CNN fails to disclose questioner’s support for Hillary.
CNN fails to disclose questioner’s support for Hillary.
Last night during the Republican presidential candidates’ YouTube debate, CNN failed to disclose that a questioner, Retired Brig. Gen. Keith Kerr, who asked about gays and lesbians serving in the military, is actually a co-chair of “Veterans and Military Retirees for Hillary Committee” and a steering member of “LGBT Americans for Hillary.” (See the question here.) CNN Senior Vice President and Executive Producer of the debate, David Bohrman, later acknowledged the network’s error:
We regret this, and apologize to the Republican candidates. We never would have used the General’s question had we known that he was connected to any presidential candidate.
Phil Singer, a spokesman for the Clinton campaign, told Raw Story: “[Kerr] is not a campaign employee and was not acting on behalf of the campaign.”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
First and foremost, the Gen. is an american citizen and has a right to ask any candidate their stance on any topic. Why shouldn’t candidates have to answer uncomfortable questions? This is a union, not a partisan love fest.
November 29th, 2007 at 9:50 amJust one more example of how the MSM is choosing our choices for us. It’s time to vote for the write in cantidate “none of the above”. If enough people do that maybe it will sink in. But I doubt it.
November 29th, 2007 at 9:51 amWhen has any candidate stayed within the “time limit”? The Gen. is a living example that gays in the military are not detrimental to the forces. It didn’t matter how much time the candidates got anyway. Romney would have just twisted in the wind more.
Anderson Cooper asked the Gen. if he thought his question was answered. it was not.
November 29th, 2007 at 9:52 amGood.
Non-factor anyway as these NONE of these idiots has a snowball’s chance in hell of being elected.
November 29th, 2007 at 9:52 amNo disclosure? Too bad. All questions are acceptable except indecency.
November 29th, 2007 at 10:00 amI stand corrected Wilco & Squeege.
I didn’t realize Kerr was ‘both men’.
OTOH, it’s good Mitt supports ‘don’t ask, don’t smell’.
November 29th, 2007 at 10:00 amBohrman today: “We never would have used the General’s question had we known that he was connected to any presidential candidate.”
Bohrman, recently interviewed:
Q: What’s the process for checking these YouTube questioners and their affiliations?
A: “If it’s a loaded question, we’ll click back and check…some need vetting, and we’ll do that.â€
“We’re doing the best we can…but if a question is interesting on its face, it almost doesn’t matter.â€
http://www.townhall.com/blog/g/2551a39c-3b72-4215-a088-b14365277b9d
Hmmm.
November 29th, 2007 at 10:01 amWho in your opinion does?
Comment by cold_hard_left
Unfortunately, Hill’reh.
But frankly, I really couldn’t care less what you think.
November 29th, 2007 at 10:02 amI should add, I think Bohrman is flat wrong about nixing a question just because the questioner is affiliated to another campaign. But not disclosing the affiliation is a problem, especially because it diverts attention from the candidates’ answers.
November 29th, 2007 at 10:07 amespecially because it diverts attention from the candidates’ answers.
Comment by Dumb_Fox
You mean the candidates answers TODAY.
I don’t watch so-called “debates”. I don’t believe in electing the best liar, which is all a debate is, window dressing for the sheeple.
November 29th, 2007 at 10:11 amIt wasn’t a real debate anyway. If it had been a real debate, there would have been real candidates.
November 29th, 2007 at 10:11 amI was hoping for an answer along these lines:
Yes, they said the same thing about minorities and women and were proven wrong. To not allow them to serve, or to continue the policy of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell is the view of a bigot.
But then I remembered it’s the Republican debate.
November 29th, 2007 at 10:12 amAre supporters of presidential candidates not citizens entitled to their Constitutional rights as well? By that tenuous logic, luvable, furry ol’ Grover should have been excised as well. He’s not just a supporter of President Bush; his lips are so intimately connected to Dubya’s ass that he’s often confused with a boil.
And yes, I know Bush is not a candidate; I appreciate the attention to semantics around here.
November 29th, 2007 at 10:12 amApparantly, Republicans cannot answer questions posed by anyone who is not another Republican.
One can only assume that they might be asked questions that will make then think, which hurts the GOP brain.
