Late Edition: Suzanne Malveaux Thinks You're The Winner of The Last Dem Debate
By Nicole Belle Saturday Nov 17, 2007 7:46pm
Download | play 
Download | play (h/t David)
The condescension towards the intelligence of the America public that Suzanne Malveaux displays in this post mortem on the CNN Democratic Debate last week is simply breathtaking.
You know I think the other winner too was really the audience, because they played such a significant role. I mean, twice they were...they booed Senator Edwards, they booed Senator Obama, and really I think kind of framed and changed kind of the tone of the debate, because you saw Edwards take a back seat after Hillary Clinton went after him on mudslinging. And you saw Obama on the defensive here, and that largely had to do with the role the audience played.
The role the audience played, Suzanne? You mean the one where CNN decided that in the face of crippling deficits and trade inbalances, of an endless bloody occupation of a sovereign nation, a growing climate crisis, being the only western nation without universal health coverage, a disappearing middle class, failing educational standards, the thing that the American public are MORE interested in is whether Hillary prefers diamonds or pearls?
No, Suzanne, the audience was most assuredly the loser in this one.
Login or Register to post comments.
First!
Lighten up 'bout insulting 'American' intelligence -- you guys elected Bush -- TWICE!
To the rest of the world, Bush is a complete idiot ... and that was obvious *before* '04.
Cheers and Happy Thanksgiving!
What...you mean the audience booing as a confirmation of Hillary playing the gender card to great effect?
Suzanne is another propagandist for the Corporate elite. Hence her and CNN's worship of the Clintons.
Peace.
Suzanne thinks everyone is as shallow and high-school-popularity-contest oriented as she is.
Another arrogant, irrelevant media hack with nothing redemptive to add. How typical these days. Their industry (with several exceptions) is a joke. They're just the Republican's marketing arm.
Well said, Nicole Belle. As you correctly note, simply another example of the dumbing down of the American media.
I'm surprised CNN did not have applause signs held up at the end of every Hillary response. Or an option to rattle your pearls.
CNN did carefully script the entire event did they not!
It was just an infomercial for the next "selectee" for 2008.
Ah, 2008, will we make it that far into the future?
"Suzanne Malveaux Thinks You’re The Winner of The Last Dem Debate"
Are you really that dense?
She thinks the audience that was physically at the debate was the winner because they CHANGED the behavior of the candidates. Both Obama and Edwards were cowed by the audience reactions.
Mitt Romney:
• Mitt Romney: You've Already Eye-Fucked Him; Now Vote For Him
• Vote For Mitt: He's Just Like You, Only Without The Swearing, Drinking, Smoking And Monogamy
• Vote For Romney: His Pecs Are Like God Damn Dinner Plates
• Mitt Romney: Quickly Changed Every Position He Ever Had Just For You
• Romney For President: Not Just Another Massachusetts Mormon Who Was CEO Of The 2002 Winter Olympics
For Christ's sake - can America get any more bafflingly insane?
Marvin El Canucki @ 1:
Uh no. Actually there were quite a number of us in both elections that knew Bush was not only an idiot but a dangerous one as well. I think if you look at the elections, Bush was NOT elected either time. He was selected by the Supreme Court in 2000, and if you can take into account that there was (for example) 4,000 more votes for Bush in an Ohio precinct than there were actual registered voters, the beneficiary of some voting machine fraud in 2004.
Swashbuckler @ 9:
Suzanne Mal-function thinks? What a concept.
Rudy Giuliani:
• Vote For Giuliani: He'll Torture And Kill You To Protect Your Children
• Rudy For President: Because The Neo-Cons Were Just A Bunch Of Fucking Pansy-Ass Hippies
• Giuliani in '08: You Ever Dance With The Devil In The Pale Moonlight?
• Vote For Rudy: It'll Be Like 9/11 Everyday!
• Rudy Giuliani: Hard On Gays (If You Know What I Mean)
The dems were stupid to go along with the extended debate/campaign season. I smell Karl Rove behind this (that pig-faced little bastard). Getting involved this early can only serve to have voters turned off by the sheer duration of the cross-pissing, not to mention extending swiftboating season. Pathetic party management.
