J. Merle,

If you think Tim Russert, lifelong Democrat and former Hill staffer, is a conservative, you'd better put down the crackpipe.

The point isn't that the questions were asked (although in a debate for Republican voters, perhaps Republicans should have asked the questions--Dems will get their chance in the general), but that they were not disclosed.

So, I guess it's only "good" when conservative media pundits rip liberals and Democrats over the airwaves. It's only "good" when Tim Russert is going for Hillary's juggler.

LOL Merle:

That little girl is only getting a taste right now...
wait till the general election.....

If you're told before the debate that the questions will be from undecided Republicans or independents but in fact they are from decided Democrats, it strikes me as being inappropriate.  With questions from undecided Republicans, one would not expect (and would be blind-sided with) "loaded" questions designed to make you look stupid or evil regardless of how you answer--along the lines of " How many times did you beat your wife this year".  One example of a question during the debate that fit this template was "Why don't you think our military people are not professional enough to accept open homosexuals".  If you respond in a negative way, then you are guilty of accusing the troops of not being professional.  If you agree that the troops are professional, then you are giving credence to the assumption underlying the question that "professionalism" requires acceptance of open homosexuality in the armed forces. The appropriate question in this area should have been "Do you support the "don't ask don't tell" policy regarding honsexuals in the military? It is evident that a great deal of thought went into framing the gay-in-the-military question and other questions to try to make the candidates look bad no matter what they said.  Unfortuntely, the candidates did not grasp they were being hoodwinked and tried to respond in good faith to questions asked in bad faith.  Whenever this happens, whether in politics, in school, or in life in general, it is usually unproductive and can easily give the wrong impression of the  person answering the question.  It is surprising that the candidates, who after all live in the world of politics and deal constantly with questions by the press and by opponents which are not always in good faith, did not pick up on this and respond with something like this:  "I don't agree with the premises or any implications inherent in this question but here are my views on this general subject".  I would imagine they didn't respond this way because, in addition to being off balance about the background of the questioner, the candidates were trying to abide by the rules of the debate (which by the way is not a good idea in these situations) to answer all questions and also did not want to appear evasive to the questioner and to the viewers--who also were misled by assuming the questions were asked in good faith.

Anderson Cooper is a joke and an ultra-left leaning reporter that doesn't report, but preaches.  Where was Lou Dobbs?  He is the only person at CNN that is honest.

You entire post is fully of fanatical lies.  Hillary was never a socialist.  

pat huntington ny (Sent Friday, November 30, 2007 11:06 AM)


Oh god pat LOL:

Then I guess her health care plan is not???????

David Anders - Funny how you glossed over some important facts.  Tell me...just how has President Bush kept us safe???  Seems to me the Middle East is even more unstable than before we invaded Iraq, al Qaeda is stronger and re-grouping in Afhganistan, Pakistan is about to fall apart, we don't have control of our borders (we don't know whose coming in),etc. If you had done any research as you say you have done, than you would realize that Iraq was a strategic play by the neo-con administration, planned well in advance of 9/11, to rangle control of middle eastern assets (oil).  The "War On Terror" is just a convenient tag line akin to red meat, to keep the masses in line and fearful while the powers play their game.  Haven't you noticed how the ball moves....weapons of mass destruction, freedom for the Iraqis, Sadamm is a bad man, build up a functioning government, elections, or when all else didn't play...just because. You are a fool plain and simple.

Hey David Anders - what's a woman's libber???  Someone that speaks her mind, that has a thought process, that believes in the rights of Americans as paramount to the rights of the President???...a woman who believes that women are as competent and capable as men...possibly better able to handle the governing of this country???  Men have been at the helm for over 200 years and they haven't done such a great job.  I'd be willing to wager that a woman could do a better job governing than a man hands down.  What's the matter, sir, you feel threatened.  Too bad....welcome to the 21st century...get used to it.

I would have liked to have more democratic plants in the debate.  I want to know how the candidates react to "left-field" type questions before they are forced to confront the enemy.  

So now people who aren't in the same party as the candidates aren't allowed to ask any questions? Just like only those willing to sign a loyalty oath were allowed to attend any Presidential public event in 2004 to make sure that Bush got only questions like "Why are you so damned wonderful?"  And what kind of questions do these rightie talking heads think their candidate will have to answer when it comes down to a one on one debate in the general election?  Aren't candidates supposed to be prepared to answer tough questions from any citizen?  What a silly hissy fit over nothing.

