home

Immigration and CNN's You Tube Republican Debate

Timothy Rutten at the LA Times skewers CNN over the questions asked of the Republican candidates at the You Tube debate, calling it a masquerade and suggesting the focus on immigration was done to boost Lou Dobbs' ratings.

When CNN brought the Republican presidential candidates together this week for what is loosely termed a "debate," what did the country get but a discussion of immigration, Biblical inerrancy and the propriety of flying the Confederate flag?

....CNN chose to devote the first 35 minutes of this critical debate to a single issue -- immigration. Now, if that leaves you scratching your head, it's probably because you're included in the 96% of Americans who do not think immigration is the most important issue confronting this country.

The Pew Center which studies issues of concern to voters, ranks the issues of most importance as:

By an overwhelming margin, Americans think the war in Iraq is the most important issue facing the United States, followed by the economy, healthcare and energy prices. In fact, if you lump the war into a category with terrorism and other foreign policy issues, 40% of Americans say foreign affairs are their biggest concern in this election cycle.

So why did CNN focus on immigration:

The answer is that CNN's most popular news-oriented personality, Lou Dobbs, has made opposition to illegal immigration and free trade the centerpiece of his neonativist/neopopulist platform. In fact, Dobbs led into Wednesday's debate with a good solid dose of immigrant bashing. His network is in a desperate ratings battle with Fox News and, in a critical prime-time slot, with MSNBC's Keith Olbermann. So, what's good for Dobbs is good for CNN.

In other words, CNN intentionally directed the Republicans' debate to advance its own interests. Make immigration a bigger issue and you've made a bigger audience for Dobbs.

On the religion questions:

American journalists quite legitimately ask candidates about policy issues -- say, abortion -- that might be influenced by their religious or philosophical convictions. We do not and should not ask them about those convictions themselves. It's nobody's business whether a candidate believes in the virgin birth, whether God gave an oral Torah to Moses at Sinai, whether the Buddha escaped the round of birth and rebirth or whether an angel appeared to Joseph Smith.

What did CNN do? It chose "some crackpot's query about the candidates' stand on Biblical inerrancy..."

CNN's noxious laundering of this question through the goofy YouTube mechanism quite clearly was designed to embarrass Mitt Romney -- who happens to be a Mormon -- and, secondarily, to help Mike Huckabee -- who, as a Baptist minister, had a ready answer, and who happens to be television's campaign flavor of the month.

You might think the You Tube debate questions are viewer created. They are, but they are not the ones who decide which of the 5,000 submitted questions will be asked. Television producers for the network hosting the debate make that call.

Ruttan concludes:

CNN has failed in its responsibilities to the political process and it's time for the leaders of both the Republican and Democratic parties to take the network out of our electoral affairs.

< A Repentant Imus Returns to Radio | Rudy Crashing And Burning >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Leaving aside the fact that (1.00 / 0) (#1)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Dec 03, 2007 at 12:23:49 PM EST
    these debates, both Repub and Demo, are supposedly about which one of their party's candidate they want to nominate, and NOT about the general election just under a year from now..... The issue certainly resonated with the large majority of US Citizens that rejected the amnesty bill backed by Bush and Reid last summer as well as the 77% of New Yorkers who made Spitzer back down and eat humble pie.

    Is it No. 1? I doubt that, but I believe it is in the top 10 for all Americans, and certainly in the top 5 with the Repub base. And again. That was who the debate for.

    As for religion?? That's a toughie. I would have trouble believing a practicing Catholic who claimed to strongly favor abortion rights, just as I would have trouble believing a Moslem who claims to not believe Shari law. They are both basic to their claimed faiths.

    BS (none / 0) (#2)
    by squeaky on Mon Dec 03, 2007 at 12:33:58 PM EST
    as well as the 77% of New Yorkers who made Spitzer back down and eat humble pie.

    No one asked me or anyone I know. It may have been a poll of NYers but no way did 77% of NYers make Spitzer back down.

    That is your anti immigrant fantasy, and a misrepresentation of the facts.

    tehe No one cares what squeaky thinks. (1.00 / 0) (#6)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Dec 03, 2007 at 05:44:30 PM EST
    No one asked me or anyone I know.

    Let me gentle.

    The fact that you weren't asked proves absolutely nothing. Zip. Nada. Wait! It does prove no one cares what you think!

    ALBANY - An overwhelming number of Americans oppose Gov. Spitzer's idea to give illegal aliens driver's licenses, a new Rasmussen Reports poll shows.

    Asked "Should we allow people who are in this country illegally to get a driver's license?" 77 percent answered no, compared to 16 percent who said yes and 7 percent who were not sure.


    How does it feel to be a 16 percenter??


    Parent

    OK (5.00 / 0) (#7)
    by squeaky on Mon Dec 03, 2007 at 10:02:45 PM EST
    It means nothing. Like most of what you say.

