Presidential Debates: To Be Or Not To Be?

Mar 23 2004
Counterbias.com
Robert Furs

I find myself wondering what the likely upcoming Presidential debates will look like. In one corner, George W. Bush, the incumbent President whose surprise debate victories over a seemingly weakened Al Gore played a part in getting him elected (or selected, as some Democrats would argue) the first time. In the other corner, John Kerry, a man who is already calling for monthly debates all the way up to the November election.

It’s the Northeastern liberal versus the Northeast-born quasi-conservative.

Many would certainly assume that Kerry holds an edge in debate skills, although, with Gore’s devastatingly disappointing showing in 2000’s debates, anything could happen.

Anything, theoretically. The reality—or at least my fantasy-based reality—dictates that the debates will not go as planned or hoped. After all, the RNC will argue, why embarrass a President who has been embarrassed enough by the “liberal media” and constant “Bush-bashing” from Democrats? Why subject the sitting President to a pointless debate that will only strain the President’s weak—no, sensitive—mind?

The American people don’t want to see debate. Talking gets boring, fast. Arguing and criticism of another’s policies only amounts to dirty politics. Americans want action! So what’s the darned point in subjecting a susceptible President to vile, hateful, even critical attacks from a lowly Senator?

After all, Bush is campaigning on the issues that matter to Americans most: national security, homeland security, mall security, terror, fear, Nascar, gay marriage, Nascar dads, Muhammed Horton, evil ‘terrists’ and their evil plots, ‘nukular’ catastrophe—you get the picture. Bush, of course, has all these issues covered. So what’s left to debate about?

So here, I present to you, the closest that the two Presidential contenders will come to an actual debate in the 2004 election season.

Senator Kerry: I would like to debate Mr. Bush. Once a month, maybe more. Can somebody set this up? Americans want this.

Bush Spokesman Scott McClellan: The president has said, and he will say it again, just so you come to a full understanding. No.

Kerry: This is a campaign season, an election! Step up to the plate! Does nobody care about democratic principles?

Spokesman: Of course, absolutely, and it is traitorous to think otherwise! I can assure you that the President cares about this matter a great deal. But as a matter of national security, the President is unable to schedule a debate due to his current prerogative as a homeland security freedom fighter, defender of America.

Kerry: If that’s the case, then I will say to you, bring…it…on! I’ve been on an aircraft carrier for real. Have you?

Spokesman: And I will say this, on behalf of the President. When you ask the President to deny his America-protecting duties for an inconsequential political maneuver you refer to as a debate, it clearly shows your deep disdain for America's security in general...

Kerry: Bring it on, McClellan. You creep. I fought in ‘Nam.

Spokesman: …Because Senator Kerry, the American public must know this--when Bush debates, the terrorists win. Republicans are too moralistic and have too much integrity to play politics and question your patriotism, but the fact of the matter is, your constant qualms and harsh demands for a debate only spell out your deep, divisive hatred for America, freedom, and good old-fashioned American values. Senator Kerry, you should be ashamed of yourself, and the President will use his corporate cash flow to do whatever it takes to make sure that Americans feel that shame as well whenever the word "Kerry" is uttered. Now, stop playing politics with this Presidential election. No is no, the President will not debate. For the good of America. Goodbye.

Hopefully the debates go further than the scenario I've concocted. America is counting on unscripted Presidential debates to help pave the way for a decision more important than any in a long while. A Bush no-show would be a train-wreck of democratic malfunction.