Debate? What "debate"?

Everywhere you look, there's further discussion of the "debates" between the two factions of the ruling party. Excuse us, but doesn't "debate" at least imply two opposing positions? Where's the difference between Tweedledee and Tweedledum? As Friedrich von Hayek put it, "The concern of the majority parties is not whether the government may seize too much power, but who will wield that power."

It would have been a much different thing if either a) minor-party candidates had been allowed to participate, thus making it worth attending; or b) there were any substantive difference between the candidates. Radio Man told us a while back of a comment he had heard on late-night talk radio. Quoth the commentator: we're all in a car, headed for a cliff. The Republicans want to go the speed limit; the Democrats want to mash the pedal to the floor.

This three-part joint press conference by the two front-running candidates and their seconds was a real snorefest for anyone with an IQ in the high double digits. Even the last one -- the so-called "town hall" one -- was a joke. We have no doubt that the screening process for the questions involved making sure that no one would ask what either candidate would do to reduce the size, cost, scope, and intrusiveness of the Imperial Federal Government.

Of course, we must confess that our sympathies do lie just a little bit with Mr. Bush, since the deck was stacked against him from the start. No matter how well he did, the dominant news media would find a way of making him look bad. Puts us in mind of the old joke about the car race between the US and the old Soviet Union. The two cars took off together, but the American car won easily. As the Soviet press reported it, the Soviet car finished in second place, while the American car finished next to last.

One has to wonder what the Republocrats are so afraid of. If their positions are so beneficial, why should they worry about those that are different? What harm can come from letting Michael Badnarik -- or even Ralph Nader -- participate and represent (respectively) the Libertarian and Socialist viewpoints?

(And since we've already cast our absentee ballot for Mr. Badnarik, it doesn't hurt to say that we hope that Bush wins re-election. This country has already suffered thru eight years of a lying Democrat in the White House; it can certainly wait another four years for the next one.)

(As a side note, too, what kind of moron runs a presidential campaign based on a four-month incident that happened 35 years ago, and completely ignores an on-going 20-year Senate career?)