
Why the hell are you so up in arms about this? Is it against the law? Did they do something wrong?
Where you up in arms when the White House was fielding questions from Jeff Gannon? Were you up in arms during the San Diego wildfires when FEMA had a press conference and it was FEMA employees asking the questions?

Why are you all freaked out now????
2. phnx | November 30th, 2007 at 3:28 pm

A primary campaign is designed to permit the register voters of each party select the candidate which best represents them. Just what is it about this that you leftist morons don’t understand?

The President of CNN clearly stated that the purpose of this debate was to have the candidates field questions REPUBLICAN voters.

Perhaps there would be less of a flap if he just fessed up and said that the plan was to embarass the candidates by fielding questions from a group of dem plants, dem policital activists and sundry fringe wackos.

Perhaps there would be less of a flap if there weren’t a concerted effort by Dems to undermine the system.

And after your dirty tricks you idiots still wonder why there is a divided country and such acrimony in politics?
3. Tiffany | November 30th, 2007 at 3:29 pm

The Republicans claim they can win the war on terror, yet they shy away from answering questions from a Democrat? I think all debates should include tough questions from the opposition party. I’m tired of candidates (Dem. & Repub.) being tossed softball questions. If a candidate can’t face opposition from fellow Americans, how can they be expected to face international opposition as President of the United States?
4. kliquee » More Post&hellip | November 30th, 2007 at 3:31 pm

[...] Check it out! While looking through the blogosphere we stumbled on an interesting post today.Here’s a quick excerptCNN continues to get more flak for their screening practices… and even more obviously Democrats/liberal questioners have been discovered… Also interesting is that the Republican CNN/YouTube debate was the most-watched debate yet. [...]
5. liberalT | November 30th, 2007 at 3:36 pm

what is the problem of having a democrat ask a question at a republican debate?
6. coulterfan | November 30th, 2007 at 3:42 pm

I’m sure that Mark & Matt were just as upset at the Dem YouTube debate, where questions like this were asked:

“I’d like to know, if the Democrats come into office, are my taxes going to rise like usually they do when a Democrat gets into office?”

“To all the candidates: Tell me your position on gun control, as myself and other Americans really want to know if our babies are safe. This is my baby, purchased under the 1994 gun ban.”

“My question for all the candidates: How do we pull out now? And the follow-up: Are we watching the same blankin’ war? I certainly wasn’t a big fan of the invasion/liberation. It sickens me to hear about soldiers wounded and getting killed daily, not to mention innocent Iraqis, but how do we pull out now? Government’s shaky; bombs daily.
Don’t you think if we pulled out now that it would open it up for Iran and Syria, God knows who — Russia — how do we pull out now? And isn’t it our responsibility to get these people up on their feet? I mean, do you leave a newborn baby to take care of himself? How do we pull out now?”

“My question is for Mike Gravel. In one of the previous debates, you said something along the lines of, “The entire deaths of Vietnam died in vain.”
How do you expect to win in a country where probably a pretty large chunk of the people voting disagree with that statement and might very well be offended by it? I’d like to know if you plan to defend that statement, or if you’re just going to flip-flop. Thanks.”

“I’m a proud serving member of the United States military. I’m serving overseas.
This question is to Senator Hillary Clinton. The Arab states, Muslim nations, believe its women as being second-class citizens. If you’re president of the United States, how do you feel that you would be even be taken seriously by these states in any kind of talks, negotiations, or any other diplomatic relations? I feel that’s a legitimate question.”

See? The Dems only got these questions from obviously Democratic voters (?) while the POOR Republicans had to answer questions from people who don’t agree with them : (

Boo Hoo. . .

Funny, though, how McCain was able to pull it off and come out looking pretty good. But, then, he was radical with his opposition to torture and a non-racist immigration plan. . .So I guess the GOP thinks HE’S the wacko!
7. hermie | November 30th, 2007 at 3:52 pm

Well Tiffany, why did they deliberately conceal that they are Democrat activists?

How many Republican activists were allowed to present questions to Hillary, Obama, etc at the Dems debate? How many were flown in as a ‘gotcha’ to the Dem candidates?

Besides these were debates to choose a Republican candidate for the General Election.
8. coulterfan | November 30th, 2007 at 3:57 pm

One more thing:

The poor Republicans are operating on the assumption that having to answer contentious questions from (gasp) Democrats made them look bad.

But that’s not it AT ALL! What made them look bad was the petty bickering between Guiliani and Romney over immigration, Fred Thompson’s attack ad (which BROKE the rules of the debate), Romney’s evasion of his shifting positions and whether he sees waterboarding as torture, etc. . .

In reality, we have gotten so used to Republican solidarity and well-run campaign machines that they all just looked AMATEURISH! They were bickering, name calling, unfocused, unable to answer the questions, and they all did HORRIBLY! There is no front-runner (since most Republicans aren’t too excited about ANY OF THEM), so it was a free-for-all of attacks and unrehearsed chaos.

But it’s easier to blame their poor performance on the Dems than to look at the real problems that your candidates have. Face it, if they had performed well (as did the Democrats even when facing hostile questions) - no one would be complaining. Just more diversionary tactics.
9. phnx | November 30th, 2007 at 4:00 pm

“I think all debates should include tough questions from the opposition party.” Tiffany

You must have beedn sleeping the day they covered that in Civics Class.

That’s what the GENERAL ELECTION IS FOR!!
10. coulterfan | November 30th, 2007 at 4:00 pm

>>How many Republican activists were allowed to present questions to Hillary, Obama, etc at the Dems debate?

Look above. . . I doubt the questions like “I’d like to know, if the Democrats come into office, are my taxes going to rise like usually they do when a Democrat gets into office?” were leaning Democratic.

There’s a LONG list of them if you care to look.
11. The Political News You Ne&hellip | November 30th, 2007 at 4:02 pm

[...] Read the rest of this great post here [...]
12. Joe | November 30th, 2007 at 4:04 pm

phnx,
How exactly are these questions designed to “embarass the candidates”?
I am seriously interested in finding this out.
13. liberalT | November 30th, 2007 at 4:24 pm

look - its a public debate. Anybody should be able to ask any reasonable question. You guys are really cry babies.
14. Zach | November 30th, 2007 at 4:24 pm

I believe Mr. O’Reilly will be covering the presidential campaigns with that method. Send a republican to ask democratic contenders hard questions, and vice versa.

I think its a good idea. Our next POTUS ought to be able to assert himself/herself to answer questions directly. If there are bogus questions aimed only to aggitate, thats fine too; it only gives the candidates the chance to clear the air of silly assumptions.
15. Zach | November 30th, 2007 at 4:26 pm

I’m not crying about anything, Liberal T. I actually think that that is a great idea.

Let’em sweat it out I say. They have to show some damn backbone to get my vote.
16. Joe | November 30th, 2007 at 4:31 pm

Question 1 - About gays in the military
Question 2 - About the US standing in the Muslim world
Who really gives a rats ass if these people back Hillery, Obama, or the man on the moon???
Why can’t a presidential candidate answer these? You outrage is bogus and makes you look even more hypocritical than you truly are.

phnx, don’t give me this is for the primary and not the General Election. Why should they be outraged that they have to answer these questions?

Again let me ask…
Where you up in arms when the White House was fielding questions from Jeff Gannon?
Were you up in arms during the San Diego wildfires when FEMA had a press conference and it was FEMA employees asking the questions?
17. Kahn | November 30th, 2007 at 4:31 pm

I knew that the liberal posters here would be OK with an underhanded attack on Republicans. We deserve it, right? Anything you do to us is OK - because we deserve it. Fine. Continue to defend it.

