Rep. Tom Davis’ (R-VA) retirement plans bring to an end a short but entertaining YouTube career.

This video?

Nope, too bland, even with those spectacular final seconds.

No, we’re talking this video (hat tip Fishbowl and Not Larry Sabato) …

… a moment which makes all the more prescient given this boost we got from a loyal Extreme reader, suggesting Davis’ heir apparent.

The Washington Post’s “Reliable Source” column strikes again with unparalleled brilliance.  Here’s what they reveal today in their spectacular State of the Union coverage:

What will be this year’s viral-video moment?

At press time, a clip of the GOP side standing to cheer Bush’s call for tax relief while Dems stay seated is outpacing a reaction shot of Clinton frowning, according to YouTube stats tracked by New Media Strategies. Remains to be seen whether either can compete with John McCain dozing during the ‘07 SOTU (281,000 views) or Clinton laughing during the ‘06 speech (67,000 views).

Here are the videos…

GOP standing for Bush’s call for tax relief:

Hillary Clinton frowning:

John McCain dozing:

Hillary Clinton laughing:

In his marvelous new column/blog Ground Game, Congressional Quarterly’s Eric Pfeiffer notes “the feeling amongst many conservatives that the error of omission was a combination of laziness and inherent bias.”

Does anyone other than conservatives have similar pangs of angst?

Glenn Reynolds did a check and makes this stark observation at Instapundit:

SO I LOOKED AT EDITOR AND PUBLISHER and there’s nothing about the CNN planted-question scandal. There’s one story on the debate, but it’s a puff piece about a cartoonist getting his video in. Then I looked at Poynter and all I could find was this piece on covering the debates. But I’m not seeing anything about the planted-question scandal. I’m not seeing anything at the Columbia Journalism Review site, either. Journalism, cover thyself!

Well, actually I think they are covering . . . .

The only true “wise person” of conventional wisdom willing to tsk tsk CNN I could find is in the Washington Times:

Kathleen Hall Jamieson of the Annenberg Public Policy Center said the YouTube format, puts an additional screening burden on organizers: “I’m always concerned when I don’t know how to judge the person asking the question, and it’s not someone who asks questions for a living.”

Yes, we’re all concerned.  Dare we suggest, perplexed?

We recently wrote in Politico about the Jack Bauer moment — how nearly every debate includes some cameo mention of the “24″ action hero character.

Last night’s CNN/YouTube debate did not disappoint.

Here’s John McCain admonishing Mitt Romney over waterboarding:

Well, then you would have to advocate that we withdraw from the Geneva Conventions, which were for the treatment of people who were held prisoners, whether they be illegal combatants or regular prisoners of war. Because it’s clear the definition of torture. It’s in violation of laws we have passed.

And again, I would hope that we would understand, my friends, that life is not “24″ and Jack Bauer.

Life may not be Jack Bauer.  But debates certainly are.

And a postscript — we’ll believe this is the first time an Axis leader has made a debate appereance — John McCain admonishing Ron Paul over Iraq:

We allowed Hitler to come to power with that kind of attitude of isolationism and appeasement.

Jack Bauer would never have let that happen.

Could the YouTube revolution in politics backfire?

We’ve become quite enamored with YouTube’s edgy ability to bring us raw, uncensored, unscripted moments from politics for our ridiculing pleasure.  But is this public video voyeurism setting ourselves up for the next logical development:  politicians will simply provide us less raw, uncensored, unscripted moments?

The question is prompted after reading this excerpt from Washingtonian editor at large Garrett Graff’s new book “The First Campaign: Globalization, the Web, and the Race for the White House” in the December issue of the magazine:

While Virginia senator George Allen faced a particularly devastating situation with his “macaca” comment, none of the 2008 candidates will escape the wrath of YouTube.

The rules of the game have changed — and not in the candidates’ favor. In the new world, candidates have to be prepared that anything they say could travel around the world before they finish a speech.

If that’s the case, then politicians will surely become even more guarded than ever before.  And that’s a terrible thing.  We will have more robotic candidates and politicians — more talking points, more platitudes, more stay-on-message public encounters.  And far less fun.  All in fear of the YouTube upload.

Savor what we’ve got.  Because by learning more now, we may learn far less real soon.

Monday’s Democratic presidential candidate debate set two important milestones:

1. The establishment of YouTube as an official player in politics; and
2. The establishment of the precedent that politicians will answer questions from anyone – even snowmen. In fact, with so many Senators running for president, soon we’ll hear this on Capitol Hill: “I’d like to thank my good friend, the distinguished snowman, Mr. Frosty.”

What’s next?

It’s only a matter of time before other hugely popular websites get in on the action and sponsor their own debates.

Here are likely suspects for hosting future presidential debates – and the questions candidates will probably get:

The Amazon Debate

• What’s your favorite book?
• What’s the last book you’ve read?
• What’s on your nightstand?
• Beach reading?
• Book if you’re by yourself on a deserted island?
• Book if you’re at 1% in the polls?
• Book if you’re caught on video decking an intrusive photographer?
• Do you only care whether your name is in a book’s index?
• The last book you authored – who wrote it?
• To qualify for free shipping, would you care to double the amount you’re already spending with us?
• Why do you think that people who purchased your autobiography are also reading Dr. Seuss?

