CNN: Gen. Kerr Sets the Record State on Clinton 'Controversy'

Run time: 00:46 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lsAxWdiXEsQ   Posted on YouTube: November 29, 2007 By YouTube Member: Views on YouTube: 0   Posted on DU: November 29, 2007 By DU Member: Hissyspit Views on DU: 1306

 
CNN interview on 11/29

Let's just forget Rudy's using taxpayer money to get laid

What is he talking about? I missed something obviously.

http://rawstory.com/news/2007/CNN_slammed_for_question_from_Clinton_1129.html

Clinton campaign: We didn't plant gay soldier
David Edwards and Nick Juliano
Published: Thursday November 29, 2007

An openly gay retired soldier who quizzed Republican candidates about the military's don't ask don't tell policy was not acting on behalf of Hillary Clinton, despite his role on her campaign's gay-rights steering committee, the campaign said Thursday.

"He is not a campaign employee and was not acting on behalf of the campaign," Clinton spokesman Phil Singer told RAW STORY.

Toward the end of Wednesday's Republican presidential debate, retired Brigadier Gen. Keith Kerr asked the candidates, "Why you think that American men and women in uniform are not professional enough to serve with gays and lesbians."

Right-wing bloggers quickly noted that Kerr was a member of Clinton's "LGBT Americans for Hillary" steering committee. Within 40 minutes of the debate's end, Townhall.com ran a post titled, "Hillary Plants a Question in Republican Debate."

After the debate had ended CNN host Anderson Cooper acknowledged the Clinton connection and said the network was unaware of it before airing his question.

"Certainly, had we had that information, we would have acknowledged that in using his question, if we had used it at all," Cooper told viewers.

Thursday, CNN acknowledged questions about Kerr and interviewed him about his ties to Clinton.

"I have not done any work (for Clinton), several friends asked me if I would allow my name to be listed, and I agreed," Kerr said referring to his position on the steering committee.

Kerr said is a registered independent and has not donated money to Clinton or any other 2008 candidates, and he stressed that no one put him up to asking the question. A search of OpenSecrets,a campaign finance database confirms Kerr has made no donations.

"This was a private initiative on my own," Kerr told CNN host John King.
This video is from CNN's American Morning, broadcast on November 29, 2007.

she put him up to it or not, it is not very ethical. You don't sit on someone's steering committee and then claim to be an unbiased independent.

I wouldn't want anyone from Romney or Guiliani's committees posing as an independent and asking questions at the democratic primary debates, but then maybe that's just me. :shrug:

I am not a fan of Hillary, in fact she is the one Democratic candidate that I am most fiercely opposed to getting the nomination.

But that is beside the point, Kerr did not say one word about Hillary in his beautiful and passionate speech. He was talking about equal rights for the GLBT community, and there is no reason that the GOP candidates should not have to listen to him. If you are running for public office you sure as hell better be able to listen to opposing viewpoints, and that was what he was offering. I would have no problem with a Republican doing something similar at a Democratic debate because debates should be about hearing different perspectives on the issues and then allowing candidates to respond.

with a republican showing up at a democratic debate and launching into her heartbreaking story of keeping her child after a teenage pregnancy or her friend who committed suicide after having an abortion.... Well I'm sure you can conjure a few scenarios as to where that might go.

The abortion issue is just as important to republicans as gay rights are to democrats. There is free speech and there are proper venues for that speech. As much as you might argue otherwise, I don't feel people have the inherit right to impose their points of view on whoever they want, whenever they want.

*on edit - he claimed to be an independent. perhaps I wrongly equated that with unbiased.

As long as the story was true, no I would have no problem with them giving a Republican a minute or so to talk to the candidates about their views on abortion at a debate and then letting the candidates respond. A good candidate should be able to address such issues, that is part of being a candidate for office.

This was a perfectly proper venue for the General to give his speech, he was invited to do so and he accepted the invitation. I was glad to hear from more than just the Republican candidates and get a more sane perspective, if that means I have to compromise by allowing a Republican a couple minutes during the next Democratic debate so be it, I think debate is healthy and that any good Democratic candidate should be able to knock down any Republican talking points that get thrown at them.

If the new what?
a. If they new he was gay.
b. If they new he supported Hillary.

What a stupid statement.

is Gen Kerr, is being lambasted because he is gay, his Clinton stuff is merely a smokescreen. The fact that a gay man, served his country admirably and rose through the ranks to become a Brig General, is what should be focused upon here, because it shows (not that there should be any doubt), that anyone who wishes to serve their country in the army, navy and airforce should be judged on their character, not their sexual orientation, he has every right as a citizen to vote how he sees fit, that is th basis of a democracy.

Whilst I believe this to be a storm in a teacup, it does show just how irrationally homophobic a lot of the Reslugs are.

Peace