Dems/ CNN guilty of what they accuse GOP/ FOX of being.

[AURaptor 1,126]

I've answered this already, whether you want to accept my answer or not, is something else. It matters if a campaign worker for Obama or a devout Edwards supporter asks a loaded question when they're not being honest about who they are and who they are supporting.

[TexasTiger 13,029]

It's seems pretty clear, Al, that like most Right-wing whining, this one is substance-free!

[AURaptor 1,126]

It's seems pretty clear, Al, that like most Right-wing whining, this one is substance-free!

No, you just ignore that what you wish wasn't true. Typical of the Left.

[TexasTiger 13,029]

It's seems pretty clear, Al, that like most Right-wing whining, this one is substance-free!

No, you just ignore that what you wish wasn't true. Typical of the Left.

It's true that a handful of democrats asked some pretty predictable questions at a CNN Youtube debate. The facts aren't really in dispute.

[AURaptor 1,126]

It's seems pretty clear, Al, that like most Right-wing whining, this one is substance-free!

No, you just ignore that what you wish wasn't true. Typical of the Left.

It's true that a handful of democrats asked some pretty predictable questions at a CNN Youtube debate. The facts aren't really in dispute.

They kept hidden who they really were. That's relevent, yet you want to ignore the facts.

[DKW 86 7,441]

I need to correct myself. The plants at the Dem Debate werent Republicans, they were all from Hillary's camp. Funny, but so were most of the ones at the Republican Debate.

Things that make you go hhhmmm......

[Tiger Al 0]

I've answered this already, whether you want to accept my answer or not, is something else. It matters if a campaign worker for Obama or a devout Edwards supporter asks a loaded question when they're not being honest about who they are and who they are supporting.

You've never explained what was wrong with the questions in your opinion. TexasTiger asked you in post #5 and you answered, "Really, you should take the time to read the news more often. It wasn't ONE specific question, but a series of questions asked," in post #6. In #8 he asked you "what series of questions" were unfair. Your response in #9 is a tangent on the person (Kerr) asking the question and why he didn't ask the Democrats, too. (This was later explained) In post #28, I asked you what was wrong with Kerr's question and you never responded.

The next time you did respond to me was in post #33 where you try to steer back to the questioners and not the questions. In #34 I asked you, again, what was wrong with Kerr's question and you responded in #35 that he should've been asking Hillary Clinton, but, you still never explained what was wrong with the question. In post #32 I provided a link to a bill o'reilly interview with Kerr in which this same question was asked and answered.

In post #47 I again ask you to tell me what was wrong with the questions. Your response in #48 was, "We've already sang this verse." Still, no explanation as to what you find wrong with the questions. Finally, in post #50 I ask you for the umpteenth time what is wrong with the questions and your response, in #51 was, "I've answered this already, whether you want to accept my answer or not, is something else."

As of this posting you've yet to answer that one...simple...question. And that question really goes to the heart of this debate format; The questions. Not the questioners. You, AFTiger and, now, David, want to argue that CNN/youtube somehow breached the public trust by allowing perceived "Democrat operatives," "union activists" and/or "campaign workers" to ask a question of the republican candidate to become the President of the United States of all Americans.

The rules of the contest stated that it was open to anyone. The only request by CNN/youtube for purposes of context was for the submissions to include name and hometown. According to CNN, the QUESTIONS were vetted for accuracy because the QUESTIONS were the heart of the debate, not the questioners. There was never any requirement for either debate that the videos submitted were to be only from affiliates of the party participating. You all are manufacturing a controversy where none exists. I realize that for the last seven years Democrats have been largely excluded from the legislative process and now it appears that we aren't allowed in the electoral process, either.

I've provided links to the Democratic debate because you all have claimed that the questions to them were all easy ones as opposed to the ones the republicans had. Nonsense. There were questions asked of them that were clearly not partisan questions or partisan questioners, but, none of you has a problem with that. The reason there have been no claims of "gop plants" is because we understood that the format and the debate was open to everyone. It's a moot point. It seems that if someone asks your precious candidates a tough question or reasonably questions their ability, the reaction is to conduct a background check, get a credit report and then launch a public smear campaign against that person instead of confronting the issue that he or she raised.

Raptor, in your first post you asked 'where's the outrage' at CNN for 'conning' America with its' 'bias.' The sum of your 'outrage' has been your claim that CNN allowed 'plants' to pose 'gotcha-type' questions to the republican candidates. You've utterly failed to show how ANY of the questions were unfair. Only parroting Michele Malkin that it was 'unfair' to let certain people ask these fair, mostly benign questions. Yet, when an instance of REAL, WILLFUL and PROVEN misrepresentation has occurred, your response has been to defend, minimize and excuse it. Such was the case in the fake FEMA news conference thread.

But, in response to your claims on this subject, I've already said, as has CNN, that Kerr shouldn't have been used because he's on the steering committee. Not because his question was unfair, but, because I realize the republicans proclivity to destroy the messenger to avoid the message. If CNN thought the question was valid and wanted to use it, they should've used someone elses video. They admitted as much. Their claim is that Kerr was vetted to make sure his claim of military service was accurate and that he hadn't donated money to any campaigns. He passed on both counts. Should CNN have checked him out further? Maybe, maybe not. I still go back to his question. Was it a fair question? Given his background, I believe it was. Was it a damaging question for any of the republicans to answer? It was for Romney, given his recent 'conversion' to conservatism. Giuliani didn't answer it. For the others who did answer it, it was another chance to give a wink and a nod to the base.

So, if Kerr WAS there as some kind of 'plant' as you insist, it seems to me that it was a failed opportunity since his question wasn't very hurtful or helpful to the republicans, which is why I keep asking you what was wrong with the question. I'm sure if the goal of CNN had been to discredit or hurt any or all of the candidates they could've come up with better videos than Kerr's or Journey's or the mother who asked about lead-based toys couldn't they?

I'd still like to know; What was wrong with the questions?

[AURaptor 1,126]

You've wasted an awful lot of time w/ your last post, Tiger Al. And you keep asking the same questions over and over. Seriously, it's beyond tedious. I'm moving on now.

[AFTiger 282]

[AURaptor 1,126]

^ Period. Dot. Bingo.

[TexasTiger 13,029]

You've wasted an awful lot of time w/ your last post, Tiger Al. And you keep asking the same questions over and over. Seriously, it's beyond tedious. I'm moving on now.

Thanks for admitting what I have long said. Any reply to you is waste of time.

[AFTiger 282]

You've wasted an awful lot of time w/ your last post, Tiger Al. And you keep asking the same questions over and over. Seriously, it's beyond tedious. I'm moving on now.

Thanks for admitting what I have long said. Any reply to you is waste of time.

TT is right. All replies to TigerAL have been a waste.

[TexasTiger 13,029]

You've wasted an awful lot of time w/ your last post, Tiger Al. And you keep asking the same questions over and over. Seriously, it's beyond tedious. I'm moving on now.

Thanks for admitting what I have long said. Any reply to you is waste of time.

TT is right. All replies to TigerAL have been a waste.

AFTiger illustrating his lack of reading comprehension and why engaging him is always a waste of time.

[AFTiger 282]

You've wasted an awful lot of time w/ your last post, Tiger Al. And you keep asking the same questions over and over. Seriously, it's beyond tedious. I'm moving on now.

Thanks for admitting what I have long said. Any reply to you is waste of time.

TT is right. All replies to TigerAL have been a waste.

AFTiger illustrating his lack of reading comprehension and why engaging him is always a waste of time.

Sorry. I thought you had come to your senses. Stop wasting my time.