 | ||||
| ||||
Hey kids! Mojo here! I just attended a meeting of the National Governors Association, and as one of the few real National Governors in the room, I have to admit, I was quite impressive! As I sat there listening to one boring speech after another, I started looking at each governor and reminding myself of their approval ratings versus my approval ratings! Guess what? I'm more popular than any of them! Well, except for one. That darned Sarah Palin has an approval rating of about 90 percent! But she's the goveror of Alaska -- not even a real part of the United States! Have to admit, she's easy on the eyes, and that probably accounts for her popularity! But what's the big issue in Alaska? Well, natural resources -- which explains why I'm the chair and she's the vice chair of the NGA's Natural Resources Committee! They would stick me on a committee with the only governor more popular than me! They're so jealous sometimes!
CNN's "innovative" You Tube debate among the Democrat presidential candidates on Monday was an exercise in the absurd. You Tube is predominantly occupied by teen-agers or young adults fascinated with the concept of putting inane videos of themselves online for millions of people to see. I kept waiting for Anderson Cooper to say, "Here's Johnny in Kansas, who just finished taping himself standing on his bed playing air guitar and miming the words to the latest Avril Lavigne song. Johnny, gotta question for Barack Obama?" Several elections ago, someone decided it wasn't enough for candidates to stand side by side and answer questions from a moderator. So they started filling studios with "average Americans" and allowed them to ask questions, too. Putting the candidates in front of "real people" was all the vogue.The You Tube experiment was simply a case of the town hall meeting taken to the internet age, and it was completely ridiculous. What's next, lining the candidates up on a busy street corner and asking motorists to shout out questions as they drive by? Somewhere along the way -- I think it started with the Clinton-Bush debates in 1992 -- someone decided that presidential candidates needed to hear questions from "real Americans," as though they didn't get enough of that every day of their campaign life. Let's let the housewife in Peoria or the college student in Michigan or the lawyer in Los Angeles or the farmer in Indiana ask a few questions. Let's see how the candidates interact with the grassroots.Candidates mingle with "real Americans" every day in the countless campaign stops they make in every town in every state in America. And if you have ever spent 20 minutes watching CSPAN as they follow a candidate making his or her way through a crowd of people, and you listen to the comments and questions they get, you find out quickly why it's best to let the professionals do the questioning at the formal televised debates.I remember one of those CSPAN eavesdropping sessions in 2004 featuring John Kerry. I never thought I could feel sorry for Kerry, but this night I did. As Kerry was trying to make his way through a crowd, a woman kept up with him step by step, trying to talk to him about a specific problem a relative of hers was having with collecting her child support. Kerry was politely trying to show concern, while at the same time desperately looking for an escape route. This went on for ten of the longest minutes of John Kerry's life. An aide finally distracted the woman and slowly coaxed her away.I'm not an elitist. I don't think that "real people" can't ask good questions. Average Americans can include smart people with good questions, and that was demonstrated on the You Tube debate. But average Americans also include people who should never be permitted to take up valuable TV time asking a question of a presidential candidate, and that was also demonstrated. It would be nice to escape the gimmicks and get back to a traditional debate format with only a news person or two asking the questions. That might be boring to some people, but if it is, those are likely the same people that political parties have to beg to go to the polls on Election Day. 
So what changed the governor's mind? Likely a number of things. First, Republicans were quickly gaining "ownership" of the wiretap issue, first with a press conference a couple of months ago by the GOP House caucus, then with a formal resolution approved by the state GOP executive committee on July 14. Second, law enforcement personnel have undoubtedly been wearing the governor out with the issue. Third, lawmakers in his own party have likely been pressuring the gov to do something so they could break their loyal silence and amen the issue too.Associated Press reporter Lawrence Messina reported on his blog that after attending the National Governors Association meeting in Michigan, Gov. Joe Manchin was traveling straight to South Carolina to attend Monday evening's debate among the Democrat presidential candidates.According to Messina, the state Democrat Party issued a press release saying, "The Democratic National Committee (DNC) invited Manchin to attend this DNC-sanctioned 2008 presidential debate. Prior to the debate, Manchin is scheduled to attend a dignitaries’ reception and then be escorted to the debate by Governor Howard Dean."If, as assumed, Manchin flew state aircraft to the NGA meeting, and then on to South Carolina, the question is, will he or the Democrat Party pick up the tab for his trip south to a purely political event? Or will the taxpayers foot the bill?As of late Tuesday, there was no firm confirmation whether Manchin had actually made the trip to South Carolina.