The primary elections are certainly internal party affairs, yet the candidates campaign in public for all to hear. Except for the closed caucuses and committee meetings, they campaign in public venues in which, one would assume, Democrats could wander in and ask questions. Is it an artificial distinction to say that participation in the nationally-televised debates should be closed to non-Republicans?

Possibly...but then you're asking CNN to verify that all questioners who claim to be Republicans are, in fact, Republicans. That's quite the can of worms. Voter registration databases seem to be online everywhere, but in several that I sampled, they don't identify party affiliation. Even if that information were available, is it fair to use such a strict criteria to define a Republican (or a Democrat)? What about independents and undecided? People who might currently be registered Democratic but are thinking of switching? How do you really define "Republican"?

And what about RINOs? ;-)

I have no problem with this scenario in general--activists have as much right to ask questions as anybody else--but it wouldn't have hurt to make this clear up front, and painting them as average citizens is not honest. Their questions were mostly inane, and designed specifically to make the candidates look bad, not to generate information.

Of course, the RightWing blogosphere is tirelessly ferreting out Democratic "activists" who asked questions, but has anybody checked to determine whether the Republican questioners could be considered "activists"? (he asked rhetorically) I did a little research of my own, and identified a few of them who could be considered genuinely activists (without the quotes):

Chris Nandor (sang the song): 39th District Chair of the Snohomish County Republican Party

Grover Norquist: We both know who this guy is.

Andrew Fink: Member of the Louisville Libertarian "meetup" group; seems to be a Ron Paul supporter, possibly could be defined as an "activist".

Buzz Brockway: Rabid blogger, ran for offices in the Georgia GOP--definitely a player, if not an activist.

A lot may depend on the definition of "activist", given the spectrum of involvement that goes beyond being just a Republican voter.

While you may have a point about segregating the debate questioners, I'm not so sure it's practical. That's a pretty big burden to put on CNN to demand them to be the judge of who's a Genuine Republican™. You know what would happen if they tried: They'd make a controversial call, and then the blogosphere would light up with outrage about that.

Now explain what CNN's motive would be in loading the Republican debate with Democratic activist questioners, some asking loaded questions?

Loaded questions came from people who were indisputably Republicans, too. Democratic questioners had no monopoly on that. And again you're asking CNN to step into a minefield by making that rather subjective judgment, and risking more blogorage by getting it wrong. Tricky for a news organization to be the judge of what questions are fair to ask, and which are not.

I think CNN may have done just about all that they realistically could.