Names are hidden to protect the clueless, but here's a little bit of what we'll see this week...
Moderator: We went over our rules. Each of you will have 30 seconds and we'll allow a 15-second rebuttal from a second candidate. Question number one is for you, Candidate 1, the American presence in Iraq has lasted longer than World War II, we're on our third surge in a little more than a year to increas troop levels again, attacks against Americans are up, American casualties are up, Iraqi casualties are up... if you were president right now, what would you do?
Candiadate 1: We need to stay the course. We haven't given this latest surge enough time. Six months should do it.
Moderator: But in each of the previous surges, they were also accompanied by a six-month time estimate, and in each the situation worsened. Isn't six months really just an arbitrary time period in order to give the public enough time to forget the previous misstep?
Candidate 1: Obviously you're not paying attention to the new history. That's the old history you're talking about. The new history is that we're doing better every day. Just ask General Petraeus.
Moderator: Speaking of General Petraeus, Candidate Two, he said this week, "The level of horrific attacks like the one that killed nine US soldiers at a patrol base in Diyala province April 23 is still too high." What is the level of horrific attacks that is acceptable?
Candidate 2: Off the top of my head, I would say a level that kills fewer than nine Americans at a time. Of course, I don't want to go out on a limb and put words in the general's mouth. It's really all the democrats fault for trying to give soldiers money the wrong way.
Moderator: Doesn't the Iraq Accountability Act actually give more money than what the republicans are asking for by additionally funding hospitalization for soldiers and veterans?
Candidate 2: That's just a slick trick to pretend they support the troops. We know how to support the troops - by not pampering them with things like health care or body armor. We're already catering their meals through private contractors. Isn't that enough? Next they'll be wanting armored vehicles and night vision goggles, too.
Moderator: The sticking point with the democratic funding bill is that the president doesn't want any deadline to leave Iraq. What incentive will Iraq have to take over control of their own country if they have no deadline?
Candidate 3: You can't just give them a date for our withdrawal or else they'll simply wait and stop the attacks until we leave. Is that what you want - peace in the country for several months while Iraq brings their own people together?
Moderator: Candidate 4, Iraq has put the American economy into the worst national debt of any country in the history of Planet Earth. What will...
Candidate 4: What's with all these questions about Iraq? Don't you want to ask me about flag burning or the proper ways to hate gays and minorities, you know, our special areas of expertise?
Candidate 1: You don't hate gays nearly as much as I do.
Candidate 4: Are you kidding? I've been hating gays since before you were born. I hate them more than you and Candidate 2 combined.
Candidate 2: Well, you may have a great record on hating gays, but I'm really big on hating Mexicans. What have you done to hate the Mexicans?
Moderator: Could we please have some order?
Candidate 1: My record is very solid in hating Mexicans. Blacks, too!
Candidate 3: You love the blacks compared to me. In fact, I not only hate the Mexicans and the blacks, but I led the fight against women.
Moderator: Please, everyone, this isn't a free for all...
Candidate 2: You know, there's nothing quite as much fun as denying rights to women.
Candidate 1: That's true.
Moderator: Please calm down everyone, I have another question...
Candidate 4: Except, of course, for denying science.
Candidate 3: That goes without saying. If you have to deny anything, it's science. Unless by "science" you're talking about using taxpayer money to pay full price to pharmaceutical companies for old people's drugs. Old people - that's another group we're pampering too much.
Moderator: All right, Candidate 4, I'll change topics. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales said 72 times to Congress that he didn't remember anything having to do with directing the Department of Justice to act without justice for all, but rather to direct attacks against democrats and show favoritism to republicans and their elections. Isn't that odd that he would have such a blank mind even forgetting meeting with the president?
Candidate 4: Certainly not. I've had many forgettable meetings with the president myself.