Publius eats crow; reverses opinion

This rarely happens, and it has never happened on our sites -- any of them. But after a long discussion today about this issue, Marcie was able to change my mind. Granted, she had a little help from someone else, namely Hugh Hewitt. See, Hugh showed listeners tonight why the idea of the GOP YouTube debate is fanciful, at best; at worst, it could be disastrous for politics. Please, go here and listen to the three podcasts of some of these questions already submitted.

While I wholeheartedly respect Patrick Ruffini for his opinion on why the GOP candidates shouldn't bow out of the debate, the questions spoke for themselves. Out of the two or three dozen questions he chose, there were maybe two that actually made sense or had a point. The rest of the questions were bad, to say the lest.

There was a Truther wanting to know if anyone would commission a new, independent 11 September commission to investigate why building seven was the last building to fall despite the fact that no plane hit it. (Um, it's called debris from the two main towers falling, and the damage done to it from that debris would have called for it's demolition anyway. It's not an inside job, moonbat.)

There was someone from Sri Lanka that wanted to know why his country of origin was poor, and the US was so rich. (Capitalism, rugged individualism, and an entrepreneurial spirit unmatched by any nation on the face of the globe.)

There was a guy complaining about NAFTA.

There was a guy (no kidding here) named "Santa Claus" from Tahoe wanting to know what would be done with the millions of impoverished children.

Get the patern here? Either these people are obtuse when it comes to politics, and what government should be doing, or they're simply nuts. The candidates would have to face two hours of this sort of garbage. Say what you want about who chose these videos, and say what you want about my opinion of them, but the simple fact remains that our candidates are treating this election with the utmost seriousness.

If Patrick Ruffini and his supporters wish to have a debate where the candidates field questions from everyday Americans, let those people have a microphone, and stand int he auditorium to address them directly. After listening to this show -- twice, mind you -- I am of the opinion that to have YouTubers presenting questions to the candidates would be like watching a car wreck in slow motion, much like what we witnessed in the Democrat's subsequent debate within this format.

Oh, and why did I listen to it twice? We listen to his show live every afternoon via the Internet. But we live in Arizona, not California, so his show is on tape delay. When he's done at six p.m. our time in California, his show starts on KKNT here in Arizona. Marcie wanted to make sure I got the hint, so I was asked to endure the show again, in it's entirety. OK, I get it. I was wrong in siding with Patrick. While I understand his point, it's invalid in the face of the show today. It's a bad idea, and I hope the candidates don't give into the petition being circulated, or the "brow-beating" they may endure at the hands of pundits who would love nothing more than to see the candidates embarrassed by some of the obtuse people submitting these questions.

So, there. I ate my dose of crow. I was wrong. She was right.

Publius II

Welcome Hugh Hewitt readers. Feel free to hand out licks if you'd like. Marcie sure handed hers out last night with the capable assistance of Hugh's amazing display of American asininity. Sorry Patrick, but there's no way in Hell you can convince me the Spetember GOP YouTiube debate will be anything less than a bad bit of comedy.