The right views YouTube questioners, cries foul

[Lone_Star_Dem]

Source: LA Times

Democratic partisans were allowed to put Republican hopefuls on the spot by CNN, Internet talkers say.

Conservative Internet commentators were buzzing Thursday with accusations that producers had skewed the CNN-YouTube presidential debate by allowing Democratic partisans to pose tough questions to the Republican contenders.

Several bloggers said CNN had betrayed a liberal bias by selecting questions designed to put the eight presidential candidates on the defensive. But executives at the cable-TV network said they were proud of Wednesday night's debate and had simply chosen 33 questions -- from nearly 5,000 submitted by videotape -- that would prompt a spirited and substantive discussion.

A review by the Los Angeles Times of the debate sponsored by CNN and YouTube four months ago found that the Democratic presidential candidates also faced queries that seemed to come from the conservative perspective. At least two of the citizen-interrogators had clear GOP leanings.

"We were looking for people who were interested enough in the process to ask a question," Sam Feist, CNN's political director, said Thursday. "We didn't inquire about people's ideological beliefs, and that wasn't relevant. . . . We were looking for questions that would make for an interesting debate."


Read more: http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-youtube30nov30,1,6572347.story?track=rss&ctrack=1&cset=true

[Bitwit1234]

1. So the questions asked the Democrats initiated by republicans

was OK. Gee you mean republicans should run both debates. I thought we were all Americans, Democrats, republicans, Independents, Green Party, etc. I guess I was wrong. Only republicans count.

With 22 of the 25 questions asked Hillary being hard don't you think republicans asked their share or more.

[UpInArms]

2. "allowing Democratic partisans to pose tough questions to the Republican contenders"

OMG!

Tough Questions!

Run!

Hide!

We can't have tough questions!

:scared:

[Renew Deal]

9. Which questions did they consider tough? Gays in the military is easy.

Poison toys from China is a no brainer. I haven't heard anyone alleging that the immigration questions came from Dems.

[UpInArms]

16. I would think that anything that could not be answered

with "it's the liberal press" persecuting me would be considered "tough"

:shrug:

[swag]

3. Whining is a full-time job for the right, innit?

Aw, candidates had to defend themselves.

Aw, hard questions.

Poor whiny-assed titty babies.

[C_U_L8R]

4. They need some reminding...

they are running to be President for ALL Americans.

Then again, they are Republicans. We shouldn't expect much from them.

[grytpype]

5. If they can't face Democrat's questions how can they face Bin Laden?

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[Toots]

6. Wow an American asked a Presidential candidate a question and that is not fair

because they only want to be answerable to Republicans. All other Americans need not bother, they will not be represented and in fact these candidates do not even wish to hear from them...

[apnu]

7. ahhhh conservatives: "Waaa-Waaa Unfair! Biased!" Buncha crybabies (nt)

[Renew Deal]

8. Yes, it's true. The republicans don't like to answer questions.

Seriously though, none of the questions were asked in a partisan way. The general thing was a fuck up. And the lady endorsing Edwards was pretty funny. But the questions themselves were fine.

That said, the bible question, the guy shooting, and some of the others could have been avoided. CNN isn't interested in a debate. They are interested in good TV. That's why they concentrate on hot button issues, and not important ones.

Where was health care, the environment, Iran, Pakistan, etc.?

[Buzz Clik]

10. Exactly. The YouTube debates are about good theater, not politics.

[zabet]

11. Waaaahhhhh!

Buncha effing crybabies!

[BadgerKid]

12. People are tired of gov't (R's) taking

from the people rather than the government enabling the People.

Just a guess :eyes:

[tom_paine]

13. "Working the refs." It what they do. Just jibber-jabber meant to give pause the next time

someone thinks of defying the Bushie Party Comrades.

Because the Bushie dronehead followers, like the Nazis before them, are programmed to feel Liberal (or Jewish, depending on which variety you are looking at) Bias even if all the YoTube Questions werte like this:

"How great Bush (Der Fuhrer) and why are the Liberals (Jews) so evil?"

"Should the Democratic Party (German Social Democratic Party) even be allowed to exist, since they are treasonous?"

Even AFTER a night full of questions like that, Bushies and Nazis would STILL find a way to try to intimidate to get an even "better result" (from the perspective of a Nazi-Bushie Monster) next time.

It just how it is. It is the nature of the Mind of the Authoritarian Follower.

And it works. It keeps working. God help us all, it just keeps working.

[go west young man]

14. So Grover Norquist is a Dem? I never knew.

Funny I didn't see any obvious leftleaning pundits asking questions at the dem debate. And the candyass republicans are worried the questions were too hard? Come on. As Grytpype above wrote "How are you gonna catch Bin Laden when your afraid of dems?" That's some funny shit.

[mlevans]

15. It seems to me that the Republican candidates

have been none too keen on the entire concept of the YouTube debates from the beginning. They're afraid they'll be asked questions by talking snowmen, which one candidate complained was "undignified." To some extent they're probably also afraid that the questioners will "steal the show" (this is a more legitimate fear, as in a number of cases the questioners have done just this). Republicans as a group, at least the hard-liners, tend not to like things that are different. The YouTube format doesn't strike them as a proper vehicle to frame a serious debate. Consequently they were bound to find something to complain about, and partisanship is so often the first accusation that pops into their minds. Yes, they have minds; they just work differently.

[rAVES]

17. Well it kinda evens out.. Democrats have mostly right wing idiots or corporate shills

to listen to on tv... actually no it doesnt.. I'm disgusted..

[Zorra]

18. A person who bases their entire existence on the perpetuation of lies

generally has a hard time when confronted with questions relating to their lack of honesty and integrity.

That's why republican politicians insist on scripted questions that they approve of beforehand, and why RW talk shows either plant their callers or screen their callers very carefully.

[Orsino]

19. They've got a point.

If one outlet allows tough questions to be asked of Republicans, and the rest don't, that is an inequity that should be addressed.

[Javaman]

20. Translation: why aren't our repuke candidates getting softball questions anymore???? nt

[KingOfLostSouls]

21. If They CANNOT Answer Tough Questions

then they CANNOT be president.

how can we expect the republicans to stop the terrorist when they're afraid to deal with retirees with webcams?

simple as that.

[Bake]

22. FACTS put the Puke candidates on the defenseive.

Ain't that right, Rudy?

Bake

[Az_lefty]

23. how dare they ask hard questions of the soon to be annoited !!!

if these sorry bastards can't stand some difficult questions they need to go home and get the f*** out of our lives.
:puke: