COURAGE!
Dorothy: Your Majesty, If you were King, you wouldn’t be afraid of anything?
Lion: Not nobody, not nohow!
Tin Man: Not even a rhinocerous?
Lion: Imposserous!
Dorothy: How about a hippopotamus?
Lion: Why, I’d trash him from top to bottomamus!
Dorothy: Supposin’ you met an elephant?
Lion: I’d wrap him up in cellophant!
Scarecrow: What if it were a brontosaurus?
Lion: I’d show him who was King of the Forest!
All Four: HOW?
Lion: How?
Courage!
What makes a King out of a slave?
Courage!
What makes the flag on the mast to wave?
Courage!
What makes the elephant charge his tusk, in the misty mist or the dusky dusk? What makes the muskrat guard his musk?
Courage!
What makes the sphinx the seventh wonder?
Courage!
What makes the dawn come up like thunder?
Courage!
What makes the Hottentot so hot? What puts the “ape” in apricot? What have they got that I ain’t got?
All Four: COURAGE!
Lion: You can say that again…
I was trying to decide whether to use this classic Bert Lahr bit from Wizard of Oz or another classic bit from Monty Python and the Holy Grail to illustrate how totally disgusted I am with Republican presidential candidates who fear getting questions via YouTube from well meaning but nutty citizens that would be gleefully culled and chosen by those totally impartial and fair minded editors and producers at CNN.
Hugh Hewitt, with what we assume will soon be the official Mitt Romney position, cries Humbug!
If the GOP candidates agree to this format, expect a series of cheap shots about all of the top tier candidates. Patrick worries that the Republicans will appear behind the times if they take a pass. Perhaps, but if that means skipping a no win set-up where MSM agenda journalists work for weeks to put a video shiv into one or more of the Big Three, I am for it. The second tier folks will no doubt show up hoping for a Hail mary moment, but Giuliani, Romney and Thompson ought to say no thanks.To illustrate,take a look at this story—a bit of agenda journalism that Jonathan Martin at Politico.com told me on air today is built on a story that has been floating around for months. Imagine some YouTube video asking Rudy why he’s defending a suspected pedophile. No MSMer would dare ask such a loaded question, but imagine what the gang at CNN would do. They covered for the Dems with a series of overwhelmingly left-biased questions at the first YouTube debate, with a very few tough, serious questions thrown in. That dynamic would change completely in a GOP YouTube debate—they or their counterparts at a different network will be gunning for the Republicans, and the question set will be designed to embarrass or ridicule.
Hugh is missing the point. It’s not a question of partisanship necessarily. It’s a question of putting on a good show.
If you’re all doe eyed and worshipful about the “freedom of the press” and our grand experiment in democracy being safeguarded by these noble knights with printers ink on their fingers, allow me to disabuse you of something; these guys are not very noble and the only freedom they care about is the one that says they can make gobs of money while pretending to be journalists. Paddy Chayefsky’s nightmare screenplay Network has come true with a vengeance. It’s not about the news. It’s show business. CNN, Fox, MSNBC - the lot of them – are in “the boredom killing business” as Chayefsky so sharply observed.
Even more basic than that, it’s all about eyeballs. The news nets want your eyeballs and like the carny barkers of old, will do or say just about anything to make you stop clicking the remote long enough – 3 or 4 minutes at the outside – to watch as they dangle shiny, pretty, horrifying, funny, dramatic, titillating, and blood boiling baubles made of people and events in front of your eyes. Their goal; make you stick around until after the commercial break.
Are they partisan? Sure they are. But above and beyond that, they are consummate showmen. And a bunch of conservative Christian white men standing on stage all in a row like ducks in an old fashioned shooting gallery is just too much of a target rich environment to pass up. They’ll have every group of special pleaders (who happen to be Democratic constituencies) eager to get their shots in. Why do Republicans hate blacks? Or Hispanics? Or women? Or children. Or puppy dogs?
In the Democratic debate, the entertainment value came from the questioners themselves. The snowman, the guy who called his rifle “baby” – CNN could have cared less about the efficacy of the questions as long as the people asking them were interesting to look at.
The GOP debate would be a little different. Hugh is correct about the kinds of questions that would be chosen. But here, the entertainment value would be watching the Republican candidates squirm. The chickenhawk questions would be most entertaining – from CNN’s point of view. And can you imagine some gay guy asking Brownback why he’s persecuting him? Perfect!
So why bother, Hewitt is asking?
For God’s sake, Hugh! These people want to be President of the United States! If they can’t stand up to a little tough questioning from Democratic partisans (CNN included) how in God’s name are they going to stand up to Ahmadinejad who I guarantee will feel a helluva lot more empowered come November, 2008 than a gay guy from New York asking about gay marriage!