Swashbuckler @ 9:
They were cowed by specifically selected questions by CNN, not the audience. To Hillary, CNN selected "diamonds or pearls". Or are YOU that dense to not recognize the framing?
Nicole Belle @ 12:
God bless you for treating some people as if they are intelligent.
It's bad enough having CNN host "The Hillary Show" and call it a debate. Now we have to listen to this crap too!?
Fred Thompson:
• Vote For Fred Thompson: Definitely The Only Candidate Who Was In Iron Eagle III
• Fred Thompson: Sort Of Like Gene Hackman Crossed With A Bat-Shit Crazy Person
• Fred Thompson: Feel Free To Fuck His Wife Vicariously Through Him
• Thompson In '08: Well, At Least He Never Acted With A Chimp
• Thompson For President: It'll Be Kind Of Like He's Playing The President In A Really Bad Movie About The End Of The World
Nicole Belle @ 16:
Wow, I guess you ARE that dense...
Hope @ 18:
This IS a show on CNN about a show on CNN, right?
Well, the way Americans pay more attention to Britney's vagina than say... the gutting of FISA to "protect us", she's probably right.
You wouldn't believe how many people I've run into who said they want to vote for Hillary "because she's a woman"... absolutely no other reason at all. If Satan showed up as a candidate in drag, there are a large number of idiots would vote for him.
Nicole Belle @ 12:
Thank you, Nicole. I'm so sick of being told we're ALL stupid because Bush was "elected" for two terms. Bush is in office due to what, I believe, was a silent coup.
John McCain:
• Vote For McCain: He'll Try Not To Be Buried In A Pine Box Come November
• McCain For President: Whoa, Really? What Year Are We In?
• McCain '08: Short On Funds, Just Like You
• John McCain: A Maverick On Everything But The Issues
• Vote For John McCain: Because, Sweet Jesus, Look At The Alternatives
Blue Buddha @ 22:
Are Americans interested or do the news networks offer that in lieu of news and context and background?
I, for one, can go the whole rest of my life without hearing about Britney or Lindsay or Anna Nicole or whatever white girl is missing this week. And yet, that's the bulk of most news coverage.
Swashbuckler @ 20:
Yes you are if you don't recognize that you are being manipulated by hacks like Malveaux and CNN. But knock yourself out. We're not here to regulate human folly.
Swashbuckler @ 9:
This statement suggests otherwise - that Suzanne was taking the side of Hillary and therefore the audience booing the others on Hillary's behalf:
"Mudslinging"...not questioning her record but "mudslinging".
"Dem" is an offensive shortening of the word, Democratic, just like "Repubs" or "Rethugs" is of the word, Republicans. Please draft and enforce a heading policy that bans the use of the words "Dem or "Dems".
This post is a perfect display of how msm thinks that making a parody of what they do suffices as criticism and self-analysis. kurtz's show is more of the same. I love c-n-l and mediamatters for what they do.
Suzanne Malveaux is just so gorgeous to me, I often get mesmerized and distracted when she speaks.
bmw 528 @ 26:
bmw 528 @ 26:
ROFL!
I ain't being manipulated by nobody. Just because you ain't that smart, don't be projecting that on the rest of us!
Otay @ 27:
The first part doesn't even make sense. Care to try to clarify?
The second part you're "quoting" something I didn't write. Perhaps you're confused.
Swashbuckler @ 31:
Whatever you say, pal. I don't have time to match wits with the witless. Have fun laughing with Suzanne in November 2008 when your fascist pals get buried for good.
bmw 528 @ 33:
Man! You're as stupid as O'Lielly!
Just because I don't fall in line with your world view you think I must be a con. That's the same kind of "thinking" that caused Bush and the neocons to get the world into this mess. I suggest you take a LONG look in a mirror...
The “diamonds or pearls” question is most telling. Of course, a person with an IQ of 100 or above would choose diamonds for their monetary value. However, a Republican will always choose pearls because they don’t cut your hands when you clutch them.
CoIntelPro, are you a spambot or do you just blindly spew shit out due to something missing in your synaptic functioning?
Have you ever heard of the term Open Thread?
just wondering
Grace Kelly @ 28:
I'm afraid it's too late for that. The Dems don't even mind being called names by the media and supporters at this point. Any system eventually shows the signs of the ending days. The Dems this, the Republicans that, the Dems this, GOP that. We'll played like dumb little kiddies at this point. The Repubs, the Rethugs, ops, I appologize for such an offensive word, must be laughing their asses off. Suzanne Malveaux, being a daughter of an African-American should know better and be more understanding towards Obama. I guess corporate whores like Suzanne Malveaux and Hillary Clinton stick together for a reason. Obama, Paul, Edwards, please anyone, and anything, but this mindless idiocy.
Swashbuckler @ 34:
There is NOBODY as stupid as O' Lielly. Even you.
Care to elaborate what your "view" is? Or are you just another opinionated bigmouth with an attitude problem?
Suzanne Malveaux is a loser.
She said that the audience, by making their opinions known vocally, changed the tone of the debate and perhaps how the candidates acted. What is wrong with that? I really don't understand the huge controversy here or what this post is trying to say. Also, the "diamonds or pearls" question was obviously asked because they had no time left and wanted to end with a quick, stupid laugh. That's CNN's choice.
Also, I <3 Corporations, I dig the MSM, and I'm also a fascist. I think that should cover all the insults I may receive. Oh I'm also stupid.
The audience was the winner? CNN picked the questions that they wanted the "person on the street" to ask, including the "diamonds or pearls" stupidity. Interestingly enough, all of the "undecided voters" who were questioned happened to be operatives in Democratic campaigns (the "Diamonds or Pearls" questioner is on Harry Reid's staff.) The whole thing was a charade.
The DNC side of the audience was picked by the decidedly pro-Clinton upper echelons of the DNC. From the way that they behaved, I suspect that they bought them several rounds of drinks beforehand. They were certainly not acting like adults, and not like Democrats.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&fo...
bmw 528 @ 38:
Apparently, you are.
OUTRAGEOUS! Is that comment just an effort to prop up CNN since they hosted the debate, or what? I just don't get it. How out of touch can these people be? Yeah... the "winner" is the audience, especially when we already know that CNN producers "encouraged" the "diamonds or pearls" question. what a joke cable "news" has become.
This woman's audacity and arrogance is breathtaking. You are right in that so many things need to be addressed - what was there one question about education? With all the time wasted on diamond and pearls questions we could have heard positions. And if the people could get free of CNN and Fox spin they would see the truth about Clinton and we'd have the bitch in third place and Obama and Edwards in the lead.
Blue Buhdda says "If Satan showed up as a candidate ... there are a large number of idiots [that] would vote for him."
CNN would, of course host the debate and get and the interview...and many people will watch. And during the course of it all we will learn what to wear, how to smell, where to eat, what to drive...Smell freedom do nothing.....
why would CNN be honest...
it's not in their interest
they sell entertainment
Swashbuckler @ 42:
I'll take that as a "no" I don't care to elaborate on my point of view, and yes, I am an opinionated bigmouth with an attitude.
Feel free to come back when you have something redemptive to discuss, which I would guess won't be any day soon.
More than whether she thought we were winners or losers, is it really that shocking that the audience "has opinions" about the candidates? Wow.....regular Americans understand teh issues!!!! Who knew???!!!!
the degree of intelligence of American women follows the same bell curve as men, unfortunately Suzanne Malveaux's intelligence is below the lowest level of the curve.
Jay @ 45:
Right. But the CNN debate went beyond that into biased absurdity with that question and trying to give Clinton the best light possible. Wolf (the dull and bearded Israeli agent you saw asking questions like someone with a mental deficiency during the debate) did not go after her on licenses after two weeks of changing positions. Russert has been the best host because he questioned the queen.
But beyond my hate of the Hillary bias they asked the same old questions all framed in a corporate way. Let's have a debate where we talk about less talked about issues. No Iraq talk - but instead Iran talk. No talk about education - but talk about lowering the voting age.
just another pretty face with a piehole.
budda @ 49:
news is like porn...you know it when you see it
Great Post Nicole. And an intelligent take on the news.