This is America and anyone should be able to ask a question of any Presidential candidate no matter their political affiliations. There are not enough people asking tough questions of these candidates. Whoever elected be it democrat or republican is supposed to be serving all Americans; or is this going to be the same ole two Americas debate? I mean come on people lets pay attention to the real issues here. Toughen up!!!

It wasn't who asked the question it was the stupidity and purpose for which it was asked. If you don't think it had a purpose other than knowledge you aren't very perceptive.

It does not really matter.  The question was a legitimate question from someone who served our country through military service for years.  Who cares if he is for Hillary.....millions of Americans are for her.  Does that mean they should not be allowed to ask other candidates questions?  Does that mean they are not capable of changing their minds?

Let's talk about Rudy and the New York City taxpayers flipping the bill while he was cheating "again" on his second wife with then his Mistress (Judy Nathan) in the elitist Hamptons?  Everyone that thinks nothing of this and believes that Rudy is worthy of being President should recall their thoughts about Bill Clinton in 1998...right?

The issue was that this was someone working for the Clinton campaign asking a coached question specifically for the purpose of political gain, not an honest American voter with a concern for the issue. The question itself is a fair one and should be answered, the sleazy way in which it was asked is an example of the sleazy Clinton campaign staff and a reflection of Clinton herself, dirty pool.

I am for Ron Paul. I believe he is the most honest. Even if you don't like the answer, he answers any question that is asked.

The point of the debate format was to hear what honest American voters wanted the candidates to answer, not what the Clinton campaign wants its rivals to answer for reason of political posturing. SLEAZY.

The problem with the debate wasn't that liberal leaning people asked questions of the Republican candidates.  That's all fair in my opinion, and in fact, I would like to hear how they answer.  If elected, they would have to represent everyone, not just Repubs.  However, CNN passed these people off as on-the-fence conservatives.  They were actually Libs and not looking to vote Conservative at all.  For a GOP Debate, you should have more questions conservatives are interested in asking so we can select a candidate to represent us.  When you have a Dem/Repub face-off, and they both have to answer the same questions, then I think all is fair game.  Just be honest who you are and your motives.

Completely insane.  It doesn't matter what party you are affiliated with, candidates should be able and QUALIFIED to answer questions from ALL CITIZENS!!!!!  This is supposed to be for the president of the United States, not the republican or democratic party.  If the candidates cannot handle these 'sneaky' questions, THEN THEY ARE NOT QUALIFIED TO LEAD!!!!!      

Completely insane.  It doesn't matter what party you are affiliated with, candidates should be able and QUALIFIED to answer questions from ALL CITIZENS!!!!!  This is supposed to be for the president of the United States, not the republican or democratic party.  If the candidates cannot handle these 'sneaky' questions, THEN THEY ARE NOT QUALIFIED TO LEAD!!!!!      

So all you Dems that think is good to get Diverse questions from a group of plants, let's agree to be fair and balanced-The next Dem Debate can have questions from a representative from each of the repub candidates.  Sounds fair and balanced to me.

Notice that with all of the investigating nobody has found any Republican operatives infiltrating the Democratic forums.It's not a "tough" question folks.It's already been answered on the Republican side.Democrats just don't like the answer.There are sharp differences between the two sides.Live with it.It is a Republican debate not a Democratic debate.What part of this are you having trouble with.It's just more proof that CNN is in the Democratic pocket.Can't fight the truth.

Notice that with all of the investigating nobody has found any Republican operatives infiltrating the Democratic forums.It's not a "tough" question folks.It's already been answered on the Republican side.Democrats just don't like the answer.There are sharp differences between the two sides.Live with it.It is a Republican debate not a Democratic debate.What part of this are you having trouble with.It's just more proof that CNN is in the Democratic pocket.Can't fight the truth.

Notice that with all of the investigating nobody has found any Republican operatives infiltrating the Democratic forums.It's not a "tough" question folks.It's already been answered on the Republican side.Democrats just don't like the answer.There are sharp differences between the two sides.Live with it.It is a Republican debate not a Democratic debate.What part of this are you having trouble with.It's just more proof that CNN is in the Democratic pocket.Can't fight the truth.

Anyone who thinks Fox news is "Fair and Impartial" is NEITHER fair or impartial.

Who cares who asks the questions?  Can't Republicans answer questions and concerns from Democrats?  How can they handle terrorists if they can't handle Democratic questions? Get over yourselves and stop expecting hand-picked audiences.  

As for her being dangerous, is Gearge W your idea of what is good for America? Even his own party is "abandoning him. He is the biggest failure in American history. A dog would make a better, more intelligent president than him"
RAM (Sent Friday, November 30, 2007 11:02 AM)
**************************************************
Just what do you have against dogs?

