On Tap

I couldn’t agree more with Patrick Ruffini’s reaction to the news that one or more of the leading Republican candidates for Presidents are planning to skip the September 17 CNN / YouTube debate.

What the heck are they afraid of? Interacting with real Americans?

The questions offered for Democrats at their YouTube forum were generally excellent. Many were clever and creative. But importantly, they got at issues that are central to our country. Compare that with Chris Matthews or another big media moderator, and the YouTube crowd comes off looking great.

Governor Romney doesn’t think taking questions from a snowman is befitting of the President? Has he been outside of his bubble lately?

Communications and, indeed, our whole society are becoming more conversational — more side-to-side and less top down. Romney and the rest of the Republican field need to learn this lesson and act accordingly. The age of communicating through the Beltway elite — Mark Halperin’s Gang of 500 — is over. Gone for good.

Among the Republican field, only Senator Fred Thompson seems to have grasped the opportunities that the online world offers and the way it has altered how we all communicate with one another. Ron Paul, through no discernible strategy of his own, seems to be benefitting from it.

And if Republican candidates aren’t prepared to learn this lesson on their own, voters will be glad to educate them at the polls next year.

So, to the candidates: stop complaining and show up. If you’re afraid to have a conversation with the American people, you’re not the candidate that the American people want on the job.

Jim: Yeah, I’m underwhelmed by the arguments that the Republicans shouldn’t do it. Because the questions might be stupid, unfair, biased, partisan, or suckerpunches? Folks, not only did we have Chris Matthews moderate a debate, Keith Olbermann anchored it. The Politico offered questions from readers including, “what do you hate about America?” Hello? Barn door open, horse gone.

What, the questions are “beneath the office of the presidency”? What, are you running for Queen or something? Cowboy the @#&$ up, you pansies.

If it’s a stupid question, say so. Follow the Gingrich model: Asked by a snotty teen at an MTV forum whether he wears “Boxers or briefs?” responds, “That is a very stupid question, and it’s stupid for you to ask that question.” The only way it could have been better is if he made the little punk cry.

For Pete’s sake, wouldn’t we love to see a Republican candidate respond to a 9/11 “Truth”er? (I suspect if Anderson Cooper tried the usual “your questioner was in the audience here tonight” schtick with that question on Rudy Giuliani, Rudy would jump into the audience and kick his ass himself. “Give me a minute, Anderson, I need a minute to stick a broomstick where the sun don’t shine.”)

Good example - Entry 2,944 asks, “Since you are a Mormon, a certain percentage of your salary goes to the Mormon Church. Now, there’s a conflict of interest there, if you are elected president, that means taxpayer dollars will go to the Mormon church by people who didn’t vote for you. What do you think about that?”

I think this man is a moron. Once a president, or any other government employee is paid their salary, they’re entitled to spend or donate it anyplace they like. The suggestion that Romney or any other presidential candidate tithing a portion of their income to his or her church is somehow a “conflict of interest” suggests that the questioner is supremely misinformed, and/or just has a beef with Mormons.

This entry was posted on Friday, July 27th, 2007 at July 27, 2007 - 10:29 pm and is filed under 2008 Presidential Campaign, Blogging, Conservativism, Politics. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.