Klein must have been watching a different debate than the rest of us. The "Pearls or Diamonds" question was the LAST one, not the FIRST. His credibility is as questionable as that of the debate.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Of course, there are many people who are ignorant but not stupid. This is mainly due to the media's manipulation and only giving fluff and 'info-tainment' news, government schools which teach political correctness instead of actual subjects, and politicians who exploit the fears of the American people. Sure there are some truely stupid people but they are the minority and this is probably due to being drugged up as children, having a mother who was a drunk or junkie, or some kind of birth defectives related to all the pesticides, chemicals, and engineered foods in the environment.
However the media, politicians, and their corporate,globalist backers like everyone to either:
1) be stupid
2) be ignornant
3) or to believe that "everyone else", the "majority", the "youth of today", or some minority group is either stupid or ignorant so you vote based on fears of "populism" and real "democracy".

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

...so it wouldn't surprise me this Time-Warner outlet is insinuating the NY senator above all others, but did CNN "planted" the questions and told the public to ask specific questions to be directed to specific candidates?
What does it mean that CNN "made her ask" that stupid question? How did CNN forced her to do that? Did CNN told her that after Hilary's response she had to say "...she's the only one shining there", or was this young student just vapid and now regrets losing face with the not-so-impressed-by-bling, and more thoughtful, crowd in her school?
I am not trying to clear CNN's bias. Fox is blunt, CNN is soggy, and neither is deep nor incisive. They are big LCD media (Lowest Common Denominator), but no one gets to have so much power being too stupid, so be very afraid of their agenda.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

CNN lost all journalistic credibility as has most Lame Stream Media. On 9/11 the media discovered a real friend in mass hysteria, so they jumped on the Fear monger train without a look back. Actually they jumped on board when George was selected by the Supremes, cancelling out the will of the people. Remember when CNN had daily shows with live audience participation. That was stopped so the pundits, posing as journalists could take control of the airwaves. They succeed very well.They cut their news gathering personnel to boost profits. More short sighted neocon thinking. But they have gone too far in faking these debates. Let members of the audience ask real questions if they want an honest debate. Advertisers should know that if CNN gets back to basics of reporting, and covering the world, they will have more viewers. You can not sell your stuff if everyone is turning off the prime time news events, to go check out the internet for the truth. And why the hell is Wolf on all the time. Seems they could hire a fresh face with a non grating voice. Try Greg Palast, oh I forgot, they do not have the guts.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

To call these TeeVee shows "debates" is akin to calling a plow mule a thoroughbred racehorse. It is abundantly obvious that CNN has decided who the candidates should be. Edwards, Obama, and Clinton are the triumvirate of legitimacy and, coincidentally I am sure (?), celebrity. At least according to the sages at CNN.

Blitzer is truly pathetic. The "minor" candidates had to fight for time to give answers of any complexity at all before this idiot cut them off. How much time did he waste on the non-issue of Driver's Licenses, a state prerogative not a federal one.

The pasty smiles of the three anointed ones appeared to be slathered on with superglue. These three caused me to wonder more than once if I had tuned into the 700 Club by mistake. Biden is included for comic relief. And the other candidates, none of whom were smiling, are there, evidently, to create the pretense of a political process.

But can anyone be surprised? Where was this media during the most serious event of the this century-the rush to the insane war in Iraq? Where are they in response to the usurpation of the U.S. Constitution besides playing the role of announcers heralding the most recent imperial edict? The utterly pitiful thing is that no one is surprised.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I resent CNN filtering questions from the voters, positioning itself as a buffer between voters and the candidates we are screening. These CNN debates are phony, pretending to be driven by real people when in fact nothing is farther from the truth. Wolf Blitzer's questions were stupid--forcing candidates to answer questions that told me nothing about these people. Corporate journalists have sold out, period. Why not have an array of scholars, intelligentsia, community activists, teachers, truckers? Why not have a lottery, discarding only duplicate questions? Why not include alternate media journalists?

