Well, Jim Lehrer poses the questions for Shields and whomever is representing the other side of the regular panel at any given time. You may think you know Mr. Lehrer's political leanings, but I would be hard pressed to tell you what they are. I don't believe he has ever said, himself.

And I believe it's Margaret Warner who asks the questions of the temporary panel members. Again, I haven't the slightest idea what her political leanings are, and I don't believe she has said, either. I think any attempt to say what the political positions of these two are would be pure speculation on anyone's part.

As far as watering down what is said by the two regular panel members is concerned, yes, Mark Shields does it too. I think they both make some concessions for the sake of keeping civility on that segment of the show.

Re: your example of the use of the term "budget cuts"... panel members arguing for your side of the debate could have stated an objection to the use of that term, and I feel pretty confident that it would have been at least noted. I've seen people on both sides do that before.

Re: your complaint about the adequacy of the people chosen to represent one or the other side of the debate... sometimes I'm satisfied, sometimes I'm not, and sometimes I don't feel qualified to form an opinion. But someone else who generally has the same political ideas as mine may not even agree with me about whom is adequate and who is not. I think that one is highly subjective.