Nov
30

An Open Challenge To The Right-Blogs




Posted at 0:03 by Gavin M.

Since the right-wing blogs are at full howl over the fact that some of the questions in the Republican YouTube debate were asked by identified non-Republicans, it seems pertinent to offer this clip from the Democratic YouTube debate on July 13th, by way of fostering discussion:

Any questions or comments from our right-wing pals? We’ll be sitting here eating this sandwich.


Update: One of several mega-spazztacular threads on Free Republic yields the following query:

Can you just imagine the outrage, and senate hearings, if a Hunter, or Tancredo supporter actually got to axe the Dums a question?

Their heads would explode!

posted on 11/29/2007 2:48:42 AM PST by rawcatslyentist (I’d rather be carrying a shotgun with Dick, than riding shotgun with a Kennedyl! *-0(:~{>)

Mmm, tasty sammich.

48 Comments »

  1. t4toby said,

    November 30, 2007 at 0:07

    Oh, but you do tease me with the Sammich reference, don’t you, you cad.

  2. Galactic Dustbin said,

    November 30, 2007 at 0:10

    Democrats are expected to handle that sort of thing, The GOP, on the other hand are made out of spun glass and should be coddled and protected at all times.

    Little known fact- Mitt is stored in several layers of bubblewrap when not in public.

  3. cleter said,

    November 30, 2007 at 0:10

    Is it a barbecue sandwich?

  4. cleter said,

    November 30, 2007 at 0:11

    Mitt is a delicate porcelain cherub?

  5. Walter said,

    November 30, 2007 at 0:17

    Because the President is the boss of EVERYONE, but only answers to SOME of the people. The people who agree with him.

    It’s democracy in action, bitch.

  6. Galactic Dustbin said,

    November 30, 2007 at 0:18

    McCain is a Plushy, but his fabric is hand wash only.

  7. Typical Republican said,

    November 30, 2007 at 0:27

    Well, clearly, the Repugs are at a disadvantage because the talking points that liberals hurl at them are based on reality. AND the liberals also have an advantage because Kucinich, often called the Democrats’ Ron Paul, is not only ten times smarter than Paul, he is also about a hundred times smarter than Thompson, McCain, Huckabee or Romney and about a million times more honest than Giuliani.

    So it’s not fair to make challenges like that.

    Liberals. Hmf.

  8. Jay B. said,

    November 30, 2007 at 0:38

    Ok, let’s talk plants. In a debate, a plant can at least ask an oppositional question.

    Can one of our GOP friends now explain why a gay male escort was planted in the White House Press Room when so many of our media whores give it away for free?

  9. Rufus said,

    November 30, 2007 at 0:40

    Allowing Democrats to ask questions at a Republican debate is like allowing Randy Johnson to pitch in the Little League World Series.

  10. Smut Clyde said,

    November 30, 2007 at 0:40

    Mitt is a delicate porcelain cherub?
    More the unicorn in a glass menagerie.

  11. Hoosier X said,

    November 30, 2007 at 0:40

    We were doing such a good job of neutralizing the trolls. Yet here’s Gavin, openly inviting them for a childish smorgasbord of sophistry, intellectual dishonesty, straw man arguments and “facts” pulled from Rush Limbaugh’s butt the likes of which we have never seen.

    I’m kind of glad I have to leave for work now.

  12. Nylund said,

    November 30, 2007 at 1:01

    I kinda wished the GOP got nothing but the “please prove you hate brown people more than the other candidates” questions for as long as possible. Imagine all that escalation! By the time primary season finished up, they’d all be screaming, “death to all latinos!” in a Cobra Commander voice on pure reflexes, then, the first time they had to debate with a non-psycho, they would have no practice faking sanity and would come off as the complete wackos they are.

    If Malkin had her druthers, we’d end up with a GOP candidate going into the national elections on his “internment camps for all brown people (except Michelle)” platform, and I think that’d be a good thing. The crazier a son of a bitch the GOP nominates, the better for the dems.

    I, for one, don’t like any of them getting any practice in trying to sound reasonable.

  13. Legalize said,

    November 30, 2007 at 1:11

    Don’t worry. I predict that the wingers who speculate to no end about certain reactions by certain non-wingers to certain situations anyone with a pulse realizes is factual reality, will heroically ignore every attempt to call reality to their attention, and simply keep lying.

  14. stickler said,

    November 30, 2007 at 1:13

    You guys broke YouTube! That’s awesome.

    It is the mighty power of this blog that keeps me coming back every day. What will you target next?

  15. Five of Diamonds said,

    November 30, 2007 at 1:17

    I received an email from Redstate:
    _______________________________
    Dear RedState Reader:

    RedState is calling for CNN to fire Sam Feist, their political director; and David Bohrman, Senior Vice President and Executive Producer of the debate.