You mean the one where CNN decided that in the face of crippling deficits and trade inbalances, of an endless bloody occupation of a sovereign nation, a growing climate crisis, being the only western nation without universal health coverage, a disappearing middle class, failing educational standards, the thing that the American public are MORE interested in is whether
The Corporate Media seems more concerned with anything and everything but the real issues that effect us as Americans in the long run. Too bad these corporations run so much of the News most Americans get.
Swashbuckler:
In response to your comments, I'll rewrite:
The DNC selected the audience and CNN selected the questions. The DNC and CNN have subsequently demonstrated that they favor Hillary. Therefore, Suzanne is being disingenous when she says that the audience changed the behavior of the candidates to make Hillary win, but rather knows that the DNC and CNN set up the event in Hillary's favor and is spinning the event after the fact to make it look like Hillary won by inferring that Edward's and Obama's performance was poor after being "changed" by the audience. When (in my opinion anyway) their performances were never adversely affected.
Having said that, I'll bow out. I don't remember all of the names on this site, but if I remember you properly, I respect your opinions. I don't like bad blood between fellow Democrats.
he he talk about a con, first the thugs behind hillery put the meat to spicer on thoes iileagle drivers liscences so that in the othernights debate she can get her ass out of a bind over her wishy washy answer she gave on the debate before this one so she can now say shes again it , then they bus in her goons to boo any of them critisizing her to intimidate the ones who got the goods on her ,then they get volfie to give her fluffy questions and at the end some bimbo dolt asks her if she prefers diamonds or pearls for some comic relief, and she has the bimbo tell all the world and hillery shes the only one that shines on the stage , its right out of paul newman and robert redfords [the sting] god damed thier good allmost as good as the rat bastard bushes con artists!
I like the juxtaposition of this thread and the one above it that's about "intelligent design on trial".
Suzanne Malveaux you ignorant slut!
OK, I feel better.
;-)
It just occurred to me: Suzanne Malveaux's ass sucks wind. No, really, I saw a huge gust of wind go right up her ass, and then she smiled and told us what a great debate we're seeing. Thanks, Suzanne Malveaux!
Grace Kelly @ 28:
Of all the things for a person to get riled about, "Dems" and "Repubs" as abbreviations should be near the bottom of the list.
snewp @ 36:
I was adding a bit of humor. WTF is your excuse?
PLEASE READ IMPORTANT SAFETY INFORMATION REGARDING BROADCASTS ON MAINSTREAM MEDIA:
While you get 4 CNNNews periods per day, you’re also more likely to have bleeding or spotting between ears. This can be slight to a flow like a regular nosebleed and should decrease over time possibly accompanied by headaches and screaming fits.
Like other mind control media, CNN™ has serious risks, which can be life threatening. They include blood clots, brain rot, stroke, angry dementia, flailing fits and heart attack. Smoking increases these risks, especially if you are over 35, so MSM users should not smoke.
Some persons should not take CNN, including persons who have blood clots, certain cancers, a history of heart attack or stroke, tendency to blinding rages or screaming fits, as well as those who could be pregnant. CNN does not protect against (R) infection, bathroom stall approaches or other sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) or attempts at transmittal or non-sexually transmitted diseases such as stupidity, ignorance or Trollism.
PLEASE CONSULT WITH YOUR PHYSICIAN OR OTHER QUALIFIED HEALTH CARE PROFESSIONAL BEFORE USING ANY PRODUCT DISCUSSED HERE OR WITHIN ANY OTHER MSM WEB SITES. Promptly see a qualified mental health care professional if you have, or suspect that you have, an MSM condition or possible Trollism. This site may contain information related to various health, medical, and fitness conditions and their treatment. However, we do not offer individualized mental diagnosis or patient-specific treatment advice. You should not use the information contained herein for diagnosing or treating a mental condition or disease. You should always consult a qualified health care professional before initiating use of any propaganda or other treatment. Only a qualified mental health care professional can determine if a broadcast described here, or within any other MSM sites, would be appropriate for you to use. Your qualified health care professional is in the best position to discuss with you the risks and benefits of any treatment, including propaganda selection specific to your own mental condition.
