It was a pep rally for Hillary, set up and promoted by CNN ( Clinton News Network). Of course it was a joke. They had to throw Hillary her usual soft toss questions to recoup her standings from the previous debacle, when Russert had the nerve to ask her to give an answer to a question. Enter the rest of the liberal media the next day. Headlines across the nation , touting Hillary as fighting back , and smiting her challengers. Please, what a joke.
I have a question for you. What is worse, the media pawning off this dog and pony show as a debate, or the mindless masses of voters who can't see through the Charade?
2007-11-19 04:48:02
·
answer #1
·
answered by booman17 7
·
5⤊
1⤋
i presumed it sucked. They have been filled into those little college desks. they only asked questions from 2 applicants. The questions weren't even the main necessary subjects dealing with the social gathering. In California, the main necessary difficulty is immigration in accordance to the sphere study poll, and that they did no longer even talk approximately it. They sat there and argued over who pronounced what. The media is obviously at the back of McCain. they have been pushing him because of the fact that final election. They backed off him after the amnesty debacle, yet they ramped it up returned. remember while he became for sure out of the race? He had no money, no group, and now he's interior the lead. The media is obviously at the back of McCain.
2016-10-17 06:56:25
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes, it was!
The whole thing was slanted toward Hillary.
CNN did a horrible job. The crowd should have been ordered to be quiet instead they were allowed to shut down anyone who spoke out against Hillary - very unfair!
I will forever remember it as the guise used to allow Hillary to make her, "I am not going to play the sex card... but as a woman.... I am a woman... I am the first woman' speech.
Really, really, nauseating. A moment that all women should be ashamed ever aired.
That woman is setting women back 10 years every time she opens her "I didn't stay home baking cookies" mouth.
I wish she'd compete on merit instead of groping for favors based on her gender all the time.
2007-11-19 19:25:52
·
answer #3
·
answered by wider scope 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
Its definitely interesting that Fox News is trying to elect Giuliani and CNN is trying to elect Clinton. This explains alot about our media, as it seems that they desire to always have the 2 worst candidates going against each other in the general election and it also explains why they are biased against anybody who can beat their choice for president (for example, Ron Paul, who has burst through to the top tier, despite the worst media bias since Goldwater or McGovern).
Hopefully, the voters are intelligent enough to send both Clinton and Giuliani home unhappy in the primaries so that we don't get a repeat of Bush-Kerry.
2007-11-19 11:11:52
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋
LOL...calling it a farce would be giving it a credible title. It did however answer the age old question as to what the C in CNN stood for. It stands for Clinton news Network.
2007-11-19 04:46:54
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
5⤊
1⤋
CNN set it up so Hillary Clinton would look better than anyone else. Their problem is that she didn't do the best. Joe Biden won that debate hands down. and if you haven't seen the new "Joe is Right" video, go check it out. all of the other candidates seem to think so...
2007-11-19 04:48:26
·
answer #6
·
answered by ? 6
·
5⤊
1⤋
Unf, it is just proof of bias.
So much for that "vast right wing conspiracy" huh, Hil?
The guy asking about profiling infuriates me. My dad used to travel a lot with just a briefcase and was detained several times because he fit the description of the unibomber. White, male, alone, no bags, 30s-40s. He didn't like it, but it was necessary. Do people really expect us to catch the bad guys if we ignore the likliest of people??
2007-11-19 04:52:26
·
answer #7
·
answered by 0 4
·
2⤊
1⤋
I wouldn't even call them Democratic activists, they were Hillary activists.
CNN tries so hard to look "moderate", they just look ridiculous. Nothing more than a dog and pony show.
2007-11-19 04:49:34
·
answer #8
·
answered by Middleclassandnotquiet 6
·
4⤊
1⤋
You could tell CNN was endorsing Hillary. She got softballs and all the time she needed to reply, while Obama and Edwards got much less time. The second-tier candidates didn't even need to show; they barely got the mike.
Surprisingly, I think the best show was Biden. Although I'm voting Republican, Biden got in there and got his points across when he could.
2007-11-19 04:46:06
·
answer #9
·
answered by Matt D 2
·
5⤊
1⤋
akadave: You're as bad as the politicians. Stick to the subject at hand.
There are plenty of questions on Y!A about the Republicans.
Are you too blind to see that it was a fixed debate? I would think Democrats would be outraged.
2007-11-19 10:05:43
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