The Peapod Debate

• Let’s see if you connect with average, every day Americans: How much does a gallon of milk cost?
• How much with tax?
• How much with your bonus shopper card?
• How much if you add the driver’s tip?
• How much if you deduct all the impulse purchases you won’t make by not being there in person?
• How much if you deduct your cost of gas?
• How much for a gallon of vodka, instead?

The Netflix Debate

• Do you prefer widescreen or full screen?
• Do you watch the bonus features?
• With director’s commentary or without?
• Would you ever use your DVD as a coaster?
• Ready to return to Blockbuster?
• Who should win Best Supporting Actress?
• To begin the debate, would you like to thank the Academy?

The EBay Debate

• How much would you pay for this portrait of dogs playing poker?
• How much for this pink flamingo for your front lawn?
• How much for the matching pink flamingo for your back yard?
• How much would you pay for this double-wide?
• How much for this portrait of Al Pacino in “Scarface”?
• How much would you pay for this Pink Floyd album?
• How much would you pay for this freeze-dried Lindsay Lohan spittle?
• Does this look infected to you?

The Monster.com Debate

• What’s your salary range?
• Do you work well with others?
• Why the gaps on your resume?
• Why the gaps in your teeth?
• Did you have spinach for lunch?
• Any felonies you’d like to reveal?
• This is a question from Washington Post opinion-shapers: How’s your cleavage?

The Drudge Report Debate

• Hurricanes: Friends or foes?
• Is it the heat or the humidity?
• Will melting glaciers save this two-headed mouse?
• Will melting glaciers save Hillary Clinton?
• Aliens at Roswell, NM: Forced to land by heavy fog and light drizzle?
• The Lost Continent of Atlantis: Did hurricanes from the Bermuda Triangle cause the demise?
• Can unicorns survive gale force winds – and Hillary Clinton?
• Hot enough for you today?

The Expedia Debate

• Window or aisle?
• May I see your ID?
• Your preferred seatmate: fat guy or screaming baby?
• Do you possess any firearms?
• Do you think it’s funny to joke about airport security?
• Can you tell us your best “Hi, Jack!” joke?
• Have these bags been with you through the entire debate?

The Wonkette Debate

• Do you like your snark with or without post-irony?
• Which giggly naughty words make you laugh?
• What dastardly terrorist does the name Obama sound like? How about Kucinich?
• Can you make fun of this picture?
• Does this look infected to you?

And, of course, the Google Debate: Tell us something we don’t know already know about you. Hint: It’s impossible.

Great nugget in the Washington Post story on the upcoming Democratic YouTube presidential candidate debate:

If the number of views determined the videos asked at the debate, then candidates could study the most-viewed videos and game the system, Bohrman explained. Furthermore, the most-viewed video as of Monday afternoon, he pointed out, asks if Arnold Schwarzenegger is a cyborg.

Of course, for the younger generation schooled less in “Terminator” and more in “Kindergarten Cop,” the most asked question might be whether Arnold Schwarzenegger is a substitute teacher.

Advertising Age previews the upcoming CNN/YouTube debate in South Carolina:

The Time Warner-owned network is expected to make an announcement this week about the format of the first Democratic National Committee-sanctioned debate, asking users to upload their questions to YouTube with the promise that several of them will be put to the candidates that evening.
It’s the latest example of the digitizing of the 2008 elections, where campaigning includes not only YouTube but social-networking sites and even fringe technologies such as Twitter. …
“I don’t want to get hyperbolic about it, but it’s a good first step,” said Pete Snyder, a political pollster turned CEO of New Media Strategies, an Arlington, Va., online-marketing and word-of-mouth firm that recently was acquired by Meredith Corp. “The debate format, period, doesn’t work well. If injecting user-generated content into the mix makes it more lively or connects these politics and brings it down on a level to real people, it’ll work.”

New Media Strategies measured which Republican presidential candidate got the biggest YouTube bump from the May 15 debate in South Carolina.

We also counted the number of viewers Fred Thompson got for his video responding to Michael Moore, which was being viewed online concurrently with the GOP debate:

Here are the stats as of 2 p.m. on Wednesday, May 16:

• Fred Thompson video: 598,600 viewers (posted on Vimeo, YouTube, and Google Video)
• Ron Paul and Rudy Giuliani on Iraq war and 9/11:  16,904 views from online postings
  Mitt Romney: 4,394 views from online postings
• Ron Paul: 3,273 views from online postings (including 1,450 on supporting Iraq troop withdrawal)
• John McCain, Rudy Giuliani, and Mitt Romney on Terrorism and Torture: 2,621 views from online postings
• Rudy Giuliani: 532 views from online postings
• John McCain: 523 views from online postings
• Mike Huckabee:  442 views from online postings (365 for the Edwards hair joke)
• Tom Tancredo: 382 views from online postings
• Duncan Hunter: 271 views from online postings

TechRepublican.com promotes the first installment of DomeNation’s YouTube interviews — featuring John Kerry. Check them out.  It just might be the greatest number of times you’ll hear the word “accountability” spoken in the shortest period of time in a YouTube video.  I counted Kerry saying “accountability” five times — and “truth” many more.