    During last night’s debate, which CNN billed as “a Republican debate, and the goal was to let Republican voters see their candidates,” CNN either knowingly or incompetently allowed hardcore left wing activists to plant questions and Anderson Cooper willingly gave one of those activists a soapbox so he could harass the Republican candidates about military policy.

    Simple googling would have revealed these left wing activists.

    Had CNN done its homework, this would not have happened. They either willfully let it happen, or incompetently bungled it. Either way, heads should roll.

    Likewise, we hope one or more of the GOP Presidential candidates will call for a do-over debate on substantive policy issues.

  16. Mister DNA said,

    November 30, 2007 at 1:20

    Likewise, we hope one or more of the GOP Presidential candidates will call for a do-over debate on substantive policy issues.

    And likewise, we hope that next November the GOP Presidential candidate will call for a do-over election.

  17. mikey said,

    November 30, 2007 at 1:23

    Man, is there anything out of which these syphilitic idiots cannot manufacture a controversy? These people are running for president.

    Of the United States.

    That’s ALL of them.

    Who cares WHO raises an issue. If it is an issue to americans, they need to answer it. And if their position on an issue, say gays in the military, is one that resonates with voters, why should they care how the issue was raised? They should make their points, and move on.

    This may very well be the most depleted uranium dense stupidity we’ve seen in the campaign yet…

    mikey

  18. Arky - Cthulusexual said,

    November 30, 2007 at 1:27

    Right on mikey.

    Shorter RedState:

    OMG! SOMEONE LET DEMOCRATS INTO THE SACRED CIRCLE!!

    I’m surprised they didn’t call for Cooper’s head. As one of teh ghey, he probably alarmed the fragile flowers that make up the GOP presidential candidates.

    Dickholes.

  19. Lawnguylander said,

    November 30, 2007 at 1:28

    Yet here’s Gavin, openly inviting them for a childish smorgasbord of sophistry, intellectual dishonesty, straw man arguments and “facts” pulled from Rush Limbaugh’s butt the likes of which we have never seen.

    The trolls we’re trying to neutralize are the ones who pretend to take idiotic stances just to fuck with people. Like saul & tde. Watching people debate them is like watching a particularly mean segment on Candid Camera. But the true believers and the responses they get when they come here are fucking hilarious. I remind you of Fauxhammer, Alec Rawls, Tacky Trevino, Dave from Texas and his friend Fozzi, etc. The Dogstar post was great too but I think that was a joke on us by Gavin. I would love to see some wingnuts come over here and argue how the CNN youtube debate was so horrible for the poor wiwa GOP candidates. Sure, it wouldn’t take more than a little while before they get argued into a corner and start claiming the Nazis were socialists and reminding everyone that 45 years ago segregationists voted Democratic but that’s funny shit too.

  20. bronco214 said,

    November 30, 2007 at 1:43

    Went over and tried to read the posts at freeper-I did not realize that you could actually stack stupid that high! Sammiches did not appeal to me after the tour.

  21. g said,

    November 30, 2007 at 2:04

    So why is MAlkin and Freep-world concerned that the Republican candidates are being quizzed by liberals? Is she afraid they’ll be at a disadvantage? I thought all these right wingers had their handy dandy little book of “How to respond to a liberal.”

    Seems like they forgot to pack their copy.

  22. Doctorb Science said,

    November 30, 2007 at 2:40

    Oh yeah, that clip with the guy holding the Bible and asking the candidates if they believed every word “of this specific book I am holding in my hand right now” would have been great if he followed up their responses with him taking off the Bible cover and revealing some other book, like Slave Girl of Gor.

  23. MyDD :: Direct Democracy for People-Powered Politics said,

    November 30, 2007 at 2:47

    [...] thing is, as Sadly No! reminds us, Republicans, and perhaps more importantly, Republican talking points, were not exactly banned from [...]

  24. slippytoad said,

    November 30, 2007 at 3:10

    Five of Diamonds said,

    November 30, 2007 at 1:17

    I received an email from Redstate:
    _______________________________
    Dear RedState Reader:

    RedState is calling for CNN to fire Sam Feist, their political director; and David Bohrman, Senior Vice President and Executive Producer of the debate.

    I got that letter too. I wanted to respond back: Shut Up, Morans! But then I would probably stop getting hilarious action alerts from the Morans at RedState.

  25. Random Observer said,

    November 30, 2007 at 4:36

    http://margalis.blogspot.com/2007/11/artful-dodgers-debate.html

    CNN is trying to drum up some controversy by revealing that the questioner is on a Clinton committee. And? These are YouTube debates, where anyone including a devious Clinton partisan can submit questions which are then selected via some agreed-upon process. There is no conflict of interest here or misrepresentation, the rules do not state that only avid Republicans can offer submissions. The man was not posing as a reporter or faking his military service. His question was deemed valid and worthy enough for inclusion, who he is doesn’t change that.