But remember Democrats were too chicken to do a debate on Fox. Chicken, chicken, chicken.
18. Joe | November 30th, 2007 at 4:32 pm

One more question…
If these questions came from a Republican, would they be ok questions?
19. coulterfan | November 30th, 2007 at 4:37 pm

>>I knew that the liberal posters here would be OK with an underhanded attack on Republicans.

Were you fine with the ‘underhanded attack’ on Democrats at their YouTube debate?

I was.

Look, whomever wins the primaries has a damn good chance of being EVERYONE’S president! Don’t Republicans have an interest in who the Democratic contender is and vice versa? I know I WANT the BEST candidates from both parties (in the case that the GOP pulls a miracle and wins)- I don’t want to be stuck with some wingnut. . .

Do you guys care whether we nominate Hillary or Kucinich? Remember, whomever wins is YOUR President, too. . .
20. Joe | November 30th, 2007 at 4:37 pm

“underhanded attack on Republicans”???????????
How is that an attack? Nobody has come close to explaining that yet.
21. Joel | November 30th, 2007 at 4:43 pm

I felt most of the field did pretty good at answering the stupid, stereotype questions from the wingnut plants. Mit is correct when he says you don’t tell the enemy what you are doing or going to do.

CNN is still the Clinton News Network

I think the Dimwits should debate on Fox and see how they standup.
22. coulterfan | November 30th, 2007 at 5:02 pm

>I think the Dimwits should debate on Fox and see how they standup.

Didn’t they already debate on Fox? You ARE right, they are a bunch of dimwits- they may look better, though, with ‘fluff’ questions on Fox.

Mitt looked forward to the day when openly gay men and women could serve in the military!

Now, he looks forward to when he can talk to military advisors and make a determination as to. . . blah blah

What a BOLD vision!!!

Maybe MLK could have said “I look forward to the day when one is judged according to how my advisors tell me to judge him!”

I think the Democrats were wise to avoid Fox- too many questions about Natalie Holloway and OJ Simpson would make them look ridiculous!
23. John Ryan | November 30th, 2007 at 5:07 pm

Other than that the person asking the question was a democrat, was there something wrong with the question ? More people watched this debate than any previous one, the Republicans should have been pleased.
24. Joe | November 30th, 2007 at 5:13 pm

Again, all you that are outraged… if those questions came from a red-card holding Republican from the reddest place in the country, would that have been a bad question?

Or are you just upset that the question came from a Democrat?
25. CrackpotPress | November 30th, 2007 at 5:18 pm

Did anyone hear the questions from the base Repub party? the Gun Nut, The Creepy Bible Guy and the Teenage Bigot?

Those people were scary.
26. Retired Spook | November 30th, 2007 at 5:20 pm

I had more of a problem with the questioners misrepresenting who they were than I did with the questions they asked or the fact that they were Democrats. The fact that CNN probably knew they were political operative plants and lied about it just made CNN look bad, which is also fine with me. CNN really doesn’t have to try very hard to look bad. When the Donk candidates debate on Fox, then I’ll take what Joe and Tiffany have to say a little more seriously.

Sort of OT, but my wife and I switched satellite TV providers on Wednesday, and experienced some initial technical problems that prevented us from watching any news except CBS, ABC, NBC the last couple days. We were watching Good Morning America yesterday morning while eating breakfast, and we both exclaimed almost simultaneously, “this is awful.” Almost every segment was designed to make Republicans or Conservatives look bad. There was virtually no presenting of both sides that is so prevalent on Fox. This morning we watched The Early Show on CBS, and it was even worse. Conservatives have coined the name MSM for Mainstream Media, but I think a more descriptive name would be Agenda Media, because virtually everything they report is presented in such a way as to advance a liberal agenda.
27. coulterfan | November 30th, 2007 at 5:23 pm

You know, I was upset at CNN too. I thought they didn’t ask hard enough questions.

I mean, Don’t Ask Don’t Tell isn’t something the MAJORITY of Americans care about as much as the Wingnuts. . .

Why not ONE question about HEALTH CARE?!?!?

The Democrats (according to National Review, no less) have a 32 PERCENT ADVANTAGE on health care and 47 MILLION Americans have NO HEALTH CARE.

Now THAT would have been a difficult question for the candidates to answer.

All this manufactured outrage is ridiculous. Did the GOP really think they could continue to avoid answering the general population? Remember all of Bush’s staged ‘Town Hall Meetings’? Did they expect those kind of “Thank you Mr. Bush” questions?
28. Joe | November 30th, 2007 at 5:28 pm

Spook… thank you for being honest. Not upset with the questions, but with them mis-representing. Fine.
When I read phnx say the questions were there to “embarass the candidates” I almost threw up!

Let me just say that Good Morning America IS awful, but the only reason you think it was one sided was because you are so used to FOX News being SO far the other way.

Time to go out and have some fun. Good night everyone.
29. Kahn | November 30th, 2007 at 5:31 pm

It was OUR debate to choose OUR candidate. Not YOUR debate to choose YOUR candidate. FOUR plants and the CNN focus group was all Democrats claiming to be Republicans.

If you believe in yourself and your positions, why lie?

NONE of the questions matter. YOUR dishonesty and the dishonesty of CNN are the issue. Any self respecting journalist at CNN would resign over the weekend. Wanna bet how many will?

I refuse to justify liberal insistence on the questions that were PLANTED. If it is OK to ask cross-party questions, then why boycott FOX debates? WHY?
30. Kahn | November 30th, 2007 at 5:34 pm

Fox is not conservative. Is is neutral. It seems right compared to the overwhelming left leaning media. 90% of journalists are registered Democrats. Many help fund raise. CBS has used forged documents to attack Bush. And PBS has been caught multiple times sharing donor lists with the Democrats.
31. Retired Spook | November 30th, 2007 at 5:42 pm

but the only reason you think it was one sided was because you are so used to FOX News being SO far the other way.

Joe, if by “the other way”, you mean 2-sided, then I guess you’re right.

If you believe in yourself and your positions, why lie?

Kahn, is that a rhetorical question? It isn’t a matter of Liberals/Democrats believing in themselves; it’s a matter of getting the majority of people to vote for them if they express what they really believe.
32. coulterfan | November 30th, 2007 at 5:42 pm

>>FOUR plants and the CNN focus group was all Democrats claiming to be Republicans.

Ummm, what about the obvious ‘plants’ at the Democratic debate? The “will democrats raise my taxes like they always do?” and “Will they take my baby AK-47 away?”

Were you as upset at these questions? I wasn’t, because I want to hear answers to the hardest questions AND see how they deal with antagonistic questions.

Doesn’t that help YOU make a decision? If someone cries and runs to mommy, doesn’t that change your opinion of him/her?

>>Fox is not conservative. Is is neutral.

THAT’S funny! Well, more Americans identify themselves as Democrats than Republicans. The overwhelming majority of Americans oppose Bush’s war in Iraq. But Fox presents BOTH sides equally? Give me a break, they are MUCH harder on the Dems! Colmes is the only ‘token’ Democrat and he has to ask Sean’s permission to take a piss!

Plus, when things are going badly for the GOP all they seem to talk about is Natalie Holloway or OJ or Paris Hilton. . .
33. phnx | November 30th, 2007 at 5:44 pm

Joe,

The entire event from the silly opening musical ditty to the catoon show questions, to Bible thummpers and some guy in his basement with the Confederate Flag on the wall, posing to be a gun toting militia man, all of it was a joke. It was a side show, a concerted effort to play on leftist sterotypes of Republicans and mock the candidates.