November 29th, 2007 at 10:13 amThe General didn’t just “ask a question.†He asked a question via a YouTube video, but was then allowed to give a lengthy follow-up speech when he appeared live at the debate and was handed a microphone. When that microphone cut off, the host gave him another and allowed him to speak for longer than the candidates themselves were allowed to respond.
Comment by cold_hard_left — November 29, 2007 @ 9:48 am
And shouldn’t happen in CHL’s fascist states of ‘murka, right, CHL? only those questions making hte lies of the right look good shiould be asked, and no American citizen, especially a General, should be allowed to speak, ever! Good job, CHL, perhaps our nym is more appropriate if it describes you better. How about “Closetted Hitler Lover”? that sounds like you.
November 29th, 2007 at 10:13 amt wasn’t a real debate anyway. If it had been a real debate, there would have been real candidates.
Comment by Bush is a four letter word — November 29, 2007 @ 10:11 am
who wouldn’t have been afraid of real questions from a real General.
November 29th, 2007 at 10:14 am#16 – “But then I remembered it’s the Republican debate.” Comment by Squegeeboo — November 29, 2007 @ 10:12 am
Yeah, they have to continue spouting the “party line”. Can’t have an original thought, that wouldn’t be prudent. Not at this juncture. ;-)
November 29th, 2007 at 10:15 amThey let Grover Norquist ask a question.
November 29th, 2007 at 10:16 amThis isn’t a debate… its a series of talking points bounced back and forth off storefront manniquins. And anytime anything of real substance or genuine interest pops up, the ‘moderator’ is there to stomp it back down into the mass of pablum that is the mainstream media today.
November 29th, 2007 at 10:17 amAt least CNN has acknowledged the error, which is more than one would ever expect from Fox. And please note that ThinkProgress has posted this, in spite of the troll’s assertions that TP is a Clinton project.
The pathetic whining about how certain questions were not “acceptable” is typical of the cowards on the Right. Boo-hoo! It wasn’t that long ago that the same people were kvetching about Obama and his ears: “If he can’t handle that, how can he be president?”
If a panel full of Republics can handle a few awkward questions, how can they expect to run the country?
November 29th, 2007 at 10:19 amAll this kerfluffle about who asked the question, what was or was not disclosed about the questioner, and if the questioner was a mole distracts from the obvious — was it a good question?
I am starting to think that allowing the “people” to ask questions does little to add anything positive and only serves to give people like cold_hard_left a strawman to play with (picking apart the people asking the questions seems to be more fun than commenting on the questions themselves).
If the reason for getting the “people” involved is to get away from softball questions (and we have seen that doesn’t really work), let’s allow the opposition party to select ALL the questions. Not only will that eliminate all flap about “moles”, but it will make for a more interesting exchange — one the public might actually be interested in watching.
November 29th, 2007 at 10:21 amhow can they expect to run the country?
Comment by gummitch — November 29, 2007 @ 10:19 am
Poorly, as they usually do.
November 29th, 2007 at 10:21 am#14 – I could have said it diverts attention from the relevant issue at hand.
I think the basic question – why won’t we let openly gay people serve in the military – is a very important question on a number of levels. But now, instead of discussing this question, the whole media circus is focused on screening of questioners and Hillary campaign tactics, neither of which have anything to do with policy.
That’s the point here, that because of CNN’s lack of diligence, another diversionary story headlines the political news media.
I take your point about skepticism about whatever candidates are saying, but at least if there was a proper policy issue under discussion, the political debate might perhaps be more substantive.
November 29th, 2007 at 10:24 amI guess Retired Brig. Gen. Keith Kerr is a phoney soldier whose question is irrelevant due to his political leanings, eh CHL?
November 29th, 2007 at 10:25 amApparantly, Republicans cannot answer questions posed by anyone who is not another Republican.
One can only assume that they might be asked questions that will make then think, which hurts the GOP brain.
Comment by Democrat Soldier — November 29, 2007 @ 10:13 am
They’d better learn — one of them will get the Republican nomination and then be thrust into the arena with a (gasp!) Democratic opponent.
It’s only going to benefit the Dems if the Republican candidate is ill-equipped to answer anything other than a softball question he has rehearsed the answer for.
November 29th, 2007 at 10:26 amNo, TP has only posted the General as a “questioner,†without mention of the follow-up speech.
Comment by cold_hard_left — November 29, 2007 @ 10:22 am
Here’s a hankie, dear, blow your nose and dry your tears, and grow up.