Whats she suppose to say (we are all blaitently corrupt here at CNN with our own agenda to make sure the ball gets punted away to our girl Hillary)?
All of these "debates" suck and are totally rigged by the network media whom stage and frame who they want included in this "debate" b.s.
It is a waste of time to watch these "debates" and those whom are asking the questions insult the intelligence of all Americans. Most of the ones asking the questions are politically connected and air heads simultaneously.
If you actually think these are "debates" and are "honest and open" questions which in no way rigged, then, perhaps, you deserve to watch such utter foolishness and then pick one of these media losers for the next president of the United States....
The media after all gave you George W. Bush as president--"the guy you'd want to drink a beer with."
Watch these "debates" at your own peril, but don't say I did not warn you all.
The most intelligent people who make the most sense will be the ones marginalized the most by the ugly-liars in the media.
This is why I don't watch Late Edition: the "last word" in Sunday spin.
She's not paid to upset the apple cart. She's a (putative) safety valve.
Blue Buddha @ 22:
Satan in drag? Do you mean Rudy?
This bitch is testimony to the fact the Bush administration is overseeing all of our media, especially our most prized possession called our News and Information systems.
There is just no reason at all for this woman to be reporting for the White House and all over our TV, News Channels.
Now I know why it is they were so tight about which people would be allowed into the Democratic debates. They said you could only be admitted inside if you had a special ticket, although most of the supporters for Obama and Edwards did not get entry and Obama had a huge calling of at least 20 to one of all the candidates especially Clinton
It is disgusting to say the least.
This bitch is playing games, because she too was behind this disgusting right wing scam and the round table gang that came on right after the debates, trolling for Clinton points were also a cheap scam of idiots, there to hopefully gain unearned points for Clinton.
I am here to say all they did was piss off the majority of people that came to see a free and fair debate and did not get what they came for and at least two of the people from the Clinton camp, came over to the Obama side. They want to win it appears.
I'm no fan of Hillary clinton , however the first 15 minutes were an obvious planned attack on Clinton , with all the questions directed at her , funneling questions through Edwards, obama questioning her 'electibility " and since there was a not so veiled attempt by right wing blogs to intimidate CNN into going after her , claiming they would take it easy on her . The first 15 minutes was a disaster with Blitzer ignoring KUCINICH and giving all the questions to the (and im sick of tired of it) "the top tier candidates" . If these media whores would stick to the FACTS , and stop the " speculation and commentary , we would aLL be better off .
I wish somebody would ( WALK OFF THE STAGE ), " HEY blitzer you'er not asking me any questions anyway , screw you .
Malveaux also redirected a general question by an audience member and directed to H Clinton once again , to put her on the spot . CNN is very aware of the phony liberal charge and do their part to appease the right, or at least the pentagon .
The audacity of CNN and other media whores is amazing , pretending they have nothing to do with attacks on other candidates , when THEY are the one asking the stupid questions and this idiotic idea CNN is "liberal " is baseless . With all the Generals and colonels they have hired as "Analyst" as well as the CFR well represented ( and they are showing up more and more on NBC, CBS & CNN) . In addition to the GOTCHA questions , pitting one person to another , trying to create headlines , we get the monotone aipac Blitzer , a guy doesn't think Privacy and illegal wiretapping is a problem or the Kidnapping by the CIA , and dosen't ask ONE question about CIVIL RIGHTS or the Constitution .
Malveaux is a Pig! She disgusts me, and the Media even more, who are nothing more than propaganda for the Republican party. Our country is really in the Toilet folks. I really do not know if there is a way out of this mess. Call me doom and gloom, but I really do believe our country is too far gone.
Even hitler loved elections.
CNN, news channel numero uno, is framing and shitting all over a McDebate that has the level of middle school pep rallies. Seriously, it's all a circus, nicely orchestrated for bullshit and mass confusion.
Sit each of these people down, and have them all answer 2 hours worths of the same questions, and some specific ones. This is fucking ridiculous..
McPresident, brought to you by CNN.
Mass hysteria... No bueno.