Very few issues of import to Republicans and conservatives were addressed. We don’t care about gays in the military. I doubt there are a dozen Republicans whose votes will hinge on that topic. We don’t care about the Confederate flag. And we ceratinly don’t care what underciver leftist political operatives think or have to say . Those are hate issues of importance to leftists intent upon dividing the country.
34. Ricorun | November 30th, 2007 at 5:46 pm

Kahn: It was OUR debate to choose OUR candidate. Not YOUR debate to choose YOUR candidate.

Perhaps the bigger question is… what happens when both sides pick their candidates? Is it better to make that selection on the basis of mostly softball questions? Personally, I think not. I’d rather they have to field as many difficult questions as possible early on, when there is an actual choice. I applaud the Republicans for venturing into Dem territory last night. It was something that needed to be done, IMO. And I think they came out the stronger for it. Now, if only the Dems would do the same. Maybe not FNC (even Fred Thompson has problems with FNC) — but at least some primarily Republican venue would be great. The more the better — on both sides, IMO.
35. Michael | November 30th, 2007 at 5:48 pm

One more question…
If these questions came from a Republican, would they be ok questions?

The issue is not one question I cared about came up. CNN finds some crackpot to ask about a confederate flag?…..you have got to be kidding me right?

What you guys on the left dont understand is that for a true conservative we dont pay attention to our FAR FAR FAR right people but you all let the Kooks run the asylum on your side. My dad is a Democrat and has told me on many occasions that he is ashamed of the way the party is run now and that if JFK was alive today he would be a republican.

Can you imagine the uproar if the dems did actually debate on Fox and say someone from the Guiliani campaign was a plant in the crowd. OMG we would never hear the end of it. This is the outrage you ask about this is the reason.

Hope you all have a good day.
36. Thrower | November 30th, 2007 at 5:51 pm

If left wing propaganda ruins your day Spook, turn off the tube and turn on AM radio. I am confident you will hear nothing to upset you. Here in SoCal, it is 100% right wing media.
37. KCJ | November 30th, 2007 at 6:07 pm

I love the liberal spin. If Republican operatives were planted at the Democrat debate they’d be calling for Karl Rove’s head on a platter.
38. Retired Spook | November 30th, 2007 at 6:17 pm

If left wing propaganda ruins your day Spook, turn off the tube

Thrower, it’s nice to hear a Liberal admit that ABC and CBS are left wing propaganda; not that I needed any confirmation. If it quacks like a duck …..
39. Ricorun | November 30th, 2007 at 6:28 pm

Thrower: If left wing propaganda ruins your day Spook, turn off the tube and turn on AM radio. I am confident you will hear nothing to upset you. Here in SoCal, it is 100% right wing media.

I’m assuming you don’t have a problem with that, right? If so, what do you propose to do about it?

That’s the thing I guess… as much as I hate the convolution of news and opinion, I don’t see any way to effectively distinguish the two. I try to be as objective as I can. But despite my best intentions, I know that at best it’s a goal I can only approximate, never fully achieve. It is a myth to assume any one person, no matter who it is — or any one group, no matter who they are — has the ability to grasp objective truth without his/her/their own subjectivity getting in the way to one extent or another. That’s not to deny that objective truth doesn’t exist (that’s an independent question). It’s only to say that one should always question one’s perception of it.
40. Thrower | November 30th, 2007 at 6:44 pm

It’s not a problem to me Rico, and I don’t propose to do anything about it. I was just trying to help Spook cycle down his resentment a tad. Myself I sometimes listen to sports talk radio, but generally I play CDs in my car. Talk radio is generally tired to me.

As for sources of information, I generally attempt to draw my own conclusions from what I see and experience. I read several blogs like this one for entertainment more than anything else, but often I learn things. My bias is that talking heads are either being paid to push someone else’s opinions, or are representing personal interests that are not exactly congruent with mine.
41. Kahn | November 30th, 2007 at 6:47 pm

Coulter, even if - IF - Fox is conservative… what other networks are?

CBS?
ABC?
NBC?
MSNBC?
PBS?
NPR?
CNN?

You claim the above are neutral? Even right leaning? Compared to what, Radio Havana?

But at least we don’t pretend to set up a neutral venue then lie about invitees and focus groups. We don’t coordinate the presence of fake questioners with groups poised to attck a day later from the New York Times.

Your side is showing itself. Insist on regurgitaing the crap questions if you feel you must. But the TRUTH is that your side is slimy and dishonest. THAT is what we learned from THIS debate. We learned that a supposedly neutral news outlet used the debate as part of a coordinated smeer campaign with another news outlet. Not just a mistake. Not just planted questions. A thoroughly dishonest sham from beginning to end.

Your legacy, deal with it.
42. coulterfan | November 30th, 2007 at 8:47 pm

Kahn,

You haven’t answered MY question. . . What about the non-Democratic-voter submitted questions when they had the YouTube debate? Were you okay with those?

BTW, MOST of the networks you cited have opinion shows for both Dems and Republicans. MSNBC has Keith Olbermann, but also Tucker and Scarborough- CNN has Glen Beck; in fact every one of those stations has commentary provided both both parties. Except Fox- they have Hannity & Colmes (talk about a sham), O’Reilly, Cavuto, Fox & Friends. . . None of these people are ‘journalists’ but are more akin to opinion commentators (like Dobbs, Olbermann, Matthews)

I won’t argue that our ‘news media’ is DREADFUL! But it’s not a ‘liberal’ bias, but a ’sensationalism’ bias (witness the Lewinsky scandal, or ANY sex scandal), a corporate bias (when is the last time ANY of them offended their advertisers like pharma companies, part of the reason the MSM is CLEARLY AGAINST Universal Health Care), etc, etc. . .

>>Your side is showing itself. Insist on regurgitaing the crap questions if you feel you must. But the TRUTH is that your side is slimy and dishonest. THAT is what we learned from THIS debate.

uh-huh. . . So we should NOT have an open debate with the general public submitting questions? Again, did you think ALL the questions of Dem candidates were Dem-leaning voters? The guy who wanted to know whether Dems would “Raise my taxes like Democrats always do”- perhaps you think he was a KUCINICH supporter?

Maybe the guy who wondered whether the Dems would take away his ‘baby’ (the AK-47 or whatever)- you maybe think he was leaning towards CLINTON!?!?

This persecution complex has got to stop! I remember the GOP USED TO decry the ‘victimization mentality’ that they now employ tediously. Limbaugh’s brother wrote a book about the poor ‘persecuted Christians’! WTF!?!? Yeah, it’s too bad that people who are Christian can’t hold political office in our country, can’t get decent jobs, etc!

Face it, you guys are a bunch of whining crybabies. If you can’t stand to take questions from the general public (which is pretty irate, if you haven’t noticed), you don’t DESERVE to win! The Dems are WAAAAAY leading in fundraising, in passion, in candidates, and they have FAR FEWER SEATS up this next election cycle. You sure had fun kicking Kerry around in ‘04 (as did the MSM, as you might recall- those Swift Boat Liars were on ‘Hardball’ EVERY GODDAMN NIGHT!)

Looks like Republicans like to PRETEND to be tough, but go crying to mama every time someone says ‘mean’ things to them.

Fu*king Crybabies!
43. coulterfan | November 30th, 2007 at 8:58 pm

To prove how ‘nice’ and ‘fair’ the Republicans are, I’m going to quote George ‘Macaca’ Allen:

“Let’s kick their soft teeth down their whiny throats!”
44. Kahn | November 30th, 2007 at 9:37 pm

Ah yes. Well I don’t watch the Democratic debates. But reading the questions, the actual wording of the question I have to believe that they were indeed planted. By Democrats. The wording puts those issues ion the worst possible light. Sort of like asking someone if they still beat their wife.

I reject your premise.

AND - we NOW see evidence that this was coordinated with the New York Times.