November 29th, 2007 at 10:29 amneither of which have anything to do with policy.
Comment by Dumb_Fox
Exactly! These thugs put before us as “candidates” don’t want to discuss concrete issues, they don’t want to be labeled, yet they want to represent us?
These are not true leaders, they are power-hungry evil monsters for no other purpose than personal gain and wealth. PERIOD.
November 29th, 2007 at 10:34 amHere’s a hankie, dear, blow your nose and dry your tears, and grow up.
Comment by Lefty Patriot — November 29, 2007 @ 10:29 am
Heh. Crybaby trolls probably just use their sleeves.
November 29th, 2007 at 10:34 amWhat a wonderful country:
Only your supporters can ask you questions.
How does that work?
November 29th, 2007 at 10:46 amI’m not surprised you’d have a hankie at the ready, Lefty, but there are no tears on this end. Just the cold hard truth.
Comment by cold_hard_left — November 29, 2007 @ 10:32 am
i guess the grow up part is too much to ask of a Bush fellator like Cowardly Hitler Lover.
November 29th, 2007 at 10:48 amwhen he was then given the microphone and permitted to give an extended speech, his affiliation with the Clinton campaign should have been disclosed.
Comment by cold_hard_left — November 29, 2007 @ 10:34 am
and what affiliation is that, by the way?
November 29th, 2007 at 10:50 amHe isn’t affiliated with the Hillary Campaign.
November 29th, 2007 at 11:10 amGosh, I guess Norquist should not have been put on You Tube. Why would it matter that he is on a committee that supports Hillary? The question was chosen and screened because it was relevant to an issue of national importance. It does not matter whether the general supported a Democratic candidate. I agree that handing the general a microphone at the debate was more questionable.
November 29th, 2007 at 11:24 amThis entire discussion pisses me off.
Der Furher Bush has only been president for the 24%ers since Day One, and the rest of America has been written off as irrelevant and unimportant.
So the General supports Hillary. Big effing deal. How on earth does that disqualify him – or anyone, for that matter – from asking a question of a Repuke who wants to be the president of ALL Americans…?
That’s just more Repuke exclusionist bullshit.
November 29th, 2007 at 11:25 amYeah? So what?
Grover Nordquist was allowed to do the same.
Next.
November 29th, 2007 at 11:28 amYeah? So what?
Grover Nordquist was allowed to do the same.
Next.
Comment by Leftside Annie — November 29, 2007 @ 11:28 am
The troll has been whining about this for hours.
November 29th, 2007 at 11:31 amWhen selecting the questions perhaps CNN was looking at the questions not who was asking the question.
November 29th, 2007 at 11:33 amGummitch – freakin’ whiny trolls. Eejits all. They’re just so ….so persecuted, aren’t they??
God forbid someone asks a tough question! And yikes, even worse, a non-toady is allowed to speak in the presence of Repukian Royalty – ! My God, the peasants are revolting!!!
Eh. Shut up, ya tittybaby troll.
November 29th, 2007 at 11:34 amGod forbid someone asks a tough question! And yikes, even worse, a non-toady is allowed to speak in the presence of Repukian Royalty – ! My God, the peasants are revolting!!!
Comment by Leftside Annie — November 29, 2007 @ 11:34 am
Be fair, though, Annie. If at the Democratic YouTube debate someone had gotten not only a question but then a microphone at the debate and was pressing the Dems on Gay Marriage or some similiar hot button topic, and then afterward it turned out they were a co-Chair on a Rudy’s campaign, undisclosed, wouldn’t you cry foul?
November 29th, 2007 at 11:57 amAnyone need any further proof that Hillary is the preferred Dem choice of the corporate rulers/MSM (yes, they are one in the same)?
November 29th, 2007 at 11:59 amKeltoi – the Democratic candidates get shit on by the MSM every single day.
And you don’t hear me whining, do you?
November 29th, 2007 at 12:01 pmBesides, you missed this part, evidently:
Phil Singer, a spokesman for the Clinton campaign, told Raw Story: “[Kerr] is not a campaign employee and was not acting on behalf of the campaign.â€
Not a campaign employee, and not acting on behalf of the campaign. To my mind, that makes him just an American citizen asking a question of a candidate for President.
So…where’s the problem?
November 29th, 2007 at 12:04 pmI cannot BELIEVE all this discussion about who is asking questions, who has the right to ask questions, and what is or should be disclosed about the questioners. Kerr! Norquist! Moles! Microphones!