My impression of the "debate" was that the audience was chock full of "Hillary plants." Her campaign team is clearly providing her supporters with some level of coaching and encouragement to go to these "debates" and respond to anyone who DARES question her record in a way that I describe as "just short of booing," although I did hear some boos from some of them.
If this is true, and I think it is, then it just makes Hillary seem sleazy to me.
The majority of the public distrusts the media, and that includes both democrats and republicans. The media refuses to cover the realities that all of us face on a daily basis. They serve petty self interest and profit. Hillary Clinton serves their corporate owners, they are the only "citizens" she is interested in protecting.
She wants to turn the control over our food and product safety into an international, non-elected third party organization. One that is not answerable to the American people. It's proof she does not intend to protect our constitutional rights and freedoms, she doesn't intend to uphold our constitution. She already has a woman working for her campaign who is on the payroll of the Saudi government, Huma Abedin. She's not wealthy, her father died when she was 17, her mother is a professor, who upon her daughter's being hired to work for Clinton's presidential campaign was appointed to a position on US Saudi relations, but not a highly paid one. Her payroll working for Clinton is approximately 25 thousand per year, yet she recently purchased an apartment in DC that is worth upwards of $600,000. She spends vast amounts on designer clothing, and is reported to never be seen in the same outfit twice. There's something wrong here, and it's as bad as Bush's corrupt secret dealings with the Saudi Royal family.
On this week's "Left, Right & Center", Laurence O'Donnell - who was at the debate - described the majority of the booing as being addressed at the questioners, Malveaux included.
Why, oh why, would she try to change that perception?
There's a little known movie that everyone should see called "Idiocracy". Sadly, it's not as far fetched as you would think. America is already half way there, with a population getting dumber by the day, because our corporate masters want an apathetic, uninformed, citizenry that doesn't think for themselves.
My debate team in high school was a thousand times more professional than this sideshow that CNN produced. I think our country is doomed.
[Deleted. Off topic-Sitemonitor]
Nicole, you're godamned right!
Motherf*cking mindless megaphones.
jimbo92107 @ 57:
That's "Suz-awn" to you, pal.
nohobear @ 73:
I've seen that movie and I think they need to re-catogorize as a documentary. Sad, so sad.
I still wannna do 'er!
And of course, because CNN went with the "softball", it's time for the C&L regulars to start tearing apart Mrs. Clinton!
It's nice to know you can go somewhere and get the same thing all the time, isn't it?
Some on this list may carry lingering animosity toward Suzanne Malveaux for real or imagined wrongs, such as her apparent support for the Republic Party's criticism of Pelosi's trip to Syria, but I would like to play devil's advocate here by suggesting that you misconstrued her remarks on the debate audience. She said that the audience was the winner in the debate, by which, given the context of her statement, she meant only the audience assembled for the debate. She spoke with reference to the boo's and catcalls that met Obama and Edwards at the conclusion of their remarks about Senator Clinton. You make it sound as if she meant a larger audience than the few hundred assembled at the taping. You make it sound as if, somehow, the debate audience was representative of the Democratic Party at large or the American people or some larger group outside the auditorium, which is just simply not the case. I think the audience came with a fairly open mind. I mean, consider for example the soldier home from a much extended tour of duty in Iraq expressing the idea that going back again to become cannon fodder in a conflict with no military solution was anathema to him: he had every reason to hate Hillary for voting for the war in the first place (just as Edwards did), yet it wasn't the Nay-voting Obama he and his mom responded to most positively, but the pacifist Kucinich, who hasn't a hope of being nominated. And Malveaux is correct: the live debate audience at the event really did shape the discussion, giving it its warp and woof, far more engagingly than any of the prior meetings of the candidates, Democratic or Republic. A key moment came when Obama was asked about whether he had a yes or no answer to the driver's licenses-for-undocumented-workers issue. Poor Barack hemmed and hawed and even, early on, had to quickly dispel groans and chortles from the audience with, e.g., "No, really...." because at the previous debate he'd joined Dodd and Edwards in an attack on Sen. Clinton for her awkward explanation of why she supported patchwork efforts by state governors like Elliot Spitzer to deal with the issue. She meant only that the states had to do something because Congress would not. (Remember, at the previous debate, she told the audience that attacks on her attempts to justify issuance of drivers' licenses to "illegals" was a game of "gotcha," which was exactly what her debate detractors were attempting. In the most recent debate, the victim of the "gotcha" game was Obama.) But what do I know, I'm just a guy who was proud of all the Dems at that debate. I could vote for any of them and be happy if they won. I'm the guy ordering bumper stickers that read: "ANYONE BUT RUDY."