A coordinated deception. Planted biased questioners, fake focus groups, and coordinated with a well organized follow up one day later. This was no accident and it was no small thing.

But, so who were the fake Democrats you claim asked questions? Got names? Proof they were plants? Hmmmmm - waiting.

CNN and the New York Times acted Nixonian.
45. Kahn | November 30th, 2007 at 9:40 pm

Please note - I’m not just complaining about the questions (though I have proof and you have inuendo). I’m talking about the focus group and the NYT thing also. It’s too coordinated and big to be an accident. Please, open your eyes and admit I have a point. Or I’ll have to believe you are a demobot, or stupid.
46. Kahn | November 30th, 2007 at 9:41 pm

By the way, nice off the wall quote. Couldn’t defend ANY of the news outlets? Well, thats my point. Isn’t it?
47. neocon | November 30th, 2007 at 9:54 pm

coulter,

Again, you’re such an idiot I don’t even know why I continue to respond to you. I guess it’s having sympathy for someone so obviously mentally retarded that you overlook their idiocy and have some compassion. I guess that is where I am at with you.

I don’t object to the fact that those questions were planted to somehow highlight the perceived notion of conservatives brain dead idiots like you have: that they are racist, sexist homphobes. I expect that level of dishonesty from you Chavezbots.

I object to the dumbing down of the debate which is in direct correlation to having your mindless colleagues ask the questions. Who was the mentally challenged racist with the Confderate flag? And since when in this current politcal climate, is that flag even an issue?

I feel embarassed for you and everyone you associate with if those were the best questions you could muster up.

You’re such a waste of flesh, I am only sorry you were not aborted. I know you support that so much that you might want to consider a self abortion. I provide the supplies.
48. Kahn | November 30th, 2007 at 9:58 pm

The cure for liberalism? Soylent Green?
49. CallMeTeach | November 30th, 2007 at 10:37 pm

Rico - Don’t be an @$$hole. Can’t you debate without being crude? I find it highly interesting that you guys think that CNN in consortium with Youtube had 5,000 videos made by people pretending to be Republicans. It’s ridiculous to even assert that some of the videos were faked. The more plausible answer (and less conspiracy oriented) is that the majority of these videos were by young people who are DEFINITLEY not Republican. The format dictated the questions and since your people obviously didn’t care enough to create any Republican minded videos on Youtube, this is what you get. So stop the moaning and for craps sake stop it with this conspiracy BS - you’re starting to sound like liberals. Had you actually watched the debates instead of believing everything you are told, the focus group was 1) at a University (liberal education and your brand of Republican don’t go well together) and 2) they were registered MODERATE Republicans i.e. like Giuliani who believes in abortion. Hell, I’m a registered Republican in the state of Kansas - am I a CNN operative as well. You guys crack me up.
50. coulterfan | November 30th, 2007 at 10:39 pm

You guys sure have more conspiracy theories than Kucinich and Paul put together!!!

BTW, wasn’t George Allen one of those ‘retarded racists with a Confederate flag’ in his home? Dating back at least to his high school and college years?

And a NOOSE in his law office?

I wonder where people get the idea that some Republicans are racist?
51. CallMeTeach | November 30th, 2007 at 10:45 pm

Let me iterate. You guys, especially Kahn, are actually convinced that there is a full blown conspiracy at CNN to discredit and embarrass Republicans. This type of thing, especially when you include the NYT, would have involved hundreds of organized people all with the exact same thinking and goal to get “them Republicans”. It’s your contention that not one person at CNN is a Republican or that no one would have noticed this going on and not said something? Are you out of your minds?? I think maybe all of these free thinking people that have invaded your space here at BFV are clouding your minds. Since when do Republicans believe in conspiracy theories?
52. AAR | November 30th, 2007 at 10:55 pm

I see “coulterfan” and his associates are dumping the same comments here as on a prior thread, so I’ll repeat some of my comments too…

Open debates are not the issue. Anyone can ask the questions they choose.

It’s the wolves you Democrats secretly hide among the sheep to ask those questions… without disclosing that fact to CNN, the candidates, and the American public!

It’s the plants you Democrats secretly hide in Hillary’s appearances to ask the carefully chosen and written questions… without disclosing that fact to the American public!

It’s the lies and deceit behind the Democrats’ questions that are the issues… nothing new though!

AAR
53. Eric T | November 30th, 2007 at 10:56 pm

Coulterfan

I was trolling looking for you. I got wrapped up in work, Earlier today, we were talking about divorce. I found it. Matthew 19:3-9
54. AAR | November 30th, 2007 at 11:05 pm

coulterfan,

I see you are generating and spreading more hatred!

Is racism the only thing you can think of when you see a Confederate flag? Not everyone views the Confederate flag the way you do, nor do they equate it with racism. Most people in the South do not see it your way!

It’s you racist Democrats (Liberals) who continue to try and make the flag and anything else you possibly can into a racist issue!

You Democrats are today’s racists and bigots — using and making race an issue anytime you possibly can!!!!!

AAR
55. AAR | November 30th, 2007 at 11:13 pm

coulternut,

I wonder where people get the idea that some Republicans are racist?

Because of lying, slandering, racist Democrats!

AAR
56. Kahn | November 30th, 2007 at 11:17 pm

1 known campaign consultant
3 known Democrat candidate supporters
1 fake focus group
1 previously planned and coordinated announcement by a number of retired generals and Admirals in the New York Times.

And the Democrats refused to debate on Fox.
57. neocon | November 30th, 2007 at 11:36 pm

AAR,

I noticed that too. coulter jumps straight to racism. The funny thing is he has no idea how much of a racist he is. In fact, all Dems don’t realize what idiots they are, which is the same thing as saying that a fish that doesn’t realize it’s wet. It’s just who they are.
58. Eric T | November 30th, 2007 at 11:38 pm

AAR

The Southern Democrats were the ones who flew that flag in the Civil War. Joe Biden and Mitt who spoke out against that flag may not get many votes in the deep South. That is an American flag, just like a “don’t tread on me flag.” Many fought and died for that flag, more states rights and less Federal Law. Slavery was practiced around the world during that period in time. And to alot of people that flag may be a symbol of hate, but that is the 2nd most popular flag in America. So not everyone views it that way. They love that flag down South. Everywhere you look you see it down there. The Democrats hate that flag, but it is THEIR flag, it is THEIR history.
59. liberalT | December 1st, 2007 at 12:20 am

it is their history. But its hardly an excuse that slavery was practiced elsewhere!! You have to understand that for many African Americans that flag represents an era where their ancestors were treated like animals. Its hard to believe that there are people in this country who still think the civil war was about “states rights”. It was about slavery first and foremost.
60. Ricorun | December 1st, 2007 at 1:19 am

CallMeTeach: Rico - Don’t be an @$$hole. Can’t you debate without being crude?

Well, I promise to try if you promise to tell me what the hell you’re talking about. What did I say that was crude?
61. Kahn | December 1st, 2007 at 1:24 am

Yes, you’re welcome. We Republicans ended slavery.

The CNN thing must really be a loser if this is what we’re talking about.

Sad that none of you could admit you were wrong. A condemnation on your integrity actually.
62. liberalT | December 1st, 2007 at 1:26 am

admit that we were wrong about what?
63. Kahn | December 1st, 2007 at 1:47 am

About sabotaging the Republican debate with Democratic campaign operatives, filling a “undecided Republican” focus group with Democrats, and coordinating the entire action with the general/admiral article in the New York Times. In short, of being dishonest and lacking integrity. Oh, you claim we do it - but I have actual facts and names and you don’t.

AND, don’t ask don’t tell was put in place by Bill Clinton at the insistence of the Pentagon brass, far more than 20 something admirals and generals. Your party actually put this policy in place.

