CNN's Corrupt Debate

CNN hosted the Republican presidential debate in Florida last Wednesday. Once again, the YouTube format belittled the gravity of the decision the voters will make in 2008.

It did serve to highlight the generational technology gap. Most of the questions came from the computer savvy age group that is still fighting acne. The honest answer to about 85% of the questions they asked: Who cares?

Evidently these junior members of society aren’t concerned with Iran, healthcare, the environment, education and energy, as these subjects were never addressed. In fairness to the nation’s youth, the possibility exists that CNN scraped such questions to shield the Democratic candidates’ positions from comparison.

Beside the omission of vital topics, there was plenty of evidence which indicated CNN’s presentation was motivated by partisan politics—its promotion of the secular progressive agenda.

The most blatant example was not the forum provided General Keith Kerr to preach the leftwing’s pro gay and lesbian agenda. This member of Senator Clinton’s advisory staff received more airtime than some of the Republican candidates.

The moderator, Anderson Cooper, denied any knowledge of the General’s allegiance to the Clinton camp. If true, then CNN and Mr. Cooper—a liberal zealot—must broadcast from another planet, as the General is a major promoter of homosexuals serving openly in the US military.

CNN’s agenda was flushed from cover during the post analysis of the debate. It had assembled and monitored a group of “undecided Republicans” to see if the responses of any candidate had crystallized their support.

No minds were swayed during the exchange. The second person interviewed still supported John Edwards. Who knew that Senator Edwards was a Republican?

Were any Republicans selected for this undecided roster? The answer is irrelevant. This woman’s devotion to John Edwards demonstrated that CNN doesn’t know how to screen participants, or packed the assembly with Democratic shills.

In either case, her statement cannot be construed as a candid mistake or an embarrassing oversight. The footage of the woman’s Edwards response was a taped replay—not live—and thus was deliberately selected by the producers for the viewing audience.

The only reasonable conclusion: CNN wanted the debate audience to believe that “undecided Republicans” are leaning Democratic.

In this polluted environment there are no winners—only losers. The big losers were the millions of Americans who tuned in and wasted their time watching CNN’s leftwing propaganda machine corrupt the debate. How sad is that . . . ?