"Last night I dreamed I made it to the promise land
I was standin' at the gate and I had the key in my hand
Saint Peter said "Come on in boy, you're finally home"
I said "No thanks Pete, I'll just be moving along"
"Woh-oh-oh-oh-oh-oh-oh-oh
I ain't ever satisfied
Woh-oh-oh-oh-oh-oh-oh-oh
I ain't ever satisfied "
Steve Earle - "I Ain't Ever Satisfied"
He could have been writing about C&L Bloggers with that one!
Nothing worse than a celebrity newscaster doing an analysis of the network's performance.
We haven't had a real debate since both parties refused to allow the league of women voters from sponsoring them.
Since then all we get are dog & pony shows with all the candidates pretending to look the most presidential. Whatever that means.
James M Martin @ 80:
Ever hear of paragraphs?
Oh, and one other thing. About the movie, Idiocracy....The late Williams S. Burroughs did readings of one of his short pieces in which he predicted that in any given political race in America, the winner would be a purple-assed baboon: "The Coming of the Purple Better One." I mean, what can you expect when half of the Republic Party candidates don't believe in evolution? They surely believe that our species is only about 6,000 years old and that we once lived side by side with dinosaurs. Such people are by definition DANGEROUS LUNATICS!
GonzoD @ 83:
No. What are they?
Oh, you mean THESE?
All the Zionist owned media, uncluding CNN, are in bed with the neo-cons and Bush's criminal syndicate.
That's why we come to sites like this for the truth. Anyone who gets their news off TV or radio needs psychiatric counseling.
republicanSScareme @ 86:
Charles Manson used to complain about Jews running all media...................................
Man, I gotta tell you how heartening (most of) these comments are. I love to see how much more perceptive politically active internet users generally are than the rest of the populace. At the same time it's frustrating to have to sit back and watch these tired-ass dog-and-pony shows being played out on national television when it's so obvious that no Establishment candidate is going to DO anything positive for the American people unless there's a buck in it somehow.
It does make me laugh, though, when I read articles bemoaning the major party candidates' inability to generate "buzz" via the internet like Ron Paul or, in recent years, Howard Dean. You know, like they're examining it, trying to figure out how to exploit the Net. IT'S ABOUT PRESENTING SUBSTANCE, NOT STYLE!
Pravdaess Suzanne Malveaux takes Pravdaness to a whole new level
Vote for Hillary: Because only War Profiteers know how to support the troops.
Hillary : same shit, different jar.
I don't care how many people watched this debate, it was the worst one yet. The audience was unruly and I suspect there were many Hillary 'plants' among them. Maybe we need to coach the men campaigning that she needs to be replied to immediately after one of her remarks. She sees examining her voting record as mudslinging! I see it as fair play. Throw some more mud, guys.
I saw that "balanced" panel. C'mon.
At least Candy Crawley called Hillary on the mudslinging comment.
It goes to show that the media will provide an opportunity for any monkey with a pretty face to speak their mind, even if it's mindless blather. The same can be said for Dana Parino.
Blue Buddha @ 22:
Personally, I think she would look wonderful in full Nazi dress. You know, the high boots, pointer under her arm, that beautiful blond hair and those shimmerring blue eyes...Ahhhh..
Everyone is going on and on about the booing that went on during the debate and is all gaga about it, remarking how strange that was. Strange my ass!! The general public think these events are open to the public, anyone can get in....NOT!! Each candidate is ISSUED tickets. The higher the candidate is on their "polls" the more tickets you can get, and request more, if you want more. The entire audience can be a stacked majority, if you have enough pull.