How about you stay out of our party business until we’ve chosen a candidate. We are not playing dirty tricks on you. You are the dishonest ones in this incident. Your failure to admit it speaks to your lack of credibility and integrity.
64. liberalT | December 1st, 2007 at 2:08 am

ah - no I won’t admit that because i didn’t do any of them. I think you are getting fairly paranoid. Look if your candidates can’t handle a few questions from a democrat I don’t know what to say - except thats rather sad
65. Max Power | December 1st, 2007 at 5:47 am

How can the Republicans face the threat of terrorism if they can’t even handle questions from Democrats?
66. phnx | December 1st, 2007 at 7:50 am

“The more plausible answer (and less conspiracy oriented) is that the majority of these videos were by young people who are DEFINITLEY not Republican.” Call me teach

You prove the point of leftist bias as ththe result of the debate seems to fly in the face of what a CNN executive said was the purpose of the debate.

“This debate is to let Republican voters pick from among their eight candidates,” said David Bohrman, Washington bureau chief and senior vice president for CNN. “We are trying to focus mostly on questions where there are differences among these candidates.”

Despite the fact that You Tube is the domain of teenagers and twenty somethings who have never been gainfully emplyed adn haven’t yet outgrown their leftist indoctrination by the NEA and their college professors, there must have been 40 serious political questions out of the 5000 submission which were of interest to REPUBLICAN voters. And yet Anderson Cooper and his staff at CNN, all well known for their political neutrality (NOT) chose to go for entertainment value instead of substance, which THEY ADMIT on their web site:

“CNN anchor and debate moderator Anderson Cooper and a team of CNN political journalists have been poring through the nearly 5,000 video questions that were recorded and submitted through YouTube. Watch voters use Abe Lincoln, Uncle Sam and Santa Claus to ask their questions.”

You Tube, run and owned by leftist activists, encouraged submitters to:

* Be original — choose your own approach.
* Be personal — your perspective is important.
* Make it look good

Anderson Cooper goes on to say:

“The format of this debate is all new to the Republican presidential hopefuls, and that’s part of the excitement. The candidates and their campaigns have no idea exactly what to expect. There is some sense of the unknown…”

This sounds like the promo for some game show, not a political debate.

the contestants have no idea what to expect…the unknown…excitement????!!!???

We’re trying to pick the next President of the United States for Ch**st Sake, not then next American Idol.

This type of format trivializes and makes a mockery of the political process.

From your comments it obviously appeals to you leftists and makes you proud. Its a real commentary on each of you, and the direction this country is headed.
67. neocon | December 1st, 2007 at 7:53 am

libT and Max,

You guys are completely off base, AGAIN. We don’t object to Demos asking questions, IF THEY ARE PERTINENT, RELEVANT QUESTIONS.

I sat down to watch a debate amongst the GOP candidates to discern the differences in their positions based on intelligent, pertinent questions. What I received was a CNN freak show with completely irrelevant questions posed by people with less brains than you two. It was shameful, juvenile, and a complete waste of time.

And if you noticed, all of the candidates ANSWERED the questions which is a far cry from your pathetic crop of loser candidates who WILL NOT APPEAR ON FOX NEWS.
68. coulterfan | December 1st, 2007 at 9:00 am

>>Not everyone views the Confederate flag the way you do, nor do they equate it with racism. Most people in the South do not see it your way!

Umm, wasn’t this the question? Neocon called the questioner a ‘mentally challenged racist’, but he didn’t say anything overtly racist. In fact, ALL of the candidates said that they DID NOT approve of flying the Confederate flag.

George Allen, OTOH, IS a racist - as is Trent Lott. Wheras Strom Thurmond and Robert Byrd publicly apologized for their prior views and made amends, Allen and Lott insisted that they were NEVER racist even while hanging Confederate flags (which Neocon and the GOP candidates implied was a racist symbol) and meeting with the ‘CCC’ (do some research, they are like the ’socially acceptable’ KKK)

Again, I did not bring this up as an issue. THis was something Neocon brought up and BTW this questioner WAS NOT one of the ‘Demon-craptastic plants’ that all you are raving like lunatics about.

What’t the matter , Kahn, was YOUR submitted YouTube video not USED? Maybe they RAN OUT of GOP supporters (since they used Grover Nordquist- a BIG TIME GOP operative and contributor) Remember, the ‘Has the Democratic Congress Worked For You’ Contest? It was going to be SO HUGE and ‘VIRAL’??? Well, they got FIVE submissions AND one is from two Democratic dudes who WILL WIN the contest if it’s put up to the ‘General Public’ like the RNCC’s rules originally said! Now there’s NO MENTION of the contest on their web site and I’ve got the funny feeling the winner WON’T be selected by the ‘general public’.

Why ARE the Republicans so afraid of the ‘General Public’? Remember all the Bush rallies of hand-picked supporters, ‘planted’ questions, forcing folks to leave because of bumper stickers on their cars, etc, etc? Hmmm, that doesn’t sound like a Democracy to me- what OTHER Democratic leaders HAND PICK their audience and the questions?

If you guys DIDN’T SUBMIT QUESTIONS, SHUT UP and STOP COMPLAINING! It’s like I always tell my brother, “If you don’t vote (he doesn’t), then you CAN’T WHINE AND COMPLAIN ABOUT THE OUTCOME!”

Poor F**king Crybabies ; (
69. neocon | December 1st, 2007 at 9:14 am

coulter,

Again, you’re brain damage is evident. I NEVER IMPLIED THE Flag WAS A SYMBOL OF RACISM. I called the mentally challenged boy who appeared on camera from his room in his moms house a racist, and I still stand by that assertion.

Why are the democrats afraid of Fox news?

And you obviously considered that debate to be a viable informative experience, which clearly demonstrates your stupidity. YOU REPRESENT A PATHETICALLY IGNORANT ELECTORATE.

That debate was nothing more than juvenile hacks asking pathetically stupid questions of which you can’t even discern the difference.

Your ignorance is MONUMENTALM, and you and your ilk will suffer in the end.
70. coulterfan | December 1st, 2007 at 9:23 am

One other thing:

Wasn’t the ‘liberal’ NYTImes the paper Scooter Libby was feeding FAKE Iraq stories to (through Judith Miller)? Didn’t Cheney then go on all the talk shows and herald the NYT planted ‘reporting’ (by his own office) as evidence to go to war?

Didn’t ABC run “The Path to 9-11″? You know, the film where the director is an admitted Republican and admits that he fictionalized the part having to do with Clinton, Albright, et al letting Bin Laden go? Furthermore, didn’t one of those networks PULL a similarly fictional film about the Reagans due to conservative pressure?

Didn’t one of those networks (I forget which) refuse to play Moveon.org’s ad during the Superbowl, even while they incessantly played the ‘Swift Boat Liars’?

Didn’t ALL the networks drool over Bush’s ‘Flight Suit’ performance (Chris Matthews REALLY seemed to like it, almost in an uncomfortable way)? Didn’t Matthews admit to voting for Bush on the air? And weren’t ALL the networks THRILLED with the prospect of WAR (which is, after all, good for ratings)?

I guess the MSM is convenient when pushing Right-Wing Propaganda, but they’re also EASILY VILIFIED (without any evidence- look at the 2000 elections, for instance, where NEARLY ALL the Bush stories were favorable and NEARLY ALL called Gore a ‘liar’ or ‘exaggerator’)

As I’ve said before, the MSM has A LOT of biases, but it’s NOT a LIBERAL bias! It’s a ratings bias (and currently most Americans are PISSED at this administration), a corporate bias (not to offend advertisers), a sensationalistic bias (LOOK! A car WRECK!), a bias to get things FIRST (but not necessarily correct- look at all the shoddy live reporting), etc, etc. . . In fact, MANY Democrats AGREE with you and said after our last debate that CNN has PROVEN that it SHOULD NEVER have another political debate for either party!

