Diamonds And Pearls Are A Girl's Best Friend (But Maybe Not Her Question Of Choice)

Everyone is pretty much in agreement that last night's "Diamonds or Pearls?" query to Hillary Clinton at the CNN Democratic Debate in Las Vegas was a total clunker. Now from The Atlantic's Marc Ambinder comes word that the UNLV student who asked the question, Maria Luisa, had not, in fact, expected to ask that question, but had rather prepared a question about the proposed Yucca Mountain site for nuclear waste. Ambinder tracked the story to Luisa's MySpace page, which he excerpted as follows:

"Every single question asked during the debate by the audience had to be approved by CNN...I was asked to submit questions including "lighthearted/fun" questions. I submitted more than five questions on issues important to me. I did a policy memo on Yucca Mountain a year ago and was the finalist for the Truman Scholarship. For sure, I thought I would get to ask the Yucca question that was APPROVED by CNN days in advance. CNN ran out of time and used me to "close" the debate with the pearls/diamonds question."

Oh, ouch — it's almost worse knowing that someone actually gave the thumbs-up to "diamonds or pearls?" in advance. Here's the CNN response (also pillaged from Ambinder):

Sam Feist, the executive producer of the debate, said that the student was asked to choose another question because the candidates had already spent about ten minutes discussing Yucca Mountain.

"When her Yucca mountain question was asked, she was given the opportunity to ask another question, and my understand is that the [diamond v. pearls] questions was her other question," Feist said. "She probably was disappointed, but we spent a lot of time with a bunch of different candidates on Yucca Mountain, and we were at the end of the debate."

Our take: Luisa doesn't deny submitting the "diamonds or pearls" question, and could have refused in horror...though that's a pretty high standard for a kid to meet in the heat of the moment with a mike in your face and the chance to address the presidential candidates on national TV. It sucks that Luisa is taking heat right now (it's an obit-leader) but it sucks more that anyone at CNN actually THOUGHT THAT WOULD BE A GOOD QUESTION TO ASK, EVER. Sheesh.

Meanwhile, Ambinder also notes that there are rumblings that the debate audience had a "pro-Clinton tilt"; as we (and others) have noted, CNN's postgame panel featured both James Carville (former Bill Clinton advisor and current Hillary Clinton supporter) and David Gergen, also a Clinton White House advisor (but, to be fair, also for Nixon, Ford, Reagan and Bush I. Even so, as a counselor to Clinton, it ought to have been noted — particularly when paired with the no-ifs-ands-or-buts-about-it Clintonite Carville). Our take: Did anyone see that postgame wrap-up? Urk. If comments like, "Hillary Clinton was rested and ready" were supposed to help his candidate, then Gergen's not all that much help. The other campaigns ought to be glad they weren't part of it.

"Diamond v. Pearl" Student Blasts CNN [The Atlantic]

Related:
Diamonds & Pearls [Prince]

Comments

[mimsnpips]

as far as the topic on this thread:
anyone else for crickets chirping?

[BobHanssen]

Diamonds or Pearls?
Maidenform or Olga?
Thong or bikini?
Wax or shave?
Clairol or Pantene?
Tattoo or piercing?

[Bobzmcishl]

The MSM and especially CNN yet again focused almost exclusively on Clinton, Obama, and Edwards. Dennis Kuchinich stole the show but you would not know that from the post debate recap. All Hillary all the time was the mantra. No wonder Biden and Kuchinich had looks of disgust on their faces. As for the last question of debate, that pretty much sums up the dumbing down process of the TV media. They seem to think the American public can't watch two hours of serious debate without some comic relief. That is an insult to all of us. CNBC does it too and of course Fox News is one big joke.

[northernperspective]

It may be time to return to that old tradition of presidential debates being held by The League of Women Voters. All networks get the same broadcast feed. No semblance of media bias. Serious and thoughtful (yes, probably a little boring...but I think we'd put up with that these days). No gotcha questions. Blitzer-like personalities wouldn't dominate. And they wouldn't favour one candidate over another with regard to time allotment. They could stream it, post full transcripts online, etc.

[Lazslo]

I saw the post-debate commentary and was shocked. It was so unabashedly slanted to favoring Hillary Clinton, and discounted Obama's performance, the closest challenger to her. It was so obvious, and my first thought was that the Clinton camp had gotten to CNN and intimidated them with something. It's pretty well established now that the cable news outlets and mainstream media are just propaganda outlets for big business. In order to compete with Fox News, the others are becoming just like them. They used to call this "yellow journalism".

[FirstBlowupDollLaura]

See who you should vote for by taking a quiz on the issues:

http://glassbooth.org

[Rubiconski]

Usual Clinton: EVERY ANSWER REHEARSED, EVERY THOUGHT (and "spontaneous reaction") re-written by a poll-watching response team.

Curious how the term "Clintonesque" has come to mean EVASIVE, CYNICAL, CALCULATED AND FLAT OUT UNTRUE.

The Dems SHOULD win in 2008, Clinton will singlehandedly lose it all.

[breathestolive]

And so wouldn't you love to know what questions were planted for the OTHER candidates? I sure would. Mrs. Clinton is not the only one who got canned questions, and if you think she is you're dreaming.

Honestly, this is such a tempest in a teapot.

[FirstBlowupDollLaura]

THIS IS THE PROBLEM WITH VOTERS CHOOSING THEIR FAVORITE BY WATCHING TELEVISION

[FirstForty]

All her 'ringer' anwers were clearly scripted and she was just waiting for the expected or planted question. The debate was quite disappointing and didnt do anything to help enlighten any of us.

[Rubiconski]

Diamonds or Pearls? Who do they think she is? Marie Antoinette? Imelda Marcos? Is that playing into the gender card? I think so.

It was an embarrassment, confirming the Drudge rumor that the Clinton's were in talks with AIPAC's Blitzer to "go easy on HRC."

Diamonds or pearls, m'lady. For your coronation?

Hopefully, what happens in Vegas does stay in Vegas!

CLINTON NEWS NETWORK, HRC and the DNC (if they don't protest that travesty) should be ashamed.

The American people don't deserve this!

[Steverino]

Ugh. You guys stink at writing headlines. "Student Says CNN Made Her Ask Hillary The 'Diamonds vs Pearls' Question" made me think that CNN planted the question, when really that girl DID submit the question. So they pointed to her number 5 or 6 question instead of her #1, big deal.

[BUSHsurvivor]

Our take: Luisa doesn't deny submitting the "diamonds or pearls" question

[ColoradoDan]

The Dems could have it all but instead they fall for the worst candidates who are forced up on them. Yes, the Reps are even worse - it all seems so phony, so contrived.

Hillary has backed Bush's worst policies and would just continue the same if not even more vile.

It would be great to hear more of Dennis and Ron --- the best from both camps rather than the terrible choices at the top right now.

No more Clinton/Bush regimes please.

[MPeter]

HRC can't handle the heat. She can only answer planted questions. That is as bad as rigging an election. Now watch and listen to this zinger. She looks like a deer caught in headlights.
http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post_group/ObamaHQ/CxSh