    Parent
    Squeaky (1.00 / 0) (#8)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Dec 04, 2007 at 07:10:28 AM EST
    If you would just stop and think sometimes, maybe do a little Google before shooting of in all directions... you could have Googled the 77% and surely you were aware of the shamnesty bill's defeat..

    Parent
    It Has (5.00 / 0) (#9)
    by squeaky on Tue Dec 04, 2007 at 01:00:07 PM EST
    Nothing to do with Google. It has to do with your twist of the facts, as usual. 77% of NYers weren't even polled. That would be 1,486,5761 people.  You are FOS.

    Parent
    That is close to (1.00 / 0) (#10)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Dec 04, 2007 at 04:45:57 PM EST
    as dumb a comment as you have ever made.

    Parent
    Nice (5.00 / 0) (#11)
    by squeaky on Tue Dec 04, 2007 at 06:31:10 PM EST
    Distraction from your absurd statement:

    as well as the 77% of New Yorkers who made Spitzer back down and eat humble pie.

    Which is BS.


    Parent

    Earth to Squeaky! Earth to Squeaky!! (1.00 / 0) (#12)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Dec 04, 2007 at 08:51:28 PM EST
    Come in Squeaky!

    It is a poll. And the lopsided results made Spitzer back down.

    hehehe

     

    Asked "Should we allow people who are in this country illegally to get a driver's license?" 77 percent answered no, compared to 16 percent who said yes and 7 percent who were not sure.

    The widespread opposition crosses all political, gender, age and income-level lines.

    Nearly 90 percent of Republicans, 68 percent of Democrats and 75 percent of those not affiliated with a major party, oppose giving licenses to undocumented immigrants, Rasmussen found. About 80 percent of whites, 71 percent of blacks and 64 percent of "other" are against the idea.



    Parent
    A Poll? (5.00 / 0) (#15)
    by squeaky on Tue Dec 04, 2007 at 10:02:56 PM EST
    Really, you never mentioned that. Intentionally misleading again? Even your your quote mentions the word poll, but somehow you don't mention it.

    What were the margins of error and the sample size?

    Oh less than .05%:

    The telephone survey of 1,000 adults was taken on Oct. 31 and Nov. 1.

    Which according to same Rasmussen Reports poll is 500 not 1000 also found out this:

    14* Does Rudy Giuliani's relationship with Bernie Kerik reflect on Giuliani's judgment?
    37% Yes
    37% No
    25% Not sure

    I don't suppose that you have any links other than the NY Post article you quoted, do you?

    Parent

    Do you believe that it is my (1.00 / 0) (#17)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Dec 05, 2007 at 05:51:33 PM EST
    task to keep you informed of the happenings in your home state?

    hahaha

    Parent

    Informed? (1.00 / 0) (#18)
    by squeaky on Wed Dec 05, 2007 at 05:57:56 PM EST
    You mean as to the latest GOP propaganda? That is all you ever do. It is not surprising that you would quote bogus numbers from the NY Post.

    BS central as usual.


    Parent

    While I don't doubt for a second that this (none / 0) (#3)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Mon Dec 03, 2007 at 12:44:44 PM EST
    are exactly the results Pew Center got:
    By an overwhelming margin, Americans think the war in Iraq is the most important issue facing the United States, followed by the economy, healthcare and energy prices.
    I think in reality many, perhaps most, Americans may well be more interested in debates about illegal immigration than Iraq or what have you.

    iow, (none / 0) (#4)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Mon Dec 03, 2007 at 12:47:22 PM EST
    the "most important issue facing the US" may not equal "what I want to see a debate on," for a whole host of reasons.

    Parent
    Rutten is clueless (none / 0) (#5)
    by LonewackoDotCom on Mon Dec 03, 2007 at 01:11:17 PM EST
    I discuss the article here. If this were a Dobbs promo, I'm sure he or his producers would have gotten involved. And, based on the questions that were asked, I don't think they were involved.

    Rutten is simply trying to fit the LAT narrative to the facts.

    Of course the Dem POTUS nom wannabes, (none / 0) (#13)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Dec 04, 2007 at 09:42:18 PM EST
    who spent the morning squabbling betwixt and amongst each other, spent no time on such trifling matters as illegal immigration.

    Golly, those Dems are just so enlightened.

    I didn't watch the squabble you're referring to (5.00 / 0) (#14)
    by glanton on Tue Dec 04, 2007 at 10:00:58 PM EST
    But I'll take you at face value (dangerous given your moniker) and assume they didn't talk about it.  This is fine by me because, in my view, there are simply far more important issues facing the country.  

       

    Parent

    The 3 topics in the NPR/Iowa Public Radio Dem debate were China, Iran and immigration.

    Parent