    As far as I know the YouTube questioners don’t have to sign a loyalty oath or reveal their affiliations. I guess the problem with accepting questions from anyone is that you can get questions from anyone?

    Submitting a question via an accepted process is not “planting” anything.

  26. stickler said,

    November 30, 2007 at 4:46

    I, too, got that little Redstate missive. It baffled me at first, since I didn’t remember signing up for a Redstate account under my real name. But then I did the only decent thing: I clicked on the “unsubscribe” link and terminated our business relationship.

    It was a sad moment, I suppose, but it had to be done.

    They banned me, in any case. What did they expect I would do? Boycott CNN?

  27. Righteous Bubba said,

    November 30, 2007 at 6:17

    Simple googling would have revealed these left wing activists.

    Advanced googling would allow the NSA to shoot Hellfire missiles at them.

  28. Johnny Fairplay said,

    November 30, 2007 at 8:17

    Why do you think it’s a some kind of meaningful “response” to a charge that Dems are planting questions at a Rep debate to point out that Reps plant questions at Dem debates?

    If X murders Y, can he defend himself by pointing out that A has already murdered B? Certainly not in a court of law. Does A have to let X kill Y, rather than taking action to stop it?

    Does Bush invading Iraq mean Clinton can invade Iran?

    You know, Dems haven’t re-elected an elected president with a majority of the popular vote in the last 60 years, while Reps have done it four different times. Maybe part of the explanation is that Dems just don’t get it.

    Is it really so difficult for you to defend planting questions on its own merits, so that you are reduced to pointing out that your adversary does it to? If it is, maybe you need to reevaluate your position and call for Dems to stop doing it, regardless of what Reps do, and maybe think of effective ways to stop Reps from doing it, and criticize them for it, instead of rationalizing what is obviously unethical behavior.

  29. Rightwingsnarkle said,

    November 30, 2007 at 8:36

    “Mitt is a delicate porcelain cherub?”

    That’s a typo. The correct phrase is, “Mitt has a delicate porcelain chubby.”

  30. Righteous Bubba said,

    November 30, 2007 at 8:44

    Why do you think it’s a some kind of meaningful “response” to a charge that Dems are planting questions at a Rep debate to point out that Reps plant questions at Dem debates?

    If X murders Y, can he defend himself by pointing out that A has already murdered B?

    If I have a shit analogy, can I claim it’s as bad as sawing the head off an infant?

  31. ec1009 said,

    November 30, 2007 at 8:57

    “You know, Dems haven’t re-elected an elected president with a majority of the popular vote in the last 60 years, while Reps have done it four different times.”

    Well Reps having elected a president three times like EVA!

  32. lobbey said,

    November 30, 2007 at 10:11

    Is it really so difficult for you to defend planting questions on its own merits, so that you are reduced to pointing out that your adversary does it to? If it is, maybe you need to reevaluate your position and call for Dems to stop doing it, regardless of what Reps do, and maybe think of effective ways to stop Reps from doing it, and criticize them for it, instead of rationalizing what is obviously unethical behavior.

    So, moving on, can you please tell us what is so wrong with ‘planting’ questions to the GoP candidates, would you not want them to at least awser some questions out the mainstream, or are they all just too delicate for such questions?

  33. mitch said,

    November 30, 2007 at 17:34

    Johnny Fairplay misses the point entirely. Shocking.

    Here’s the thing, JohnBoy: I’m pretty sure Gavin was pointing out that the Dems don’t CARE who asks them the questions because they are more than willing to answer questions on their own merits without throwing a tantrum about it like you delicate little flowers. And at the same time pointing out the Wingnutosphere’s hypocrisy when they pose hypotheticals and imagine-ifs that, in reality, ACTUALLY FUCKING HAPPENED, YOU IDIOTS.

    I hope that clarifies.

  34. mitch said,

    November 30, 2007 at 17:38

    To reiterate, we do not care who asks the questions at all because we our candidates and our base does not consist of raving lunatics. So your equating “planting a question” with “murder” or “invading Iraq” is about the most ridiculous comparison a human being could possibly come up with. Kudos.

  35. LiberalPercy said,

    November 30, 2007 at 18:32

    It is so much fun to make the collective blood pressure of the wingnutosphere skyrocket. The only ‘bad’ thing about all of this is CNN’s immediate apology – acting like they did something wrong. They did not.

    The “outrage” the wingnuts fabricate out of vapor hides what tender, weak little wimps they are. If asking a real question about a real issue is that hard for their candidates, how in the world do they think any one of that pitiful octet could govern? Oh – right – just like the awful piece of shit who infests our White House today.

    That’s ok, folks. Keep screaming. Keep whining. The more you do, the better we look.

