Hey it wasn't only " wingers heads " that exploded , apparently one of Obama's supporters on this site too exploded his/her head .

If you go down the diary list , you would find the diary tucked way nicely there.

Nice company to keep with redstate.

Do they want to boycott CNN, or do they want a "do-over" of the debate? Can't have it both ways.

By the way since the obama hack pack on msnbc , on morning with Joe were so quick to attack CNN and claim that it was the Clinton campaign that planted the question and cnn should have disclosed some information.

How about they disclose the information that Mika is an obama supporter , so whenever I see her dumping on Clinton every morning I at least know what I am getting and where She is coming from , she was already tossing it out there that the Clinton campaign was planting question at the GOP debate , way to go.

If they were a responsible channel they would disclose that damn near all their T.V. personalities are Obama supporters , but no and they have the nerve to attack cnn for not disclosing carville etc.

Now that there are obama/edwards supporters among those who asked questions , maybe Mika can apologize for insinuating that the clinton campaign were planting questions at the gop debate.

I wouldn't hold my breadth.

If the GOP candidates aren't tough enough to take questions from Democrats, how can they possibly be tough enough to deal with security matters?

CNN should have revealed it if they knew.  The guy should have revealed it to CNN.  And CNN should not have selected the questions by what it perceived to be Republican issues instead of American issues.  I didn't watch the whole thing but I heard there wasn't a single question on Health Care, the Environment, or Iran, but there were two questions on their interpretation of Christianity.  That's what people should be pissed about.  That seems to be something we could be united about in our anger at least.

there's no better indication of the republican's precipitous decline than to see them whining about being asked a question by a gay republican who may (or may not) supporting hillary.  i can still remember in the mid-80s when the nrcc fired their southern regional director because he was gay.  and terry dolan, of the leather set, deserves as much credit or blame for dawn of the "reagan revolution" as almost anyone.  i wonder if they'd like a do-over of 1980 without their gay supporters and employees...

I saw that RedState piece and my immediate thought was, "Why in the world would they want to go through it all again?" But I'd surley love to see them suffer through a repeat performance :).

--Kibitzer

I'm a little concerned to hear that 5 million people actually care enough about the Republican candidates to watch the debacle. Apparently, that is the highest number of viewers for a debate, about 1 million more than the total viewers watching the Democrats.

Media Matters had a great piece about some of the "gotcha" questions from the Democratic YouTube debate.  I didn't like those questions then, and I'm sympathetic to the view that the Republicans should get to talk about what they want to talk about, but the bottom line is that it has to be a level playing field.  I'm sick of Democratic debates always being like "Aren't teachers' unions icky?" and Republican debates being like "Tell us all about how you'll win the war on terror."

   * I'd like to know, if the Democrats come into office, are my taxes going to rise like usually they do when a Democrat gets into office?

   * To all the candidates: Tell me your position on gun control, as myself and other Americans really want to know if our babies are safe. This is my baby, purchased under the 1994 gun ban.
    * My question for all the candidates: How do we pull out now? And the follow-up: Are we watching the same blankin' war? I certainly wasn't a big fan of the invasion/liberation. It sickens me to hear about soldiers wounded and getting killed daily, not to mention innocent Iraqis, but how do we pull out now? Government's shaky; bombs daily.

     Don't you think if we pulled out now that it would open it up for Iran and Syria, God knows who -- Russia -- how do we pull out now? And isn't it our responsibility to get these people up on their feet? I mean, do you leave a newborn baby to take care of himself? How do we pull out now?

   * My question is for Mike Gravel. In one of the previous debates, you said something along the lines of, "The entire deaths of Vietnam died in vain."

     How do you expect to win in a country where probably a pretty large chunk of the people voting disagree with that statement and might very well be offended by it? I'd like to know if you plan to defend that statement, or if you're just going to flip-flop. Thanks.

   * I'm a proud serving member of the United States military. I'm serving overseas.

     This question is to Senator Hillary Clinton. The Arab states, Muslim nations, believe its women as being second-class citizens. If you're president of the United States, how do you feel that you would be even be taken seriously by these states in any kind of talks, negotiations, or any other diplomatic relations? I feel that's a legitimate question.

Seriously.  "Are you going to raise my taxes again?" "Are you going to take away my guns?" "Are you going to flip-flop again?"  I'd challenge any Republican to show me how their debate was any more loaded than ours.

If they can't stand up to one Clinton supporter, I don't know how they can stand up to Bin Laden.

A do-over?  Well I call 'no backsies' jebus have any of them even come up when questions that should have been asked?  

My god, what a bunch of children!

If we need to talk about people who have previously supported Democrats (a la malkin) I nominate Rudy Giuliani.  He voted for McGovern.

Really people. We should totally get on board with RedState's demands for a boycott.

CNN did a terrible job at the Democratic debate, for entirely different reasons, and I am happy to call for the heads of the Political Director and Executive Producer.

Plus I would love to give Republican candidates another chance to embarrass themselves on national television.

While I think RedState's reasoning here is assinine, I see no reason why we shouldn't fully support their efforts!

RedState.com probably wants a "do over" for banning Ron Paul supporters, now that their website traffic has plummeted and he has raised over ten million dollars in the past two months.

The only debate that has been done fairly so far was the PBS debate.  Each candidate received the same amount of time, everyone was asked the same questions, and everyone was given the opportunity to go first.

Is that really so hard for CNN, CNBC, Fox, MSNBC, and ABC to figure out?

None of the candidates has received any votes yet.  Most voters are still undecided.  Why give some candidates more time than others?  Because undecided and ill-informed respondents to telephone surveys name them when pressured to do so by pollsters?