Watching the Fox News comedy-not-so-central Republican debate last night, it seemed to me that the gentlemen (and they were, of course, only men) behind the podiums were more intent on smiling through their election-year platitudes than engaging with the messy realities of the government each seeks to head. Apart from Ron Paul, the interloping libertarian, each candidate apparently (a word that John McCain stubbornly refuses to use in his vocabulary) hoped that supporting the troop surge would lead to a surge (even a blip for those hanging on only by their televised sound bites) in their respective pre-season ratings. There was a lot of puffing and fluffing about family values, with Hizzoner begging (the question) to have his private life left private (‘fat chance’, as they say in the Big Apple) and another don’t-remember-the-name tossed out the Pottery-Barnyard we-broke-it-so-we-gotta-fix-it mantra that treats premature evacuation (Iraqis Interruptus) as one of the seven deadly sins. Mercifully, there was no gay bashing and one candidate (does it really matter who said what at this stage?) insisted that Republicans or better than Democrats because they ‘come clean’ and resign after a scandal. I wonder if Larry Craig was taking notes. Fox News should have stationed an embedded reporter in a stall in the Minneapolis airport just to be on the safe side.

This was not a debate and it had little decorum. It was more like the Antique Ideas Road Show choreographed by Ed Anger. The goal, one not easily done, apparently (sorry Senator McCain, but I think this word makes a lot of sense in the mess we face at home and abroad) was to entertain. One of the more biting bites was an exchange between Ron Paul and one of the other soon-to-be-also-rans about the war. Representative Paul, whose obsession with the notion of liberty gets the better of his logic at times, was the only candidate willing to descry the neo-con (he actually used the term) clique that took the country to war. He also noted that terrorists don’t hate us just because they are caught up in a worldwide ‘jihad’ fueled by religious sentiment, but because they hate what we have done to them (invading their countries, stationing troops, etc.). Governor Romney, on the other hand, sees the threat of a nuclear jihad as the greatest problem the country faces. None of the candidates, apart from Paul, are willing (at least in public forums that may garner votes) to admit the destructive power of fear in their fearmongering rhetoric. Paul even dared to suggest that we spend more time negotiating (as Reagan did) than planning missile launches. Imagine that, a candidate talking about diplomacy rather than rattling spears.

For me the silliest and at time invidious part of the ‘debate’ was the self-serving performance of the questioners. Having watched Mike Wallace for years as an investigative and combative reporter on CBS, it is rather disconcerting to see his son preening on stage. If anything, the questions chosen were meant to ‘bait’ the candidates and embarrass them. If this kind of circus campaign, endlessly recycled before the main event, is what American democracy is all about, I cannot imagine anyone other than money-hungry investors who would want to engage in such an affront to democracy. I can’t really blame Fox News, since American elections have always been dirty affairs full of false accusations, behind-the-scenes deals and lies. But to the extent electing a President is a four-year itch that boosts media revenues and launches reporters’ reputations, why not just trash the whole electoral process (one that many Americans refuse to participate in anyway) and switch to an American Idol format? Put a voting machine in every cellphone and let the public choose the candidate who is best packaged. And why not spice it up and have a bathing suit contest (that might even entice Larry Craig into the race). In which case F[r]ed Thompson’s web blitz is doomed, but the girly-mandated Governator is a shoe-in for the White House.

Luke R. E. Publican