It is better to keep your mouth closed and let people think you are a fool than to open it and remove all doubt.-- Mark Twain
And so it goes with CNN in last night’s debate.
Conservatives have always said there is a liberal bias in the drive by media, but liberals counter and say, “There is no such bias.” well last night, as Al Gore would say, “The debate is over.”
In the last Democrat debate by CNN, every one of the undecided voters were plants as shown in this video. I guess none were really undecided.
Okay, so that was a Democrat debate. Now we have a GOP Youtube debate, and you think CNN would have learned from the first debate. Within seconds of this video, and with a simple google search, Kevin Aylward of www.wizbangblog.com discovers a Democrat plant.
From the style of the question, it was obvious he was a plant, obvious to anyone but CNN. Retired gay general Brigadier Keith Kerr is affiliated with the Hillary campaign, and he is also on Kerry’s steering committee for gays, lesbians and transsexuals.
His question was concerning the “Don’t ask don’t tell” policy of the military. Do they forget? That was a policy instituted by the liberal's beloved saint Bill Clinton.
Bill Bennett mentioned the plant on CNN. CNN said the General had lied to them. CNN said the general said he was a Republican. So, if that is true, then CNN is incompetent for not doing the proper vetting. The pajama media sitting at home using just simple google searches finds the general pop up numerous times. On the rebroadcast, CNN skipped his question.
But does it stop there no – with more investigation (and not much at that,) more plants are discovered.
As the night drags on, bloggers continue to find plants.
The Free Republic finds these plants
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1932078/posts
Michelle Malkin www.michellemalkin.com notes about the weeding out of Keith Kerr on the rebroadcast. “Keep pulling those weeds.” Of course, if they pulled all the weeds, we would have 15 minutes of commercials and no debate. Would that be a bad thing?
And then there was the guy who asked a question at both youtube debates. What are the odds of that? This is at National Review On Line.
The upside to this debate was it exposed the liberal bias in the drive by media. And as Al Gore succinctly points out, “The debate is over.”
Now on to some of the more salient points of the debate.
Why in every GOP CNN debate, does there have to be some seemingly crazed lunatic toting an AK-47 or cocking a rifle and asking a question about gun control?
On waterboarding – Mitt Romney did not make his point very well. He went along the White House line of not disclosing what we consider torture (with which I agree). “This is not 24” scowled McCain while refusing to look Romney in the face. It was more the facial expression Romney gave McCain. His facial expression (ie: his body language) basically said, “I am talking with a guy that was tortured so he knows more about this.” The one incontrovertible fact was that Romney was uncomfortable talking about torture to a man who was tortured. Romney’s facial expression made him lose that round.
We all know that McCain is a hero for enduring what he did during the Vietnam years, but you don’t have to be tortured to believe that if waterboarding is going to save lives, then it is justified. (We dropped two atom bombs on Japan to save American lives.) He also keeps referring to the fact it’s a violation of the Geneva Convention. Well first, the Geneva convention applies to a uniformed military, not terrorists or insurgents in civilian clothes.
Mccain is right on the war on terror, but wrong on so many other issues.
On Illegal immigration and Sanctuary cities – Guliani tried to use a phrase to elicit a chuckle from the audience. It didn’t work. When Romney accused Guliani of using New York as a sanctuary city, (which Guliani denied), he said that Romney lived in a sanctuary mansion, because he had illegals working for him. These workers were contracted out, and the contractor is responsible for determining who is or who isn’t illegal, not Romney.
This exchange between Romney and Guliani was somewhat petty.
It is troubling that Guliani did operate New York as a sanctuary city, and he calls for a virtual fence instead of a real fence on the border between the United States and Mexico. I heard one talk show host comment, "maybe they should take down the fence in front of the white house and put up a virtual fence." He is in favor of a national ID card for non-citizens. That is good, but I hope he will not be another Bush when it comes to immigration. The problem is I still believe he is the only one who has a chance against Hillary.
Why doesn't Guliani just come out and say, "Although I was not as hard as I was on immigration in New York, my views changed after 9/11, and I now believe that our security is paramount." That would end the discussion. People's views change especially after some dramatic event such as 9/11. Of course, it's too late for that strategy. Changes in views, however, can't be suspect as Romney's flip-flop on abortion seems to be because of political expediency.
Would Jesus support the death penalty? What a stupid question! Another obvious plant. Read Romans written by the apostle Paul. From Romans, one could deduce the death penalty is left up to the state.
Do you believe this book? Another plant lifts up the Bible, the obvious assertion being "do the candidates believe the literal interpretation of the bible?" One of the reasons for Europe’s decline is because Europe has become devoid of faith. They live for their 35 hour work week and their social benefits. Unless there is a principle for which one is willing to die, (not a work week), a nation will not survive. Islam is taking over Europe because Muslims believe it is a religious duty to convert or conquer the Infidel. Europe is on a downward spiral. In Europe, churches are empty, and relativism has replaced Christianity. I hope we are not headed in the same direction.
Farm Subsidies – Both Guliani and Romney were for subsidies because they said other countries subsidize agricultural products. Of course,subsidies destroy the foundation of a free market. Alan Greenspan talks about a bill in May of 2001 regarding a 200 billion dollar handout on cotton and grain that reversed hard-fought earlier initiatives to scale back agricultural subsidies, and heaped new subsidies on everything from sugar to chickpeas. It passed. The remedy of course would have been a presidential veto. Farm subsidies today are in large part to enhance the ethanol fraud to make ethanol seem cheaper than it really is.
Black on black crime – Why is their black on black crime? Why do blacks kill blacks? Isn’t it obvious? 60% of Blacks are born out of wedlock, and the father’s leave. Stop that and you stop black on black crime. Of course, this was another obvious plant.
Here is my recommendation for the next Republican debate. The candidates should boycott CNN and have their debates on Fox News. They should use conservative moderators such as Michelle Malkin, Sean Hannity, Brit Hume or other well known conservative bloggers or commentators.
CNN spun this debate to make Republicans look bad. They do not understand conservatism nor do they understand what is good for this country. CNN plants known activists they call "undecided voters" and spins the debate towards issues that are not important to Republicans. Much of the debate was on silly questions about who to charge with a crime on abortion, gays in the military, etc. If there were an issue important to Republicans, it was worded in a way that gave it a liberal spin. There was no question on the war on terror except for torture and with a liberal spin. Other inane questions included: Do you believe in this book (referring to the bible)? while some obvious planted atheist flails a bible in the air or what would Jesus do (with reference to the death penalty)? by another obvious plant.
Liberals can't even figure out why someone would be pro-life and still be for the death penalty. When you can't comprehend even that, how can liberals presume to ask the more complicated questions that concern Republicans.
Questions should be asked by serious Republicans who understand the essence of what they are asking. We do not need any more inane debates like the Democrats seem to enjoy.
Why can Republicans debate on a CNN forum or on a Fox Forum, but the Democrats refuse to debate on Fox? It should be obvious.
Questions need to be hard hitting and not softball. Questions such as the diamond/Pearl question posed to Hillary Clinton in the last debate (which by the way was not the question the individual wanted to ask) are just a reflection of the idiocy driven by nescience of the average voter.
And on one final note. I learned what a log cabin Republican was last night. I had never heard that before. The log cabin Republican questioner was posed by a Barack Obama supporter.