There would be something unseemly about Republicans ducking this debate – sort of like being too frightened to walk into a dark room full of treasure where you’ve been told a vicious beast is ready to pounce and eat you. That doesn’t mean you don’t go into the room. It means that you grab yourself a set of night vision goggles and the biggest gun in your arsenal and you go and face down the beast and grab the loot.
If Republicans don’t believe strongly enough in their ideals, then perhaps they should skip the debate. Case in point was Obama’s response to the question about meeting the thugs of the world his first year in office without pre-conditions. It’s a stupid idea. But was there any doubt in your mind that Obama didn’t believe in his answer 120%? Hillary has tried to make political hay out of Obama’s naivety but isn’t getting very far because people know that Obama believes what he’s saying.
Does Romney mean it when he says he’s anti-abortion or anti-gay marriage? Does Rudy believe it when he says he’ll name strict constructionists to the Supreme Court? Does anyone believe anything John McCain says anymore?
The GOP is in crisis because it has no leadership, no agenda, and is failing the test of history. It’s principles have crashed on the shoals of expediency and arrogance. It insists on putting its social agenda front and center in the mistaken belief that Americans care more about preventing gay people from getting married then whether they’ll have a job in six months. Or how in God’s name we’re going to get out of Iraq without leaving a bloody mess.
Stay away from the debate and the American people will judge you cowards. The press will see to that. Stand up like men, take your lumps, give back as good as you get, don’t fear the unknown, and move forward.
Or, perhaps the man behind the curtain will give you what you really need; a permanent pass to the back benches of government where you belong if you skip this debate.
7:52 am
The Monty Hall Forum…
The buzz around the political blogs has the Republican presidential campaigns backing away from the September YouTube debate. Mitt Romney has publicly sniffed at the notion that serious candidates should take questions from talking snowmen, and Marc Am…
9:30 am
Republicans Bailing on the September YouTube Debate?...
That’s today’s buzz, after some of the candidates
like Mitt Romneyseem to think than being questioned by snowmen and ilk doesn’t look too presidential: “It was a presidential debate, for cryin’ out loud, and CNN’s decision to give airtime…...10:05 am
[...] There are plenty of things candidates don’t like about running for President. I’m sure they don’t like the non-stop events, the constant handshaking, the forced smiles even when they’re not feeling 100%, begging people for campaign donations, etc. Yet candidates suck it up knowing that stuff has to be done in order to win the Presidency. Heck, if elected President things won’t get easier. It wasn’t that bad. Romney, et al will survive. [...]
10:15 am
Totally agree with you here, Rick. Bring it on! It’s way past time that the limelight be put on the inaccuracy, the lying, the lack of reason and common sense, and the manipulation of the Left. Let the moonbats ask their ridiculous questions – expose them to the Nation for the whack jobs they are. Who knows, it may be a night where Rudy or Mitt or McCain could have a “There You go again…” moment.
The only issue at hand here is if CNN’s filter is such that there are 70% “attack” questions and 30% “friendly” questions – the Dems obviously got about 80% friendly.
But my view is this. The only way the Republican candidate that I back (when i decide)is going to beat Hillary is if the American people see his concise, well-founded questions to difficult and perhaps, uncomfortable questions. That way the American people can judge for themselves – an answer from a leader compared to an answer from a wannabe First Lady.
And if my Repubs can’t take the heat of the question, then good – I don’t want them facing down a tough question from Assad in Syria.
11:46 am
Barack also says in his youtube debate that as a president he is not using his religous beliefs to deterimine law.
THE following are HRC statements the top three gave a few months ago:
Clinton says
“”I would like to see federal benefits extended to
same sex couples that meet certain standards.””
“”I support repealing the provision of DOMA that may
prohibit the federal government from providing
benefits to people in states that recognize same sex
marriage. “”
“”I strongly support ensuring people in stable,
long-term same sex relationships have full equality of
benefits, rights, and responsibilities.””
Clintons above three statements have me concerned
she is side stepping in what she says as not
to commit to anything officially.
she would amend the provisions of DOMA in certain
standards. Her husband and her were the ones who got
us DOMA which Barack has wanted to erase ever since
the clintons had it installed as law. Barack obama
and john edwards want to repeal DOMA which is good for
us.
“Obama is the only candidate who supports long-term,
same-sex relationships regardless of length of time
those couples have been together.
Edwards
“”I believe that couples in committed, longâ€term
relationships should have the same rights,
benefits, and responsibilities, whether they are
straight couples or sameâ€Sex couples.””
Edwards above statement, is the only one in the area of
civil unions i am concerned about. Because straight
people don’t have to be in long term committed
relationships to get married / civil unions.