But you guys are just being fricking paranoid with all your conspiracy theories!
71. coulterfan | December 1st, 2007 at 9:32 am

>>I called the mentally challenged boy who appeared on camera from his room in his moms house a racist, and I still stand by that assertion

>>YOU REPRESENT A PATHETICALLY IGNORANT ELECTORATE.

>>That debate was nothing more than juvenile hacks asking pathetically stupid questions of which you can’t even discern the difference.

Most of the questions were in fact Republican supporters (even if in your paranoid mind EVERYONE on CNN, including Glen Beck, are out to make Republicans look ridiculous!)

You seem to be contradicting yourself, then, since you’re calling your own base ‘racist’, ‘mentally challenged’, ‘ignorant’, etc.

What’s the matter, was YOUR QUESTION not used?

Hey, did you see how STUPID Karl Rove thinks you are? He’s writing a book about how Congressional Democrats ‘pushed Bush’ into going to war TOO EARLY! Now, never mind the video clips of Bush himself arguing for Congress to vote for war before the election! Even Andrew Card laughed it off as patently false! How stupid does Karl Rove think you Republicans are to shovel such s**t into your head?!?!?
72. neocon | December 1st, 2007 at 9:41 am

In my 50+ years I have never seen anyone that has the level of ignorant and brain washed views that you possess coulter.

Roves statement re: the early vote on the war is not at all what you assert it to be, demonstrating AGAIN, your stupidity. Did you even listen to the Charlie Rose interview?

Most of the questions came from Anderson Cooper, I didn’t know he was a republican.
73. coulterfan | December 1st, 2007 at 9:43 am

Sorry, I missed this one:

“Why are the democrats afraid of Fox news?”

Again, I think it’s because they are unaware of the issues which concern Fox viewers. . .

I’ve never heard Hillary, Edwards, or Obama talk ONCE about Natalie Holloway or OJ Simpson! How can they expect to debate on Fox without a firm grasp of these issues?

Seriously, I think it’s wise that the Dems only do debates on REAL news outlets (as pathetic as we agree they are!) I would NOT THINK that they should have Katie Couric, for instance, as a moderator of ANY debate!

Fox is SO BIASED towards Republicans (and towards Guiliani, I might add) that even Romney and Thompson have noticed it- and they are not the brightest bulbs on the Christmas tree!
74. coulterfan | December 1st, 2007 at 9:47 am

>>Roves statement re: the early vote on the war is not at all what you assert it to be, demonstrating AGAIN, your stupidity. Did you even listen to the Charlie Rose interview?

Did YOU hear Andrew Card’s response? Did you SEE the White House response? Karl was trying to see if his revisionist magic would work again, but EVERYONE remembers what happened.

BTW, most of the questions were from YouTube - Cooper would occasionally re-ask them. What question did YOU want asked?

(Your habit of ‘debate’ by name-calling and insulting intelligence REALLY doesn’t add anything to the discussion. It also shows how bereft of facts you are.)
75. coulterfan | December 1st, 2007 at 9:53 am

I actually watched the whole Rose interview, as well as the Card interview on NBC with Scarborough (not overtly a ‘liberal’). Maybe you’re right, though. . . Maybe Scarborough just PRETENDED to be Republican as part of the ‘94 Congressional sweep. All of his votes with the GOP and his well-known conservative views are JUST A FACADE so that he could enact his REAL DIABOLICAL SCHEME- to become a ‘PMSNBC’ commentator and, by his extreme views, make the GOP look RIDICULOUS!

(insert EVIL laughter)
76. neocon | December 1st, 2007 at 10:01 am

coulter,

you deserve nothing less than to be insulted for your hypocritical, racist views.

The fact that you ramble on and on merely shows your desperate attempt to persuade others of your pathetic, stalinist views.

My grandson has more insight and intellect than you. (insert grandiose laughter)

I only wish my USMC nephews would run into you in a bar. You might feel a little more than insulted.
77. coulterfan | December 1st, 2007 at 10:16 am

Nice, neoconjob. . .

Well, since the facts have a well-known liberal bias, you can only ‘win’ if you insult and threaten.

Sorry, but it is YOU and YOUR PARTY which is racist, homophobic, and sexist. That you are in denial and projecting it on the Democrats (which, I might add, have a MUCH more diverse party base) just shows your desperation.

I’m REALLY looking forward to the ‘08 election since it’s going to be on the ISSUES and your party’s DIRTY TRICKS and SLANDER isn’t working any longer. . .

Even National Review is predicting a HUGE Republican loss- it seems like none of you are too thrilled with ANY of your candidates. Now that the GOP has run out of ideas and has already used Rove’s ‘wedge issues’ (God, guns, and gays as Dean called them), you really don’t have much else but to continue to go negative.

The problem is that the Democrats are ready this time and, I expect, are prepared to fight fire with fire!
78. AAR | December 1st, 2007 at 10:28 am

Is anyone else here tired of hearing coulter”nuts” endless stream of repetitive Liberal trash?

He is nothing more than a Liberal Propagandist whose efforts are to muddy, clutter, and cloud this site with as much useless Liberal propaganda as possible!

He reminds me of (and may be) the old “Middle Path” (Muddle Path) from DeLay’s site! A limit of one comment per day would be more than sufficient for his Looney Liberalism and repetitious Liberal propaganda!!!

AAR
79. AAR | December 1st, 2007 at 10:40 am

I think it’s wise that the Dems only do debates on REAL news outlets…

I think it’s wise that the DIMocrats stick with the liberal biased networks like: CNN, AL JAZERRA, NBC, CBS, ABC, and MSNBC who won’t ask them real questions and won’t expose their real LIBERAL agenda to American viewers!

Fox News will ask the hard and real questions which Democrats want to keep suppressed and hidden until after the election!!!

I think Hillary and the DIMocrats should stick with organizations where they can place their “PLANTS” to ask the questions they want to answer!

AAR
80. liberalT | December 1st, 2007 at 10:42 am

almost ALL the questions asked on the debate were worthless. Its just your paranoid delusions and hopes that somehow all the worst of them came from democrat plants. Stop watching Bill O - and think for yourself
81. coulterfan | December 1st, 2007 at 10:47 am

Clearly there’s a pattern here. . . When you don’t like the questions, can’t counter any of the points, have no facts upon which to base your opinion- just attack with personal insults and call your opponent a ‘liberal propagandaist’!

If you just want to talk with people with whom you agree, not answer any hard questions, and nod in usison, I’ll leave you alone. That sounds like what the GOP expected from the debate the other night. I WILL tell you, though, that you’re in for a harsh awakening.

Geez, the folks over at RedState.org are MUCH less hostile to alternative viewpoints and can actually debate someone with whom they disagree on the facts. . .
82. Eric T | December 1st, 2007 at 11:10 am

liberal T,

In #59 back to the rebel flag.

Would people be offended by a Dutch colonial flag from that era, Or English colonial flag.?

The Democrats are the racists, they were the KKK after the civil war. They make every issue an issue of race. They have been making race an issue for 150 + years now.
83. Kahn | December 1st, 2007 at 11:50 am

OK - so the line is dishonest plants from CNN are OK because we should be able to handle it?

Fair enough - we can and did.

But by choosing this path and defending it, you’ve lost your claim to an independent and neutral press. This wasn’t just some plants. This was a coordinated effort to steer the Republican debate (larger debate) by two “independent and neutral” news outles. Namely, CNN and the New York Times. Part of this coordinated plan was a man on Hillary Clinton’s staff.

