CNN, How Does Your Garden Grow?

Catch the Wave!

Also posted at Digital Journal here.

CNN fell down on the job vetting questions for Republican candidates. While the questions were lame, to say the least, the blatant lack of honesty in revealing the identity of the questioners calls into question both CNN’s and the DNC’s moral standards.

We all know the democratic crop of 2008 Presidential hopefuls is lame, to say the least. They will promise anything to anyone, hoping their camp followers will blindly swallow it and vote for them–as their party did with the pie-in-the-sky 2006 elections with promises they haven’t been able to deliver.

And, we all know that with the exception of Fox News, no one else, least of all CNN, even attempts to pretend they are fair and balanced in their reporting. In fact, they most blatantly are not fair and balanced and lean decidedly left.

The Presidential hopefuls (Democratic ones anyway) shake in their tiny shoes at the mere thought of appearing on FOX News and, while stamping their little feet, state they won’t appear on FOX. Because they’re afraid. Back in June, FOX News boss Roger Ailes was quoted as saying,

“The candidates that can’t face Fox, can’t face al-Qaeda. And that’s what’s coming,”

This was in direct response to the Dems fear of facing viewers in a debate on FOX News Network

Now, why would the Dems be afraid to face FOX? After all, don’t they all tout how tough they are and how they’d be so “tough” on terror? So why afraid of FOX?

They are also paranoid.

While the Dems won’t appear on FOX out of fear, the Republicans will appear when and where asked. They may not all be the greatest of candidates (there are several I don’t agree with in many areas) but they certainly aren’t afraid to face a network.

The CNN YouTube debates scheduled for November 28, 2007, were scheduled for Republicans. We are not yet in the general election. Each party has their own debates so constituents can get a “feel” for the candidates and the stand each candidate is taking on issues important to constituents.

It has come out in recent weeks, however, that most of the Dem candidates can’t handle unscripted questions, Hillary Clinton being chief among them. So there have been scandals regarding “plants” at the Dems debates to ask typically “softball” questions of the candidates so they don’t have to struggle so hard to find a believable answer.

They went a step further for the Republican YouTube debates and actually planted several “questioners”, presumably hoping to trip up the candidates with unscripted, potentially embarrassing questions.

The most prominent of these plants was an employee on Hillary’s GLBT council, Ret. Brig. Gen. Keith H. Kerr, a gays in the military lobbyist. What was rather funny, though, was the question regarding don’t ask, don’t tell. A policy implemented by Bubba himself.

Among other “plants” in the CNN garden? “Journey” aka “Paperserenade”–John Edwards supporter (also in love with Anderson Cooper); David Cercone–Barack Obama supporter; LeeAnn Anderson–John Edwards supporter and Pittsburgh Union Activist; Yasmin–former CAIR intern (all of the above courtesy of Michelle Malkin here and here); Adam Florzak–Dick Durbin supporter (courtesy of Power Line.com here); Ted Faturos–former Jane Harman intern; David McMillan–John Edwards supporter (both of the above exposed at Jason Coleman.com here and here). More are coming in periodically.

Oh yes, my sources are blogs. I have found blogs generally have the scoop before the newspapers.

Now, why is this such a big deal?

Several reasons. One, this was a Republican debate. It was not a general election debate. You don’t see the Republicans invading dem debates. So, props for general rudeness to the dems.

Two, the whole idea was an attempt to embarrass the Republicans. Well, it was shown no matter how ridiculous the question, the Republicans at least make an effort to think on their feet. They don’t have to be in total control with each individual question. It also shows the Republicans aren’t afraid to go onto any particular network based on a paranoid delusion of perceived bias.

Three, the dishonesty of it. It actually would have been okay if the questioners had said something along the lines of, “I’m so and so, I’m a democrat and I’m leaning towards this democratic candidate. How would you win my vote or persuade me to vote for you based upon this question”.

That, at least, would have been honest on the questioner’s part.

But there was no honesty on these questioners’ parts. It was a complete attempt to deceive. And CNN was complicit in this deception. That much was obvious from Cooper’s lack of surprise when Kerr’s actual status was pointed out to him by Bill Bennett.

Nor would CNN be attempting to justify this deception as they are now trying to do with so called “damage control”–with quite so much defensiveness (here in Politico’s “CNN Defends Vetting of Debate Questioners).

Dishonesty and paranoia–thy name is 2008 Democratic Presidential candidate.

Advertisements

CNN, How Does Your Garden Grow?

Catch the Wave!

Also posted at Digital Journal here.

CNN fell down on the job vetting questions for Republican candidates. While the questions were lame, to say the least, the blatant lack of honesty in revealing the identity of the questioners calls into question both CNN’s and the DNC’s moral standards.

We all know the democratic crop of 2008 Presidential hopefuls is lame, to say the least. They will promise anything to anyone, hoping their camp followers will blindly swallow it and vote for them–as their party did with the pie-in-the-sky 2006 elections with promises they haven’t been able to deliver.

And, we all know that with the exception of Fox News, no one else, least of all CNN, even attempts to pretend they are fair and balanced in their reporting. In fact, they most blatantly are not fair and balanced and lean decidedly left.

The Presidential hopefuls (Democratic ones anyway) shake in their tiny shoes at the mere thought of appearing on FOX News and, while stamping their little feet, state they won’t appear on FOX. Because they’re afraid. Back in June, FOX News boss Roger Ailes was quoted as saying,

“The candidates that can’t face Fox, can’t face al-Qaeda. And that’s what’s coming,”

This was in direct response to the Dems fear of facing viewers in a debate on FOX News Network

Now, why would the Dems be afraid to face FOX? After all, don’t they all tout how tough they are and how they’d be so “tough” on terror? So why afraid of FOX?

