|
For Fairness and Impartiality,
Give CNN a Large Zero
John F. McManus
JBS
Monday December 3, 2007
Besieged by viewers who were angered by numerous
aspects of the November 28th GOP debate, CNN has "expressed
regret" for some of what it allowed to happen. Yet, the promotion
of homosexuality and abortion during the proceedings doesn't appear
to be a mistake.
Follow this link to the original source: "CNN
Admits Holes in Screening of Questioners"
Beyond the inordinate amount of time given to Giuliani, Romney,
and McCain, CNN's choice of questions provided by YouTube gave
pro-homosexual and pro-abortion activists reason to cheer.
Perhaps the most egregious example of bias occurred when a question
about homosexuals in the military came from Retired Army Brigadier
General Keith Kerr. He wanted to know why homosexuals weren't
allowed to serve openly in the military. He announced at the end
of his unusually long question that he was "gay." It
turns out that he became so after serving 43 years in the army.
(Article continues below)
Not only did his question get aired, moderator Anderson Cooper
then pointed him out in the audience and arranged to have cameras
find him, give him a microphone, and allow further promotion of
homosexuality. Later, it was learned that Kerr is a member of
Hillary Clinton's steering committee on Gay and Lesbian issues.
Isn't that a bit like giving Hillary the opportunity to question
the Republicans and, further, to tell the nationwide audience
that the responses from the GOP candidates were inadequate?
CNN can provide after-the-deed-was-done admissions of "error,"
but was it error? Kerr just happened to have an up-front aisle
seat providing cameras and microphones easy access to him for
his follow-up comments. Who arranged that?
Later in the proceedings, CNN presented another question about
homosexuality taken from the 5,000 questions the network claimed
had been carefully screened beforehand. David Cercone asked whether
the candidates would accept support from the Log Cabin Republicans,
a pro-homosexual organization. This amounted to additional presentation
of deviant behavior as something that should be accepted. Cercone
just happens to be a supporter of Democrat Barack Obama for president.
Regarding abortion, a Texas woman wanted to know what punishment
should be given to women who had abortions and to doctors who
provide them. Out of 5,000 questions received, couldn't CNN find
one to quiz the candidates about the reality of abortion, that
it is the taking of innocent life? Viewers were evidently supposed
to believe that punishing anyone for aborting an innocent baby
is inhumane. After the debate had ended, this woman posted her
displeasure about the responses to her question while wearing
a T-shirt promoting the candidacy of Democrat John Edwards.
David Bohrman, CNN's man in Washington who oversaw the selection
of the questions, said that he and his staff tried to steer clear
of bias. Baloney! According to Howard Kurtz of the Washington
Post, it was CNN itself that "brought" the homosexual
general to Florida for the event.
CNN showed its bias on other issues, too. It’s hard to
believe that, among 5,000 questioners, the news network couldn't
find one asking why there was no constitutionally required declaration
of war before invading Iraq. Did not one questioner of the 5,000
ask about the Constitution's clear assignment of federal responsibility
to protect the states "from invasion"? Every literate
American knows that we are being invaded by millions of illegal
immigrants and next to nothing is being done to stop it. Many
more issues of real concern could have been — and should
have been — presented to the candidates.
Instead, time was taken to supply some legitimacy to homosexuality
and abortion. And the bulk of the debate amounted to bickering
among the cookie cutter candidates collectively characterized
as "Rudi McRomney."
These debates present an opportunity for educating the American
people about their country being taken off course and what the
candidates for president intend to do about it. The opportunity
was squandered. The question that needs to be asked is: Was it
squandered deliberately?
|
INFOWARS:
BECAUSE THERE'S A WAR ON FOR YOUR MIND
|
|
