I can see both sides of this debate. A few points:
- I think that people who think that CNN just slipped in not finding out all that they could about the general are either naive or willfully looking the other way...come on, the man is a retired U.S. general who is openly gay...a Google Search probably could have brought up enough to get started on. I think its highly suspect that CNN got caught with its pants down several times in that debate NOT giving the viewers all the information it needed to make an informed decision.
- That being said, the generals question was still a valid one - sure, it was a bit heavy, handed and "sir, when did you stop beating your wife" but a good question nonetheless...and even if he is a Clinton operative...the Republicans should still have to answer his question.
This is similar to Clinton's hissy fit to a man who asked her a question at a campaign stop when she was asked a question she felt was a plant from her competition (ironic, since this happened prior to her little faux pas with planted questioners). Charles Krauthammer stated something to the effect of "Here's where Hilary went wrong. Even if it was a plant - so what, it was a decent question...she should have smiled, said that she heard that one frequently and that she was happy to answer it again..."
The Republican candidates...even if CNN had deliberately stacked the deck with heavy-handed questions from Democratic operatives...should be prepared to answer questions from those who DISAGREE with them just as much, if not more, than they are prepared to answer friendly questions from their "constituents." Yes...CNN should have disclosed....Yes, the candidates should answer the questions regardless.
What disturbs me about the conversation here, however...is the automatic name-calling "whiner" "stop crying" "babies," "snivelling," etc...simply because some here dared to mention that CNN should have disclosed the backgrounds of the questioners. No one here was crying or whining...they were pointing out that a MAJOR NEWS ORGANIZATION that this nation has to trust to provide with honest, accurate data...DROPPED THE BALL...and, in their opinion...if the major news network had been Fox rather than CNN...that there would have been more of a hullabaloo...this isn't whining...its discourse about the media's role on the election process and how dangerous relying on the major media as a sole source of news can be. You can say that it isn't a big deal...but at least be prepared to discuss WHY it isn't a big deal, rather than slamming those you disagree with with silly taunts.