Until the people, us, demand our questions be answered and take this process back so that the candidate elected is accountable to us, we will always get someone like George Bush in office.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

makes me want to avoid their shows at all costs. You've got that fat neocon asshole Glenn Beck, Blitzer, and a couple of other nebishes who always seem to follow the Bush line.

It's ridiculous. Olbermann's the only person on TV today I trust. The rest of them are afraid of this administration and its NeoCon/Opus Dei axis of crooks and liars.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Write these people-CNN, good folks.

To CNN,

After witnessing what your organization staged as a presidential candidates debate on the night of 16 October, and although fully realizing that large amounts of expensive air time needs to be spent on state issued driver's license requirements-yes or no, please-and other pressing concerns, diamonds or pearls?-yes or no. Did no one appreciate that this last question might beg for a nuanced answer? With denim? With basic black? An event held at an anti-poverty conference?

Those concerns aside, I do have to wonder why none of the following made it into Blitzer's repertoire:

1.) Everyone today is seemingly for health care, motherhood, children,and apple pie. What exactly is your health care proposal? In some detail. please. How do you plan on implementing it? Yes or no in this case is not desirable as an answer.

2.) If you are elected president, what form do you envision America's continuing relationship with the current or any future governments of Israel taking?

3.) Do you truly believe that the Israeli-Palestinian impasse is a major factor fueling anti-Americanism and terrorism in the Middle East, and, if so, what would be your plan for addressing the problem of these ongoing hostilities?

4.) Do you believe unqualified support for current Israeli policies contributes to the intransigence on the Israeli side of the equation?

5.) If you are elected president, do you have any plans to include in your administration Republicans such as Chuck Hagel and Ron Paul, both of whom adopted what is commonly perceived to be the Democratic Party's position with regard to the Iraq War long before some of you on this dais came around to that position?

6.) Can you please define what you mean by "combat" troops. As we learned in Vietnam, and now in Iraq, all troops in a guerrilla war are de facto "combat" troops. Exactly how many troops do you expect to remain in Iraq and for how long?

7.) What will be the role of military contractors be in Iraq under your administration and what personnel levels do you foresee and for how long?

8.) What are your plans for the number and size of any, if any, permanent or long term bases currently in existence or currently under construction in Iraq?

9.) Do you contemplate any roles in your administration for adherents of interventionist policy such as Madeleine Albright, Richard Holbrooke, Anthony Lake, Rahm Emanuel,and Sandy Berger?

10.) Do you believe that lying the American Republic into a war is an impeachable offense, and, if so, what are, or would be, your reasons for not pursuing impeachment measures against George Bush and Richard Cheney?

11.) As President would you seek to roll back the Bush Administration's unconstitutional expansion of presidential powers? What is your position, for the record, of the "unitary executive" theory? What is your position, for the record, of "Executive Privilege?"

12.) Beyond Iranian rhetoric and posturing, much of which has been either mis-translated or distorted in the mainstream media, please explain in detail what makes you believe, if you do so, that Iran is a military threat to the United States of America.

There is little doubt, I am sure, that these questions may be less entertaining, even lending themselves to charges of being overly wonkish, than the "diamonds or pearls conundrum" or snippy repartee over driver's licenses, flip-flopping, and the throwing of "mud," but one would think in the cause of honest, informative journalism of a free republic that would be a necessary risk any news organization considered legitimate would have to take. One would think so, but one could also be wrong, very, very wrong.

Roland Poche
New Orleans, La

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

not be part of CNN debates in the future. I guess we should just be thankful it wasn't Lou Dobbs hosting. Not that Blitzer wasn't bad enough, but if I saw Dobbs more than three minutes I'm sure my head would explode.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

There hasn't been a real debate since the days before Radio and Television. You must read history to find any REAL DEBATE. Lincoln/Douglas. Webster/Haynes. There are still rare occasional debates in the Senate today. Used to be a heck of a lot more. Johnson/Dirkson on public accomodations.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]