From the very begining all the Republicans did was complain about the format. The Illigitimacy of a YouTube debate. How rediculous it was. So...having questions asked of you by the people you hope to serve is rediculous? We don't matter? Our questions and thoughts and worries are irrelevant, and you don't deem us important enough or intelligent enough to ask you a question on polices and protocol that CONCERN us? You can only answer questions when you've had time to practice and think about and rehearse what lie you're going to tell us. When the Republicans forced their debate to be postponed from September to now because of the "rediculous format of the debate", I knew all I needed to know.

From the very begining all the Republicans did was complain about the format. The Illigitimacy of a YouTube debate. How rediculous it was. So...having questions asked of you by the people you hope to serve is rediculous? We don't matter? Our questions and thoughts and worries are irrelevant, and you don't deem us important enough or intelligent enough to ask you a question on polices and protocol that CONCERN us? You can only answer questions when you've had time to practice and think about and rehearse what lie you're going to tell us. When the Republicans forced their debate to be postponed from September to now because of the "rediculous format of the debate", I knew all I needed to know.

In a free an open political system it should not matter who ask any question. The more we know the better informed we will be. We need to know what our soon to be elected officials stand for, PERIOD! It's time to stop the standard political consultant answers and tell the American People the real truth!

Wait.....what?  I might have to nap about this a little bit.  The "quality" of the question has nothing to do with anything, its a question being asked by someone whose views McCain disagrees with and he has to whine about it?!  So what if the gay brigadier general is gay or has connections to the Clinton campaign, its a question he had the right to ask and I guarantee that there are a lot of other people, both gay and non gay, that were wondering the same thing.  

There's my two cents, now I need to nap to get rid of this headache McCain gave me.

Jerry, what's socialized medicine...someone getting as good health care as you have????  I see the "I've got mine" crowd is out in force today.  You know what Jerry, I bet you'll be there the first day you're eligble for SS and Medicare signing up!!!

Completely insane.  It doesn't matter what party you are affiliated with, candidates should be able and QUALIFIED to answer questions from ALL CITIZENS!!!!!  This is supposed to be a debate for the president of the United States, not the republican or democratic party.  If the candidates cannot handle these 'sneaky' questions, THEN THEY ARE NOT QUALIFIED TO LEAD!!!!!      

I am surprised that those saying Repubs should have to answer ALL questions had anything to say about Tim Russert asking Hillary about her stance on issuing drivers licenses to illegal immigrants.  Same thing, huh.  And we all saw how she cried "no fair."  That's the issue, the same standards need to apply to both parties, more accurately, all candidates.  This two-party thing is just a devisive sham anyway.  

I've looked at both parties' debates and have to say I think Ron Paul is the way to go.  He's moderate, honest and has a good track record.  Even if you don't agree with him on everything, at least you know what his stance is -- he doesn't just tell you want you want to hear which is what most of them do.  

To all you republicans that think you want Huckabee -- be aware he is pro-amnesty so be sure you agree with him there.  THAT is a very important issue of our day which will have profound long-term effects on our nation.  

As for Hillary being a socialist -- come on, she is.  "It takes a Village" is just another term for 'you can't do it yourself, you need us to dictate to you how to do it.'  And socialized healthcare is a debacle in most countries.  Do you really want to wait 6 months for surgery when you're diagnosed with cancer?   That's what I've heard about Canadian socialized healthcare.  How about Ron Paul's suggestion of helping small businesses to band together to get private health care instead.

And for goodness sake, vote for the issues that are the most important -- not just your little personal pet peeves.  Your children and their children are going to have to live with what we do now.

It's really too bad that so many American's are in denial over the left leaning media. Take a close look at those questions - mostly along traditional divisive lines. Not anything about the key issues we all should be concerned with. You can't tell me that out of 5000 submittals they didn't have anything about how to fix Social Security; how to fix Health Care; Education, exit strategies for Iraq, etc... Liberals hide behind homosexuality, abortion and the other crap. The whole debate was a sham, I didn't like it even before this flap came to the surface.

The Republicans need to understand that they need to rebuild their party before asking the american people to trust them again with the presidency. The party has been fractured and by backing the likes of Rudy Giuliani they have thrown the party platform and their morals in the garbage bin.

I thought the candidates are running for President of all the people. It should not matter what party you belong to if you have a question you want the candidates to answer to make an informed decision on who to vote for. I believe having a variety of people ask questions is good for the american people. I would like to see more of this happen on both sides.