  36. Russ said,

    November 30, 2007 at 21:14

    Yes, well a few minutes of searching using Google would have shown that that question was filmed by TheUpTake

    http://blogs.citypages.com/gop/2007/07/the_uptake_focu.php#more

    who is formed mostly by members of the DFL, or the Democratic Farmer Labor Party.

    So put down that sammich, and do some research.

  37. Moophisto said,

    December 1, 2007 at 0:03

    Is it really so difficult for you to defend planting questions on its own merits, so that you are reduced to pointing out that your adversary does it to? If it is, maybe you need to reevaluate your position and call for Dems to stop doing it, regardless of what Reps do, and maybe think of effective ways to stop Reps from doing it, and criticize them for it, instead of rationalizing what is obviously unethical behavior.

    Ahem…

    CNN is trying to drum up some controversy by revealing that the questioner is on a Clinton committee. And? These are YouTube debates, where anyone including a devious Clinton partisan can submit questions which are then selected via some agreed-upon process. There is no conflict of interest here or misrepresentation, the rules do not state that only avid Republicans can offer submissions. The man was not posing as a reporter or faking his military service. His question was deemed valid and worthy enough for inclusion, who he is doesn’t change that.

    Done?

  38. Moophisto said,

    December 1, 2007 at 0:05

    Also

    You know, Dems haven’t re-elected an elected president with a majority of the popular vote in the last 60 years, while Reps have done it four different times. Maybe part of the explanation is that Dems just don’t get it.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

  39. Doctorb Science said,

    December 1, 2007 at 2:45

    Really, there are only two decent questions:

    a) How can I help the Republicans win?
    b) George W Bush: Great president or Greatest President?

  40. EMPY said,

    December 1, 2007 at 3:35

    Damn, I guess I tuned in to late to see the disclaimer that stated that any question by any citizen who cannot be positively identified as a card carrying Republican shall be deleted from public view.

    I hope the bubble boys get this question at every public forum from now on. I’m quite sure there are some gay republicans who would be willing to sign the loyalty oath and everything.

  41. Califlander said,

    December 1, 2007 at 3:36

    Yes, well a few minutes of searching using Google would have shown that that question was filmed by TheUpTake … who is formed mostly by members of the DFL, or the Democratic Farmer Labor Party.

    A prototypical wingnut complaint, combining bad grammar and utter irrelevance.

  42. russ said,

    December 1, 2007 at 9:18

    A prototypical wingnut complaint, combining bad grammar and utter irrelevance.

    Proto-typical internet troll response when the person is correct… attack the person.

    The film makers were Democrats. How is that a plant? How is that irrelevant? What proof do you have that the question was not by a democrat? Because he does not tow the party line?

  43. jcricket's boy toy said,

    December 1, 2007 at 20:03

    ………….or having an entire ‘debate’ landmined by dik cheney’s go to boy lil’ timmah russert…

  44. Graham Shevlin said,

    December 1, 2007 at 23:17

    If we have reached a point where an elector cannot ask a question in a debate because they are apparently affiliated with an “incorrect” group, then we have lost sight of the whole basis of representative democracy.
    An elected representative represents all electors in a district, not just the ones that voted for him/her. Working backwards from that principle, any elector has the right to ask a question of a candidate. Party affiiliation be damned. The party affiliation argument is a gigantic red herring, utterly irrelevant. If candidates want to be protected from awkward questions, they can try, but it is up to us to blow the whistle on that little scam loudly and repeatedly.
    Anybody who argues in favour of exclusion of questions based on the supposed affiliation of the questioner is by definition unqualified to make any pronouncement on the electoral process, and needs to STFU. CNN should have told the complainers to go take a hike.

  45. Vince said,

    December 3, 2007 at 4:13

    Maybe one of you hysterical leftists can tell us when in the video the guy idenitified himself by party?

    Or are you saying that only Republicans are against tax hikes?

  46. Lawnguylander said,

    December 3, 2007 at 15:58

    Maybe one of you hysterical leftists can tell us when in the video the guy idenitified himself by party?

    If by hysterical you mean that we’re laughing our hot leftist asses off at scared shitless morons like you that are flooding the internet with complaints about the questioners while paying no attention at all to the answers the GOP candidates gave then yeah, fuckface, we’re hysterical. Take a step back, put on some clean underwear and reflect upon how gutless you all sound. And learn to spell “identified” while you’re at it.

  47. Vince said,

    December 4, 2007 at 10:35

    Nice little rant but you didn’t answer the question.

  48. Loodotarswita said,

    October 20, 2008 at 23:03

    Hey,
    I am, John
    verry cool site
    look at my site:

    http://rTCouls.spaces.live.com/

Leave a Comment

  • Things of Interest

  • Meta Goodness

  • Clunkers

  • httpbl_stats()