They are also paranoid.

While the Dems won’t appear on FOX out of fear, the Republicans will appear when and where asked. They may not all be the greatest of candidates (there are several I don’t agree with in many areas) but they certainly aren’t afraid to face a network.

The CNN YouTube debates scheduled for November 28, 2007, were scheduled for Republicans. We are not yet in the general election. Each party has their own debates so constituents can get a “feel” for the candidates and the stand each candidate is taking on issues important to constituents.

It has come out in recent weeks, however, that most of the Dem candidates can’t handle unscripted questions, Hillary Clinton being chief among them. So there have been scandals regarding “plants” at the Dems debates to ask typically “softball” questions of the candidates so they don’t have to struggle so hard to find a believable answer.

They went a step further for the Republican YouTube debates and actually planted several “questioners”, presumably hoping to trip up the candidates with unscripted, potentially embarrassing questions.

The most prominent of these plants was an employee on Hillary’s GLBT council, Ret. Brig. Gen. Keith H. Kerr, a gays in the military lobbyist. What was rather funny, though, was the question regarding don’t ask, don’t tell. A policy implemented by Bubba himself.

Among other “plants” in the CNN garden? “Journey” aka “Paperserenade”–John Edwards supporter (also in love with Anderson Cooper); David Cercone–Barack Obama supporter; LeeAnn Anderson–John Edwards supporter and Pittsburgh Union Activist; Yasmin–former CAIR intern (all of the above courtesy of Michelle Malkin here and here); Adam Florzak–Dick Durbin supporter (courtesy of Power Line.com here); Ted Faturos–former Jane Harman intern; David McMillan–John Edwards supporter (both of the above exposed at Jason Coleman.com here and here). More are coming in periodically.

Oh yes, my sources are blogs. I have found blogs generally have the scoop before the newspapers.

Now, why is this such a big deal?

Several reasons. One, this was a Republican debate. It was not a general election debate. You don’t see the Republicans invading dem debates. So, props for general rudeness to the dems.

Two, the whole idea was an attempt to embarrass the Republicans. Well, it was shown no matter how ridiculous the question, the Republicans at least make an effort to think on their feet. They don’t have to be in total control with each individual question. It also shows the Republicans aren’t afraid to go onto any particular network based on a paranoid delusion of perceived bias.

Three, the dishonesty of it. It actually would have been okay if the questioners had said something along the lines of, “I’m so and so, I’m a democrat and I’m leaning towards this democratic candidate. How would you win my vote or persuade me to vote for you based upon this question”.

That, at least, would have been honest on the questioner’s part.

But there was no honesty on these questioners’ parts. It was a complete attempt to deceive. And CNN was complicit in this deception. That much was obvious from Cooper’s lack of surprise when Kerr’s actual status was pointed out to him by Bill Bennett.

Nor would CNN be attempting to justify this deception as they are now trying to do with so called “damage control”–with quite so much defensiveness (here in Politico’s “CNN Defends Vetting of Debate Questioners).

Dishonesty and paranoia–thy name is 2008 Democratic Presidential candidate.

THE ANT AND THE GRASSHOPPER–YESTERDAY AND TODAY

This came to my email courtesy of Cyper Pastor at Do the RIGHT Thing (here: http://dotherightthing.townhall.com/). Humorous, but unfortunately way too true.


OLD VERSION:

The ant works hard in the withering heat all summer long, building his house and laying up supplies for the winter.


The grasshopper thinks the ant is a fool and laughs and dances and plays the summer away.

Come winter, the ant is warm and well fed.

The grasshopper has no food or shelter, so he dies out in the cold.

MORAL OF THE STORY: Be responsible for yourself!

********************


MODERN VERSION:

The ant works hard in the withering heat all summer long, building his house and laying up supplies for the winter.

The grasshopper thinks the ant is a fool and laughs and dances and plays the summer away.

Come winter, the shivering grasshopper calls a press conference and demands to know why the ant should be allowed to be warm and well fed while others are cold and starving.

CBS, NBC, PBS, CNN, and ABC show up to provide pictures of the shivering grasshopper next to a video of the ant in his comfortable home with a table filled with food.

America is stunned by the sharp contrast. How can this be, that in a country of such wealth, this poor grasshopper is allowed to suffer so?

Kermit the Frog appears on Oprah with the grasshopper and everybody cries when they sing, “It’s Not Easy Being Green.”

Jesse Jackson stages a demonstration in front of the ant’s house where the news stations film the group singing, “We shall Overcome.” Jesse then has the group kneel down to pray to God for the grasshopper’s sake.

Nancy Pelosi & John Kerry exclaim in an interview with Larry King that the ant has gotten rich off the back of the grasshopper, and both call for an immediate tax hike on the ant to make him pay his fair share.

Finally, the EEOC drafts the Economic Equity and Anti-Grasshopper Act retroactive to the beginning of the summer. The ant is fined for failing to hire a proportionate number of green bugs and, having nothing left to pay his retroactive taxes, his home is confiscated by the government.

Hillary gets her old law firm to represent the grasshopper in a defamation suit against the ant, and the case is tried before a panel of federal judges that Bill Clinton appointed from a list of single-parent welfare recipients.

The ant loses the case.

The story ends as we see the grasshopper finishing up the last bits of the ant’s food while the government house he is in, which just happens to be the ant’s old house, crumbles around him because he doesn’t maintain it.

The ant has disappeared in the snow.

The grasshopper is found dead in a drug related incident and the house, now abandoned, is taken over by a gang of spiders who terrorize the once peaceful neighborhood.

MORAL OF THE STORY: Be careful how you vote