The issue of General Kerr's appearance at the You Tube debate continues to raise a firestorm. General Kerr lends his name to a Clinton campaign committee on gay rights. (And apparently his name was on a letter for a Kerry veterans committee in 2004). At the very least it shows bad judgment on his part, especially in light of questions whether the Clinton campaign was planting questions at her rallies.
CNN apparently edited the General out of the rebroadcast of the debate.
There are other issues now being raised regarding whether other questioners were "plants." Some of the other questioners were either supporters of Democratic candidates or have some other left wing connection. That does not really bother me. All of the questions were respectful and serious questions. The Muslim woman might have been a former CAIR intern, but the question was a good and serious one, and was respectful (not a GOTTA type of thing). The black man who asked about getting more black support for the GOP apparently runs a satire site about black Republicans, but again, his question was serious and respectful. (I doubt the guy who asked the gun question of Biden in the Democratic debate was a Democrat)
My only problem is with the General because his name is attached to the Clinton campaign, and he was flown in at Google's expense to give a rebuttal to the answers given. His question was a serious one, but one that someone else should have asked.