However, edwards does want to repeal the DOMA bill
that the clintons levied on us in the 90’s, which is a
good thing for edwards.
JOHN EDWARDS
http://a4.g.akamai.net/f/4/19675/0/newmill.download.akamai.com/19677/anon.newmediamill/pdfs/edwards.pdf
HILLARY CLINTON
http://a4.g.akamai.net/f/4/19675/0/newmill.download.akamai.com/19677/anon.newmediamill/pdfs/clinton.pdf
BARACK OBAMA
http://a4.g.akamai.net/f/4/19675/0/newmill.download.akamai.com/19677/anon.newmediamill/pdfs/obama.pdf
12:27 pm
Who cares about “debates”...
My opinion is that they should not do events like the You Tube debate OR the town hall “debate” which is just like a joint press conference with 8 or 10 people making short sound bite responses to stupid questions. They should have real debates betwe…
1:52 pm
[...] Rick Moran shares my thoughts… These people want to be President of the United States! If they can’t stand up to a little tough questioning from Democratic partisans (CNN included) how in God’s name are they going to stand up to Ahmadinejad who I guarantee will feel a helluva lot more empowered come November, 2008 than a gay guy from New York asking about gay marriage! [...]
3:27 pm
[...] The odd couple of Josh Marshall and our BTR colleague Rick Moran take Ruffini’s side in full taunt-mode, asking, in essence, “If they can’t face Youtube, how can they defeat the terrorists or stand up to Ahmadinejad.” Like anybody’s going to do that in the next few years in any case. While our esteemed leader Ed Morrissey equates the YouTube format to political “Let’s Make A Deal”. [...]
3:45 pm
GOP Candidates Weigh Participation in YouTube Debate…
One of the hottest stories in the blogosphere in recent weeks is the apparent reluctance of leading Republican presidential candidates to appear in a YouTube sponsored debate in September. As of now frontrunner Rudy Giuliani has declined and Mitt Romne…
4:28 pm
Any chance to hear what candidates think is good for independent voters like myself. I don’t care if the questions come from a talking snowman or two actual lesbians*. Quit being gigantic pussies and answer some f’ing questions! I want to know who to vote for, and it sure as hell isn’t going to be someone who’s afraid of direct questions from the public.
*not the hot kind from my dreams, unfortunately.
11:12 pm
Public Voice Adds Edge to Debate…
CHARLESTON, S.C., July 23—Democratic presidential candidates shared the spotlight Monday night …
12:16 am
Mitt Romney was just on CSPAN moments ago and took a YouTube question, along with a plethora of telephone calls in CSPAN’s standard format of Republican, Democrat and Independent phone lines.
He also said, due to his schedule, he is unable to attend the CNN/YouTube debate in Sept.
It’s interesting, reading all the puffery today about how Mitt is some how afraid of YouTube and then I turn on CSPAN and there he is answering a YouTube question…nice!
Classic….from a class guy!
4:32 am
Hillary, Obama, and a “Return to Normalcy”...
When the leading Democratic candidates take the opportunity to snipe at each other about experience and wisdom versus youth and enthusiasm in the press, Rick Moran sees one of the primary choices facing voters next year. Do we want to…...
4:09 pm
Hit the issue squarely on target. If you can’t even wing a good lie, you really have no business being at this level of the political game. Dem or GOP, if your job is to sell ideals, then you should at least be able to work a crowd.
I’m not a fan of the Parlimentary system of government, but I do think Prime Minister’s Questions should be instituted here, in some form or another, to at least force politicians to be good liars. I may not have approved of Mr. Blair, but damn he could field a question about anything, anytime, anywhere, and come out smelling sweet as a rose.
9:46 am
So what about the democrats refusing fox news debates, cannot the same argument be made?
12:56 pm
A Proposal To CNN…
The Republican reluctance to engage in the scheduled September YouTube debate has created a fierce debate in the blogosphere, including something of a civil war at Hugh Hewitt’s Townhall blog. Hugh himself has adamantly insisted that Republican candid…
12:58 pm
[...] The Republican reluctance to engage in the scheduled September YouTube debate has created a fierce debate in the blogosphere, including something of a civil war at Hugh Hewitt’s Townhall blog. Hugh himself has adamantly insisted that Republican candidates eschew the substanceless spectacle of the YouTube/CNN enterprise as a media setup. Patrick Ruffini, his co-blogger, insists that a refusal will show an unwillingness to engage directly with citizens. I argued that the YouTube debate amounted to a political equivalent of the game show Let’s Make A Deal, while Rick Moran casts it as a test of political courage. Michelle Malkin and Mark Steyn agree with Rick, while Jasmius at Heading Right says the whole thing is a tempest in a teapot. [...]