More Thoughts on the “debate” Last Night

I’ve spent the last several hours, devouring everything I can get my hands on from the news sites, and the blogs, about the obviously planted questions from the Democrats last night.

….and that’s my conclusion, I don’t think there’s any question that these people were planted, quite intentionally, by the members of the Democrat party, and possibly by the party itself.

The question comes up as to whether or not CNN had a hand in it. In answer, I will state for the record that I’m totally with Joe Scarborough on this one. I don’t think there’s a chance in hell, that CNN didn’t know what was going on.

Perhaps, however, the best way to approach this is to take the dangerous step of taking CNN at their word, and assume that CNN really didn’t know what the story was and these people just magically slipped by whatever screening process was in place, thus defeating their defense. How can we do that? First, by revealing that their lame excuse making doesn’t make them look any better than if they were to admit they were operating under the orders of Howard Dean.

To examine this fully, let’s make the assumption, unlikely as this would be, that CNN took (what was that figure? oh, yeah…) 5000 submitted questions. Let’s assume further, that they spent a good deal of time going over these 5000 submissions, and whittled it down to what we saw on the screen last night.

Ask yourself; what would it have been about the questions or the questioners, that attracted the attention of the workers at CNN, in the process that CNN tells us happened?

Well, consider the quality of the questions involved. Almost universally, they treated the people on the stage last night, as if they were suspect in some way. As we’ve discussed here, many times, the mainstream media has always viewed Republicans in general, and conservatives, in particular, as being somewhere in the neighborhood of sewer rats on the evolutionary scale. In short, they were looking for questions which made the assumption of that point of view.

No surprise, then, that CNN should decide that point of view would be best reflected by people on record as supporting various Democrats.

So, frankly, even if you take CNN at their word, they come out of this looking like the incompetent hacks their ratings say they are.

Like a friend of mine used to say “Looks ain’t deceivin'”

Addendum: (David L)

Brian Maloney, Radio Equalizier, shows why there good ones and then there is the Great One.  The good ones discuss the Clinton News Network bias after the fact.  The Great One, Rush Limbaugh, discussed the bias on 20 July of this year:

RUSH: They are not trying to avoid talking to you. By the way, they’re going to try to reschedule this thing for December, is what I’m hearing. I never said the Republicans shouldn’t do it because of bias. We all know there’s bias in the Drive-By Media. We all know that CNN’s going to choose questions based on their agenda, based on what they get submitted to them. We know there’s going to be bias.

And how.  Score one for Rush.

Hat Tip: Hot Air.

Addendum ][:

Powerline has yet more Democrat plants.

It’s starting to look like there was nobody on the air last night that wasn’t a plant.