A Neo-cons head is exploding...

Here you have the nutjob from Iran saying "we don't have the gay in Iran", and the students LAUGHING at him. So it's good the students are laughing at this guy we've decided is the Evil-du-jour, but they're laughing about him denying they have gay people, which is crazy because we know they MUST have some gay people... but we hate gay people... and we know being gay is a choice... so it's possible he's telling the truth... which is one reason to LIKE Iran... but we hate them... and we hate the students at Columbia... but but but
*BOOM*

Rove's Horrible Legacy (aka: no one really cares)

I'm reading through this Andrew Sullivan piece and I think, "Was Rove all that bad?":

His divisive politics and elevation of corrupt mediocrities to every branch of government has turned an entire generation off the conservative label. And rightly so. It will take another generation to recover from the toxins he has injected, with the president's eager approval, into the political culture and into the conservative soul.

Really? Were any these the same "turned off" people that gave the Democrats a tenuous (at best) victory in the Congress last year? After years of mismanagement and idiocy in the White House, it seems there are only 2 possible reasons the Democrats didn't just dominate last year: 1) the Dem's own dumb-assery or 2) Rove is a genius. It was probably a mixture of both.

I'm no Rove apologist, mind you. He can rot in hell, with AIDS-infested monkeys feasting on his internal organs, for all I care. But he's managed to keep things together fairly well, in one of the stupidest Presidencies we've ever had. Even with a slate of total loser candidates for Republican Presidential Nomination, and "media darling" Democratic candidates, it's no small feat that the Dems aren't just annihilating the Repubs in the polls. But I guess when the most popular polling line-up is Hillary Clinton vs Rudy Giuliani, it's no so easy to choose a winner... and I'm sure "sharp stick jabbed in my eyeball" would probably have garnered a good 25-30% if that were an option. But I think Rove most definitely still has a hand in keeping the Republicans from withering away for good.

The Republicans don't like you....Tube.

The Democratic YouTube/CNN debate was somewhat novel, and I said before it didn't totally suck. And the one thing this format provides (whether it's real or just perceived) is a one-on-one communication with actual, everyday people. So while the hillbillies and snowmen were silly, for the audience, it helps shed light on if the potential leader of the free world is able to relate with "down home" folk and have a sense of humor. Remember, there's really only one reason Dubya got as many votes as he did in 2000 -- he was the "guy you could have a beer with".

Now, many of the GOP candidates are possibly NOT going to attend the Republican YouTube/CNN deabates. From Talking Points Memo:

It's looking like there might not be a GOP CNN/Youtube debate. Rudy appears to be opting out and Mitt Romney doesn't seem far behind. And GOP party functionary Hugh Hewitt is already laying down a line of covering fire for the retreat, arguing that CNN and Youtube are biased against Republicans.

In a strange twist of fate, even conservative bloggers realize what a horrible idea skipping this debate would be. From the oh-so-smart Andrew Sullivan:

For my part, the current old white men running for the GOP already seem from some other planet. Ducking YouTube after the Dems did so well will look like a party uncomfortable with the culture and uncomfortable with democracy. But then, we kind of knew that already, I guess, didn't we?

And even a more pragmatic criticism from Hot Air:

“The GOP can’t face the people, the GOP can’t handle unorthodox questions, the GOP has no sense no fun” — it’s a PR disaster in the making. Although I’m not surprised it’s Rudy who’s leading the way. Formats that don’t lend themselves to pat answers aren’t his strong suit.
[...]
In this case, if the frontrunner walks, the rest have every incentive to attend and then bludgeon Rudy with the same no-guts-no-fun talking points the Democrats have on ice.

There's some comparison between the Democrats not participating in the Fox News debates... but the comparison is decidedly weak. Fox News is a conservative outlet -- sure they may be fair and balanced, but they're "fair" coming from a conservative standpoint already. CNN is accused of being "liberal", but only from right-wing people. There are quite a few cases of lefties accusing CNN of being too willing to coddle conservative viewpoints... so obviously the political compass at CNN is not entrenched in one ideology. When was the last time a righty accused Fox News of being too "liberal"? Or when has there been ANY time that ANYONE accused Fox News of being "liberal"? I rest my case.

My prediction: Any GOP candidate that doesn't attend this debate will NOT be the GOP candidate for President.