So, a Clinton staffer, along with others asks planted questions designed to divert attention from issues Republicans think are important. It is coordinated with the New York Times who run a “follow-up” piece a day later. And all for a policy put in place by Bill Clinton in the first place?

So this is you - Democrats. Call us crybabies, call us whatever. You are sunverting the process.

Will it finally end in civil war? I wonder.
84. Kahn | December 1st, 2007 at 11:51 am

subverting
85. coulterfan | December 1st, 2007 at 12:26 pm

Well, I wouldn’t put it past CNN and the NYT to put out propaganda (as they did in SUPPORT of the Iraq war, remember?) Still, you guys are being SUPER paranoid!

But, if you’re paranoid NOW just think about when President Hillary Clinton has all the powers YOU STAUNCHLY defended! Warrantless wiretaps, domestic spying, ability to declare ‘enemy combatants’ and hold them without trial, torture (BTW, if waterboarding isn’t torture- then pulling out fingernails isn’t either because that’s even LESS dangerous and, after all, fingernails grow back), etc, etc

Remember, Operation Rescue, those who hoard automatic weapons, ‘radical’ Christian groups, etc can ALSO be classified as ‘domestic terrorists’ under the rules YOUR PARTY put in place! AT LEAST you didn’t succeed in the ‘Nuclear Option’ or the minority party (that would now be YOU) would have almost NO power!

EVEN I shudder at the thought of giving Hillary all that power, and I trust HER more than Bush!
86. AAR | December 1st, 2007 at 12:35 pm

Eric T,

People all across the South, and even in other parts of America have various pictures of the Confederate flag on many things. It’s part of our culture and heritage — and not slavery — except to racist Democrats who want to make it a symbol of racism to help them with spread and maintain their racist hatred propaganda!

Most people don’t relate it to slavery or even think of slavery or Blacks when they see or own one.

It’s only in the feeble brains of Liberals like coulternut who try to keep it alive as a symbol of hatred and slavery!

Perhaps coulternut could hold a double flag burning ceremony. He and his Liberal friends don’t really care which flag they burn or dishonor — as long as they can use it to display THEIR HATRED!!!

Perhaps coulternut has forgotten that slavery was at Constitutional at one time. It is not now. The Construction was Amended to ban it. Using coulternut’s nutty logic, we should burn and outlaw the Constitution because it was associated with and actually approved slavery at one time in our nation’s history.

Most Americans got over it, moved on, and do not equate our Constitution with slavery, but Liberals like coulternut didn’t… they long for the return of racism, and they will do all they can to keep it alive, to perpetuate it, and to resurrect it’s ugly head! (Come to think of it, Democrats already want to ignore the Constitution!)

AAR
87. coulterfan | December 1st, 2007 at 12:46 pm

You know what AAR? I LOVE the American flag and Constitution and would not burn or subvert either. It’s not, however, the symbol that I LOVE, but what the symbol stands for. Not sure where you get the idea that I’d want to burn it. . .

However, the Confederate flag. . .I DOUBT that many African Americans own one of those. And as far as what it symbolizes. . . Correct me if I’m wrong, but didn’t the South try to secede from the Union and take up arms against America? Isn’t that TREASON?!?!? If a militia group was to attempt to secede and take up arms against America, isn’t that what YOU would call it?

You calling the Democratic party ‘racist’ is tiresome and laughable. They are not the ones with ties to the CCC. What percentage of non-whites are Republican? There WERE (and ARE, no doubt) racist Democrats (usually from the South-we’ve gone over and over this), but it was socially LIBERAL Democrats and Republicans (from the North) who outlawed slavery, passed Civil Rights legislation, fought for suffrage, etc. Remember, you’re counting ‘Democrats’ like Trent Lott and Strom Thurmond when you refer to ‘racist Democrats’.

So, how many of your African American friends own the Confederate flag?
88. neocon | December 1st, 2007 at 12:47 pm

What we’re dealing with here is a complete lack of knowldege of conservatism. coulter exemplifies this lack of understanding of conservatism, knowing only what his masters fed him.

Independent thought is not allowed on the left side of the aisle anymore as they all must toe the MoveOn.org and Soros line, or risk being defunded and excluded. Just ask Joe Lieberman.
89. neocon | December 1st, 2007 at 12:55 pm

Bobby Jindal, an Indian descent Republican, was just elected Governor in a prodiminantly African American state, Louisiana. This is clearly an indication that minorities are finally tiring of Democratic lies and promises and their never ending war on poverty (which of course they don’t want to end)

Bush has more minorities serving in his administration than all other Democratic administrations combined.

coulter, you are the one that mentions skin color in every post and it is the Democrats that continue to distinguish Americans along racial lines. It’s shameful.

How’s that war on poverty coming along?
90. coulterfan | December 1st, 2007 at 12:57 pm

Don’t address the points, neocon. . . Ignore, ignore, ignore. . .

You guys must have been PISSED that all your candidates ALSO considered the Confederate flag a racist symbol (everyone who had the courage to answer, that is). I found myself thinking, “good for them!” BTW, I thought it was appalling when Howard Dean wanted to appeal to “people with the Confederate flag on their trucks”- I think we should appeal to people with the AMERICAN FLAG!
91. coulterfan | December 1st, 2007 at 1:09 pm

Hey, neocon!

To lighten the topic: who’s your favorite hip hop artist? Your favorite hip-hop song?

Maybe you don’t like hip-hop? Who are your favorite jazz musicians? Blues musicians?
92. neocon | December 1st, 2007 at 1:40 pm

I will have to answer that later, I have to run….

Ciao
93. phnx | December 1st, 2007 at 3:08 pm

“…but it was socially LIBERAL Democrats and Republicans (from the North) who outlawed slavery, passed Civil Rights legislation.” Coulterfan

You are an ill informed moron. Your revisionist history is a complete fabrication.

In 1854, the main Democratic leader in the Senate, Stephen A. Douglas of Illinois, pushed through the pro-slavery Kansas-Nebraska Act despite strong protest from REPUBLICANS.

IN 1856 Democrat Douglas supported the Dred Scott decision which stated that a white slave owner could purchase slaves in a slave state and then bring his slaves to a state where slavery was illegal without losing rights to the slaves. This factor upset the Northern Republicans and further split Northern and Southern relations.
The Republicans claimed that the northern Democrats, such as Pierce, Buchanan, Douglas and Cass, were accomplices to southern slave power. The Republicans argued that slaveholders had seized control of the federal government and were blocking the progress of liberty.

In 1860 Lincoln only received 40% of the popular vote. Fortunately for the USA and blacks, he would have been defeated in a landslide by the racists Democrats but for a series of events which prevented slavery from being perpetuated.

Stephen Douglas, was the Democrat candidate in the 1860 election. He would have been elected, with 48% of the vote had Southern Dems not split to nominate a candidate with even more racist views than Douglas. In addition a third party candidate also willing to compromise on slavery took 12% of the vote.

General McClellan was Democratic nominee opposing Lincoln in the 1864 presidential election. His party had an anti-war platform, promising to end the war and negotiate with the Confederacy. Fortunately he lost and the anti-war racists Dems wouldn’t regain the Presidency until the 1880’s.

Gee this sounds very familiar.

You leftists have a long proud tradition as Defeatocrats, willing to compromise principle for peace. If it wasn’t for REPUBLICANS, blacks would still be slaves and there would be the United States of America as well as the Confederate States of America.

Without the bi-partisan support from 80% of REPUBLICANS in the house and Senate, the civil rights bill would never have passed due to the large number of Democrats who opposed it, including Algore’s father, and current Democrat senator Robert KKK Byrd (so much for his apology).