It would be wrong to exclude the general's legitimate question on the Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy. If he is on the Clinton payroll, they should have disclosed the fact, but it's not grounds to prevent him from asking.

What the Republican establlishment candidates are really objecting to is a gay, former officer of significant rank presenting a coherent and thoughtful challenge to them. With all the restrictions, preferences, and caveats attached to these farcical "debates", they don't fit the definition. Similarly, Democratic debates ought not exclude so-called Republican questions or Republican "infiltrators" posing them.

I find it simple to understand.Democrates have debates amoung their canidates, and choose the one they want to run.Republicans do the same. After those choices have been made by their respective parties anyone, anywhere can ask any questions they want. Are Democrates so frightened by the Republicans that they can't abide by that simple concept of a two party system. You'll have your chance to ask anything you want once the Republicans choose their own canidate. Maybe the Republicans made a mistake by not hiding people in the audience with pre planned questions like Hillary.

I find it simple to understand.Democrates have debates amoung their canidates, and choose the one they want to run.Republicans do the same. After those choices have been made by their respective parties anyone, anywhere can ask any questions they want. Are Democrates so frightened by the Republicans that they can't abide by that simple concept of a two party system. You'll have your chance to ask anything you want once the Republicans choose their own canidate. Maybe the Republicans made a mistake by not hiding people in the audience with pre planned questions like Hillary.

I find it simple to understand.Democrates have debates amoung their canidates, and choose the one they want to run.Republicans do the same. After those choices have been made by their respective parties anyone, anywhere can ask any questions they want. Are Democrates so frightened by the Republicans that they can't abide by that simple concept of a two party system. You'll have your chance to ask anything you want once the Republicans choose their own canidate. Maybe the Republicans made a mistake by not hiding people in the audience with pre planned questions like Hillary.

Please.  The republicans are all "up in arms" over a question asked by a citizen who has repeatedly stated that he has not given any money to the Clinton campaign and not done any work for them?  Ha!  

I think their real problem is two-fold: One, they don't have an answer for the question because they remain blinded by their own prejudice and two, they're so used to attended totally staged "talks" by w that they can't deal with the real thing.

Welcome to 2008, cons.  We're waiting.

The question was still valid, despite who asked it! John McCain - you're a good man. Stop being partisan. Be reasonable.

i like mike, any0ne that thinks for themselves would like mike, all you libs like the perverts like the clintons, cigar bill turns laura on.

It is amazing to me that all the focus is on the QUESTION........I could not believe my ears when I heard the ANSWERS..........especially the one about how not allowing gays in the military "protects young, conservative Christians"........where have they been living?   There are many young and old  GAY Christian conservatives who have "come out" themselves or have been "outed".  These guys want to be President, do they read or listen to the news?  They claim there's not "2 America's" but  obviously they're living in a different one than I am!

I have not watched any of the debates since I just do not have much expectation from either side. Especially Republican, do not we think that we have had ENOUGH this REHAbilican party rule after the past 7 years. The rest world has been changed so much. But we got lost in the name of god, terror.... I hope that common sense will prevail here.  

In all fairness, the primaries are about the parties deciding which candidates will represent them in the general election.  As such, it makes sense for the questions in debates to represent concerns and issues within the party.  That is why it doesn't make sense to field questions from other partisans.

That being said, I think the question does in fact represent a growing concern in the GOP which the party has been slow to address: the many faithful GOP members who are themselves gay and desire a fair shake within the party.  

For what it's worth.

I also like barrack obamba, he is my second choice behind huckabee, because he doesnt lie, that s why the dems wont nominate him.

The issue is not whether candidates should have to field tought questions--they get them all the time.  It's whether CNN, by secretly planting the questions and the questioners, can be trusted as a news organization.  By trying to pull this dishonest stunt over on the American people, CNN just confirms what every thinking person already knows--that CNN is just another shameless, pandering tool of the left, completely lacking in integrity.  Anyone remember Dan Rather?

who cares if this guy is partisan. the candidate needs to just answer the question.  look at how different this youtube format was for the republicans vs. the dems.  anyway, none of this really matters.  we all know these debates are rigged and so are the elections.  the democratic process in this country got derailed a long time ago and folks need to wake up and realize that.

McCain's reaction to gays in military issue is proof positive that the Republican Party has been infiltrated by the enemy we fought a World War against, Fascism.  Fascist will always be the enemy of this nation.

A person who is for true democracy would have answered without any problem.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):