What should really matter is — is it a valid question? And what were the responses to the question?
I find it fascinating that the Republicans have managed to steer the discourse toward being all about the legitimacy of questioners to avoid any discussion of the candidates’ answers.
November 29th, 2007 at 12:14 pmNot a campaign employee, and not acting on behalf of the campaign. To my mind, that makes him just an American citizen asking a question of a candidate for President.
So…where’s the problem?
Comment by Leftside Annie — November 29, 2007 @ 12:04 pm
It isn’t a HUGE problem, but CNN has said that if they knew about his affiliation they would not have used his question and they have apologized.
It is just a full-disclosure/smell test issue.
There is also a delicious irony when you have someone who is a co-chair on a Hillary Clinton campaign committee grilling Republicans about a policy that was instituted by Bill Clinton! Triangulation doesn’t even do it justice, it is more like Double-Bank Shot Pyramidation.
November 29th, 2007 at 12:55 pmKeltoi – as far as I’m concerned the apology from CNN was just as bullshit as the whole who-asked-the-question issue.
I stand by my opinion. Since when should only Repukes get to question other Repukes…?
Since NEVER.
November 29th, 2007 at 1:08 pmThis is from the Hillary for President site. She DID seem to think he was part of her campaign in this excerpt. The whole thing is just another example of the Clinton machine manipulating the process. I know virtually no one here supports her; I think CNN was right to apologize.
“The list also includes prominent LGBT activists who have been leaders on issues important to the community, including three retired members of the military who have worked to overturn the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy, advocates in the fight against HIV/AIDS, and the attorney who argued and won the landmark Supreme Court case, Lawrence v. Texas.
November 29th, 2007 at 1:30 pm“Her commitment to repeal Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, and her steadfast work to improve access to care and treatment for people living with HIV/AIDS are just two of the reasons why I support Hillary Clinton for President,”
I stand by my opinion. Since when should only Repukes get to question other Repukes…?
Since NEVER.
Comment by Leftside Annie — November 29, 2007 @ 1:08 pm
I never said that. Had he simply said, “I am a member of HC’s LGBT committee and I’d like to ask a question” there would be no problem at all. It is the double standard that bugs me – WOULD you be okay with a secret Rudy supporter asking questions at a Dem debate? I mean, the Dems aren’t even willing to go to a debate sponsored by FOX, but Hillary gets to plant questions/questioners at a Repub debate? Is that fair coverage?
And don’t get me wrong, the debates are a charade anyway, they should just do a better job keeping the curtain in place.
November 29th, 2007 at 1:34 pm1)Curmudgeon, further proof blah blah blah…no, it’s not further proof Clinton “controls the MSM”…it’s just your paranoia and made up mind, failing once again…to understand facts.
Do you believe everything you read?
2)ThinkProgress…love this site, but on this post you are misrepresenting facts, and misleading people…is this intentional?
It’s already been discussed…AT LENGTH that Gen Kerr is a registered REPUBLICAN, and a member of the LOG CABIN REPUBLICANS…and records show he has NOT DONATED ANY MONEY to any campaign. The “association with Hillary” is a bipartisan Veterans association; HOW CAN HILLARY GET A FAIR SHOT if even “progressives” buy into the lies, and smears?
This is just one of many…I especially loved the time over the summer where it was blared all over the news (and liberal blogs) that she spoke in a fake accent to pander to southerners…where if you watch the damn clip you can see she only used inflection for a reading from a book; not the whole speech.
LIES…no wonder people hate the Clintons. Personally, anyone who starts out from modest means and works there way into a Presidential election, when you have 50 yo college frat boys who had 16 million in his daddy’s stock at age 13…that takes intelligence and a shrewd ability to plan. People saying Hillary wouldn’t have this chance if she wasn’t married to Bill, prove that misogyny is alive and well, and that’s my point exactly.
So it’s not because she’s not Presidential material and smart enough to get there on her own, it’s because HOW MANY WOMEN HAVE BEEN TAKEN SERIOUSLY as Presidential contenders?
I might disagree with her on some points..but her voting record by and large is Liberal. If you want to be President, or Senator, or anything..you have to play ball. She knows how to play it, and cover her entire rear end…once she gets into office, she’ll be head and shoulders above shrub junior.
