Well, it’s 9:14 pm on Monday, July 23rd -just minutes after the unbelievably important and innovative Democrat candidate debate put on by CNN and You Tube. The debate was hyped for about 64 days in advance because, not only would it be on CNN (distantly the second biggest name in cable news!), but the questions were submitted via the video site You Tube — and You Tube is on the internet, which for the young bucks running CNN is a new idea.
Through this alliance, average citizens with digital video cameras and web access (suddenly no Democrat talk of a digital divide) could record a question and, in just picoseconds, have it zoomed to CNN via You Tube — where it would sit for days to weeks until a couple of dozen videos asking the same questions that CNN staff would have asked directly could be cherry picked and played on a small screen with poor sound quality. Now that’s revolutionary!
Submitting prewritten questions to CNN days ahead of time is clearly a miracle of technology. This is not the sort of thing that could have been accomplished by the United States Postal Service in previous times. But You Tube videos are hip, baby, so don’t question the premise of the high-tech suggestion box. And saying that the process means that now “anyone” can question the candidates is a little like saying anyone can date Gisele Bündchen. We can all apply, but ultimately somebody else makes the decision for us and most of us ain’t making the cut. (Gisele, call me!)
The actual debate began with some self-important autovideographer berating the candidates while using repeated “air quotes” (picture me using “air quotes” while saying “air quotes”). Man, that “video” could be just what TV needs to reinvigorate itself. The debate then went downhill from there. I know because my editor made me watch it. There is no way I am being paid enough to watch moonbats on You Tube on CNN -let alone take notes.
All the big issues about which the candidates wanted their supporters to plant questions were covered: Iraq, Katrina, race, health care, Katrina and race, race and health care, war for oil, Lorenzo’s oil, the danger of religion (Christianity), gay marriage, gay marriage and the danger of religion (Christianity). Technology made the field wide open for novel inquiries.
According to my notes, the debate made several things clear. One is that Mike Gravel is quite insane. In case you don’t know who he is, he’s one of the two old fart characters from “The Muppet Show” who used to sit up in the balcony and tell Kermit the whole place was going to Hell in a hand basket. He’s now running for President and is angry about some things — –mostly anything real, but a good deal of his anger was also aimed at the imaginary. He’s still so mad about Vietnam that he wants us to withdraw from Iraq via Saigon.
Iraq was a major topic of debate, as the candidates argued with one another at several points over how quickly surrender should take place. Joe Biden, being the “Hawk” of the Democrat field, was very adamant that it would take at least a year to surrender fully, pointing out that, logistically, it just takes time to tuck 160,000 tails. Bill Richardson thought the surrender could be done in six months, while Dennis Kucinich gloated that he wanted to surrender before the war began and that we could teleport our troops home by “texting” P-E-A-C-E on our cell phones. Chris Dodd wants to leave in April –either this past April or maybe next April, or perhaps April of the year he becomes President (in his mind). But April is the only good option (June is full up with weddings, February is Black History month… April is open).
The candidates then argued over whether, in some future war, it would be good to draft teenage girls to participate in some future surrender. While against war and against the draft, all want to draft little girls in the name of sexual equality. In truth, though, I think they all just drool at the possibility of having young dead girls to use as a political tool in a future war.
Still on Iraq, the candidates debated over how comprehensive our surrender should be. Biden, still the hawk, demanded our total surrender. Others wanted a token apology team left behind.
In between videos from average MoveOn.org members (or the occasional non-liberal picked mostly for his ability to sound really stupid), the candidates’ production teams were given their own shot at producing a You Tube video (so many new voices on the internet!). These made the amateur videos shine, since it took the candidates hundreds of thousands of dollars to make annoying rambling videos, while the amateurs did it for pennies on the dollar.
Clinton’s video ended by endorsing Ann Coulter for President (what else could she mean by “Sometimes the best man for the job is a woman”?) Kucinich’s video asked us again to text P-E-A-C-E (perhaps to his mother ship?). Dodd talked about his hair. Edwards talked about his hair. Biden, anxious to not talk about his occasional hair, claimed to have a secret plan for surrender in Iraq, which will take at least a year. Obama pointed out that he’s for hope and good things and opposed to many unnamed bad things and the despair they might bring. Gravel played an old segment from the “$10,000 Pyramid” game show. Richardson… Oh, why can’t a few of these people drop out early?
In other highlights: Big Oil/Insurance/Drug companies are bad and we should use solar-powered compact fluorescent bulbs so as to save the snowmen who will die in Iraq if we don’t withdraw in 6 months to a year this next April. Also, public schools are good, but just not right for each candidate’s own special family situation.
Finally, one You Tube guy asked the field what “In God We Trust” means. All candidates got the answer absolutely wrong. The correct answer is that the motto is our public acknowledgement that, given the inherent and inexhaustible stupidity of man, this nation’s ultimate salvation must rest with the benevolence of a divine protector. After watching the You Boobs debate, I think trust in God is our only hope for 2008.
Sign up to the Human Events newsletter