The big media have selected Hillary. As far as they are concerned she is the Dems candidate, so she would have been given as many seats as she could fill.
No, Suzanne, the audience was most assuredly the loser in this one.
I strongly disagree with this statement.
Suzanne, if you are fascinated by booing, it's just a damned shame that you CNN show was not interactive, or you'd have had the orgasm of your life as your were booed right through the back wall of the studio.
I'm with Suzanne, let's have more booing if its going to stop this negative name calling... If your better, lets hear how your better... or maybe your better only if you can make the others look bad... come on kids lets talk about something the audience wants to hear about.... Grow-up
Total b.s. from CNN. The more that comes out from these dabates, the worse it looks for CNN. They blew it and they know it. Hopefully there will not be anymore dabates hosted by CNN. It's like they wanted to turn back the clock to the Reagan era where nothing of substance was ever asked. Just a lot of demagogery while this country continues its decay.
GonzoD @ 87:
perhaps charlie wasnt so mad after all!
Sometimes Dim light bulbs, like Susanne, should just shut up and not show her bias against the Dem's.
The person who wrote the book "The Peter Principle" several decades ago was clearly on the mark and perfectly described what has happened in our society. Everyone in our government and media has obviously risen to "their level of incompetency."
We're screwed......
I'm sorry...but this question being asked was made to look Clinton look bad...not the other way around.
She's a "bitch" and the rest of the progressives laugh it off, or ignore it.
SHAME!
Josh @ 102:
Well, it's better to be a bitch then to be a traitor and a coward like Dick Cheney and his partner in crime, George W Bush.
the word is IMbalance, not inbalance
and your logic is as flawed as a republicans. You didn't make any point here, you just spewed all of the talking points like a good little republican would. We don't have an echo chamber and we don't have to play that game. You know why?
Because we're not playing a game. People are dying and this country is coming apart at the seams. Stop being indignant and start doing something productive. You're job is to keep people in the know because our other news media have failed on so many levels. Please don't forget this. We depend on you for your reportage not your damn soapbox.
That analysis is absolutely correct. Without the participation of the voters that are mostly affected by the proposed plans of the candidates; there would not be a balance of consideration to the debate as a whole.
Yes indeed the Audience won the debate in this case. They (the voters) Won the debate in 2006, when they made clear their demands during the election. There is no debate in deciding who the public servants and who the constituents are. Voters are NOT happy with the way things are turning out in Washington D.C. And that was reflective in audience response to the "top-tier" candidates. It is also quite clear that the debate format is so BIAS; that the voters are not being afforded to learn more ALL the candidate in this debate format. There's an obvious IMBALANCE of time granted to respond to issues (disproportionate allocated to ALL the candidates).
THIS IS CLEARLY NOT DEMOCRATIC.
Suzanne really gets all smily when Bush compliments her outfits. She is a moron. The audience was just plain rude and biased. Hillary and her abused little lady act, even with the denial and her commitment to the hot kitchen, gag me. Edwards said that she is a corporatist and she is. It was about issues not name calling. Hillary,I don't want a Clinton monarchy. You couldn't keep Bill in control enough so that we all are suffering because your family, not mine, didn't have values. Even if the Repugs shouldn't have asked, Bill was wrong and we will hear all about it again if you are the nominee. I want a woman president, just not one namedf Hillary now.
For an excellent analysis of how Malveaux spun the audience questions during the debates:
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/11/19/83043/598
Now now, let's not assume that the average American is as stupid and/or shallow as Suzanne Malveaux! I'm still voting for the black guy!
Hey CrooksAndLiars:
Please put this Video on Wolf Blitzer, CNN's Situation Room runner and last debates "moderator" up: http://alternet.org/blogs/video/
Suzanne is Colin Powell, Condi Rice, and Clarence Thomas combined.
I wonder if the audience was rooting for obama or eddie you babies would stop crying. Hillary is way ahead in nevada so duh more hillary supporters. Stop blaming cnn or hillary. your boys got their lights knocked out and she did it with a smile.............
I’d like to score her performance on a scale of 0 to 1…
I’d give her one.
Login or Register to post comments.