November 29th, 2007 at 1:38 pmoops..I do know the difference between “they’re, their, and there” so sorry!
November 29th, 2007 at 1:39 pmKeltoi – again, I think the who-gets-to-ask-the-question thing is a huge problem in itself.
WE ARE ALL AMERICANS – it shouldn’t matter who asks the questions.
November 29th, 2007 at 1:49 pmWell well…why he’s listed as a supporter on her site…that’s interesting.
The fact still remains the question is valid, and republicans screwed up.
Anyone who thinks because the guy’s name is linked to Hillary in whatever loosely tied bond invalidates his question, or makes it look like Hillary is pulling strings is 1)Wasting valuable airtime, 2)has an ax to grind.
The plant in Hillary’s audience before, is completely inappropriate and wrong..and I wrote her campaign a letter about it.
This Kerr thing is a nonissue; it’s personal for him.
November 29th, 2007 at 1:50 pm61 – Josh – you said it better than I did – thanks.
November 29th, 2007 at 2:05 pmI think the 3 of us basically agree.
You have GOT to admit – Hillary vowing to undo Bill’s policies is funny. It is like Bill saying he was againt Iraq from the beginning, like when his wife was voting to authorize it.
I pray this surge for Obama in Iowa is for real and he gets the nomination. I will totally vote for him over anyone the Rs throw up.
November 29th, 2007 at 2:18 pmIf at the Democratic YouTube debate someone had gotten not only a question but then a microphone at the debate and was pressing the Dems on Gay Marriage or some similiar hot button topic, and then afterward it turned out they were a co-Chair on a Rudy’s campaign, undisclosed, wouldn’t you cry foul?
Comment by Keltoi — November 29, 2007 @ 11:57 am
Personally, I’d love to hear what the Democratic candidates have to say on gay marriage (actually, at one debate they were asked that very question). Or any other topic. I’m tired of candidates being asked lukewarm sanitized questions designed to not embarrass them or put them on the spot in any way. This is why I no longer watch these events.
November 29th, 2007 at 2:29 pmI will totally vote for him over anyone the Rs throw up.
Comment by Keltoi — November 29, 2007 @ 2:18 pm
You are suggesting the Repubs are vomiting their candidates? This might explain a few things…
November 29th, 2007 at 2:29 pmFirst, Hillary plants a questioner at her own event, followed by the disclaimer that it was all a misunderstanding and “will never happen again.” Two or three weeks later, a Hillary operative gets planted at a REPUBLICAN event. CNN will say Hillary had nothing to do with it, of course, as will she (assuming the press ever asks her, on which I would not bet a whole lot). Only how did this guy come to CNN’s attention? By chance? And once on their radar screen, how does he get selected to be one of the few out of thousands to ask a question? Also by chance? Some cub CNN reporter just happened to think he was a good pick?
Ha!
This is the same Hillary who engaged in the most flagrant episode of prosecutorial abuse I ever saw in detail [pre-Mike Nifong]. To wit, this is the same Hillary who orchestrated the Billy Dale prosecution, the design of which was not to bring Mr. Dale to account for his misdeeds at the White House Travel Office, there having been none, but to pry him out of there so that she could give the travel business to her pals, the Thomasons.
And this is the Hillary who groans about the loss of integrity and politicization of the Justice Department.
November 29th, 2007 at 2:43 pmKeith Kerr and his life-long partner were my friends and landlords for a number of years. The General has many years of public service – not only in uniform but also as a leader in tertiary education in the Bay Area. He’s an honest man who deeply loves his country and is proud of his military service.
How stupid for this to degenerate into a “who does he support” question. Don’t Ask Don’t Tell is well past its sell-by date. All Americans, gay or straight, should be allowed to serve if that is their choice.
November 29th, 2007 at 2:52 pmYou are suggesting the Repubs are vomiting their candidates? This might explain a few things…
Comment by missmolly — November 29, 2007 @ 2:29 pm
A Tweety “Hah!” to you Missmolly!
November 29th, 2007 at 3:09 pm67 – Normalasf – HEAR-freakin’- HEAR.
November 29th, 2007 at 3:11 pmSo, CNN made a “mistake” in regards to the General and wouldn’t “have used” the question if they knew he was an “adviser” to a Democratic campaign. Fine. Are they willing to declare their mistake in allowing a question from Grover Norquist?
November 29th, 2007 at 4:39 pm