Bit and I had a disagreement of the CNN debate debacle. Bit argued that CNN’s screening process was faulty. I argued that the only thing a whore screen is the money.
Gaius, Blue Crab Boulevard [1], shows that CNN’s plants were no accident, but rather a design.
With steaming heaps of all-natural, bovine end-product, piled high and deep [2]. The folks at CNN are lashing out at bloggers and others who dare to question them on their packing the CNN/YouTube debate with questions from Democratic party operatives, sympathizers or activists.
Sadly for CNN, defending the questioners themselves for asking good question fails, because the questions themselves were lame. Fred Barnes, Weekly Standard [3]:
But it was chiefly the questions and who asked them that made the debate so appalling. By my recollection, there were no questions on health care, the economy, trade, the S-chip children’s health care issue, the “surge” in Iraq, the spending showdown between President Bush and Congress, terrorist surveillance, or the performance of the Democratic Congress.
Instead there were questions – ones moderator Anderson Cooper kept insisting had required a lot of time and effort by the questioners – on the Confederate flag, Mars, Giuliani’s rooting for the Boston Red Sox in the World Series, whether Ron Paul might run as an independent for president, and the Bible. The best response to these questions was Romney’s refusal to discuss what the Confederate flag represents. Fred Thompson discussed it.
Eric Earling, Sound Politics [4], provides the perfect wrap:
It’s easy to see why CNN’s producers liked their questions. It’s because those questions echoed the partisan prejudices of CNN producers.
Amen.