Why do more minorities support the dems now you ask. Simple, modern day Dem racism is far more sophisiticated and subtle than that practised by your racist founders. You have bought minority votes with transfer payments and government subsidies. You have made them dependent upon your largesse and have practised the soft racism of low expectations.

Defeatocrats… A proud tradition of racism and Cut and Run since 1854!!!!
94. Kahn | December 1st, 2007 at 5:28 pm

coulter, you are 100% correct about being afraid of Hillary Clinton and for precisely the arguments you specified.

However, may I add?

Her husband ordered tanks to burn American women and children to death in Texas.

Her husband ordered the FBI to shoot to kill Randy Weaver at Ruby Ridge whether he was posing a direct threat or not. Instead, they shot his wife in the head and killed her - and she was not wanted for anything.

The Clinton White House ordered the raw (unvetted) FBI files on hundreds of Republicans delivered to the White House and poured over them for weeks before it was made public.

She personally ran a bimbo erruption team that would use private detectives and intimidation to keep Bill’s forays quiet.

She personally used this same technique to attack political enemies.

Her husband did his damnedest to eliminate gun ownership as a personal right.

Yah, with THAT history and the powers you name you’re damn right I’m afraid. You’re not?
95. neocon | December 1st, 2007 at 6:45 pm

Excellent rebuttals phnx and Kahn.

coulter is a good lessen for us all on the level of liberal indoctrination so prevalent in our school system.
96. neocon | December 1st, 2007 at 6:50 pm

coulter,

why would we be “pissed” that the candidates thought the flag represented racism?

There are definitely some racist connotations with the flag but it also represented quite a bit more. And everyone has a right to their own opinion, don’t you agree?
97. phnx | December 1st, 2007 at 7:53 pm

Seems like the soft racism of low expecations is alive and well in the Alabama Democrat Party.

“Before the endorsement vote, Perry County Commissioner Albert Turner praised Obama’s qualifications, but urged the group to support Clinton.

“The question you have to put forth to yourself is that whether or not in this racist country a black man named Obama — when we are shooting at Osama — can win the presidency of the United States?” Turner said.

Turner said Clinton is the Democrat most likely to win in November “because of her husband and because of some other things, mainly because she’s white.”

When the Alabama Democratic Conference endorsed Clinton in October, leaders cited long-standing friendships with Clinton and her husband and voiced concerns about whether white voters would support a black Democrat.”
98. Almiranta | December 2nd, 2007 at 2:04 pm

Michael, you made a great point. I have been saying for years that if you were to overlay the platform and political beliefs of JFK on top of Bush’s, they would line up almost perfectly.

Long before I knew Reagan said it, I commented that I did not leave the Democratic Party, it left me.

A rational and objective analysis of the Democratic Party will show, does show, that it has moved so far to the left that it barely resembles the party in the days of its greatness. The Dems of the 60’s look exactly like the Republicans of today.

I am a conservative who votes Republican because it is the party which is MOST LIKELY to govern the way I think the country should be governed. But when Bush was promoting his amnesty program, and the radical Lefties were calling us “racists” for wanting strong borders, I seriously considered the need for a new party.

So many Dems cannot bring themselves to vote for a Republican, for emotional reasons, no matter how a D vote is against their own best interests. Too many are disenchanted with the GOP, partly for legitimate reasons and partly due to successful attack campaigns from the Left. The vast majority of Americans reside firmly between the goofball radical Left and the image, inaccurate as it is, of the GOP.

I think most, if not all, of the rabid radicals who post here believe they represent the Democrat Party. But when I print out their posts and show them to Dems I know, they are appalled. Personally, I kind of like the delusions of the radical Left, that they either represent the Party or that they can bully them into submission, because I think the more radical and nasty and hate-driven and irrational the Left becomes, the more they will drive the moderates to pretty much any likable Republican.

But it sure would be nice to start to vote on issues for a change.
99. Almiranta | December 2nd, 2007 at 2:19 pm

Regarding the CNN scam, the Left is, as usual, trying to confabulate one issue with another.

The first is whether or not “hard” questions should be asked. Yep, they sure should. But as this is a Republican process, the Republicans get to choose among Republicans and they get to choose the questions that matter to them.

When their candidate is chosen, and goes up against the candidate from the other side, THEN is the time to ask all those questions that have been bubbling around in their craniums for so long.

The second, and more relevant, issue is the dishonesty and trickery of CNN. The defensive radicals are trying to disguise this trickery with their challenges about who gets to ask what, but the bottom line is, CNN acted very pro-actively to first influence the debate, and then later to influence the perception of the debate.

This. Is. Wrong.

CNN represents itself as a news organization. The most basic tenet of journalism, the way it has been taught and perceived for decades, is that it is objective, that it is balanced, that it DOES NOT INJECT ITSELF INTO THE STORY.

CNN not only injects itself into the story, it creates the story, scripts the story, plants fake commentary to create a false impression of the story, and then postures as an objective arm of “journalism” to convince people of the validity of the story.

There is something so inherently wrong, so far beyond distasteful, in having “news” organizations actively trying to shape the news they are pretending to merely report, I am amazed to see even the rabid lemming left trying to defend it.

It does not matter if or when any other person or group ever did the same thing. This thread is about one entity, CNN, and the actions of that entity, and the ethics of those actions. Period.

The actions of CNN stand alone. They cannot be excused by claims that so-and-so once did the same thing, they cannot be hidden behind claims that well, it should have been done anwyay.

The responsibility—let me repeat that, the RESPONSIBILITY—of the press is to REPORT the news, not to create it, not to invent it, not to spin it, not to influence it in any way.

A free country depends on a free press—but this does not mean a press free to invent its own rules. It means a press free to report WHAT ACTUALLY HAPPENS. When the press subverts the process, when the press becomes part of the story, more to the point when the press become so suspect that the populace cannot count on getting unadulterated facts, then the end effect is the same as not having a free press at all.

We all know the dangers of having the government run the press, yet we seem oblivious to the dangers of having the oppositon to the government run the press. But it is two sides of the same coin, and both endanger a free and democratic society.
100. FmrMarine | December 2nd, 2007 at 2:22 pm

I used to work with a group of cool aid drinking union aircraft mechanics.
All dyed in the wool democRATS.
Id ask them ….
Do you believe in gun control = NO
Do you believe in abortion on demand = NO
Do you believe on affirmative action = NO
Do you believe in the radical homosexual agenda = NO
Do you support radical fenimism = NO
Do you support higher taxes = NO

Q, then how can you be a donk?
answer” they are for the working man”

DUH !
101. FmrMarine | December 2nd, 2007 at 2:26 pm

Almiantra

well said!
remember CNN = Comunist news network.
What else would one expect from ted turner and Hanoi jane.
102. Katie Couric&hellip | December 12th, 2007 at 4:18 pm

Katie Couric

I Googled for something completely different, but found your page…and have to say thanks. nice read.
103. Power Of Law Forms&hellip | December 13th, 2007 at 3:18 am

Power Of Law Forms

I couldn’t understand some parts of this article, but it sounds interesting
104. Gay Sex Hardcore Gay Sex &hellip | December 17th, 2007 at 5:27 am

Gay Sex Hardcore Gay Sex Gay Anal

I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
105. Pee Public Pee Public Pis&hellip | December 18th, 2007 at 7:54 am

Pee Public Pee Public Pissing

I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
106. allstate insurance&hellip | January 24th, 2008 at 10:10 am

allstate insurance

gambling allstate insurance

More Post-Debate Fallout For CNN

106 Comments

Prime Sponsor

Advertisements

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

Archives

Blogroll

Meta

Tags

Advertisements

Buttons For Your Blog

Disclaimer