Simon Cowell teams with GOP to bring you ‘Republican Idol’ show

By David McElroy · December 5, 2011

LOS ANGELES — In an effort to spice up a Republican presidential campaign that’s not attracting the ratings it once did, the GOP is teaming with former “American Idol” star Simon Cowell for a series of “Republican Idol” debates starting in two weeks.

“When some Republican Party poobah first called me in London to discuss the idea, I was really skeptical,” Cowell said Monday. “Then I watched some of the video of the previous debates and realized we could turn this into quite a show if we just produce it right. It already has a fantastic cast of nutty characters just waiting for someone to mine their comic potential. This is going to be a blast. I expect ratings will shoot through the roof.”

Republican national chairman Reince Priebus said his staff was similarly skeptical of the changes Cowell will be bringing to the show, but said his party’s need to appeal to mainstream voters made it worth working through the initial creative differences.

“I wasn’t initially comfortable with the opening act that will require all the candidates to perform together,” Priebus said. “But Simon tells me that audiences love that sort of goofy camaraderie. The candidates were mostly OK with at after we said their parts could be lip-synched, but all of the dancing will be legitimate and they’ll all be wearing the same flag-covered Spandex costumes. If we can get the act together in time, there’s even going to be a Christmas special with lots of singing and dancing.”

The plan was almost killed at the last second when the only black member of the cast was voted off the island over the weekend. Cowell and other producers huddled over this issue late Sunday night and decided that having one female candidate was good enough to go on with the show.

“The Republicans don’t really get any black votes anyway, so it didn’t really matter, but it looks good if you can show you’re not racist,” Cowell said. “There are rumors that Ricky Perry is one-eighth Native American, so that will help. Plus, we have Mormons covered with that Romney guy, and we have a strong appeal to the narcissist audience by giving Newt Gingrich a featured role.”

Priebus said both GOP leadership and Cowell unanimously agreed to kill off the Ron Paul character, simply because he’s seen as too serious and focused on issues no one cares about, but he said party bosses were shocked to discover there wasn’t a legal mechanism to force Paul out.

“At first we were bummed about that, but we decided to make something good out of it,” he said. “We’ll keep him around and let him be his normal self, but we’ll just treat him like the ‘crazy uncle’ guy who we can all identify with. The talk about the gold standard always gets a big laugh since nobody knows what it means.”

In addition to the opening production number, there will be a number of other changes to the format. The new swimsuit competition should offer great comic potential, according to Cowell, and the addition of Sybil the Soothsayer to read tarot cards for each candidate will appeal to those with more mystical interests. (Here’s Paul getting his tan ready for the swimsuit competition.)

“We had some thoughts about keeping some of the issue-oriented questions in the show, but Simon nixed that,” Priebus said. “We’re still going to ask them questions in two different segments, but audience tests showed that discussion of political issues bored the viewers, so we’re going to ask trivia about current television programming. Each campaign has been sent a briefing book about various shows and the candidates are studying that. Then there will be a segment asking each candidate embarrassing questions about his sex life. That tested well with the research audience.”

Although it’s not yet legal to substitute phone voting in place of actually going to polling places, Priebus said he’s open to the idea for the future.

“We’re really getting into this pop culture thing,” he said. “It shows me how little people care about the things we’ve been trying to talk to voters about.”

Cowell said the show should produce the same results as the old debate and primary format produced, but with far higher ratings.

“Let’s be honest,” Cowell said. “Nobody votes for candidates because they agree with them. Nobody even knows what these clowns stand for anyway. It’s all about popularity. We’re just going to open the process up and make it much more intimate and personal to help audiences decide who they really like best.”

There’s discussion of a more involved reality-style show starting in four years, but producers didn’t have time to put that together quickly enough for this campaign, Cowell said.

“We already have some interesting ideas for 2016,” he said. “We could send the candidates on a round-the-world trip with no money and see who can get back first. Or we could put them on an island together and force them to co-operate on some impossible task like balancing a budget — and then they can kill and eat one candidate a week until there’s only one left. There are all sorts of possibilities.”

Priebus said a few old-timers had objected to the lack of policy content in the new format of the show, but he put his foot down.

“The object of the game is to beat the Democrats next fall,” he said. “People are going to vote for whoever they like. It doesn’t matter what they really know. Once we’ve elected someone, there will be advisors to tell them what to do. This is really the best way.”

Share on Social Networks

If you have problems with high blood pressure, I’d like to encourage you to consider making serious changes to your diet. There might be some people who don’t have any choice but to start taking prescription medications for high blood pressure, but I’d like to tell you that I have completely eliminated my issue by eliminating all sugar and almost all carbohydrates. (A couple of months ago, my blood pressure hit 185/144, which was dangerously high — considered stage 3 hypertension.) By completely changing my eating habits, I’m down 22 pounds and my blood pressure is now in the “ideal” range — without taking any medication. In addition, I sleep better and I have more energy. Getting away from the sugar-laden mess that we generally refer to as “highly processed food” has been a life-changer for me. Now my challenge is to avoid slipping back into old habits — by eating in the dangerous ways that almost everyone in our society has come to see as normal.

When I first heard about this, I thought it must be satire. When I discovered it was real, I was appalled, but I still thought it must be a one-time thing from some nutty activist. But it turns out it’s the latest bit of pandering to a bunch of far-left activists who believe that a man can become a woman if he decides to claim he’s a woman. As everybody knows, men have prostate glands. Women do not. Period. End of story. Men can get prostate cancer. Women cannot. But political activists are so eager to pretend that a man claiming to be a “trans woman” is really a woman that they are insisting that “women” be included in public health messages about the issue. This is nothing but political virtue-signaling. If you’re a man, you know which parts you have. You know that you ought to be screened. Nobody is made any safer by dragging far-left gender ideology into simple medical reality.

Every time someone tries to tighten requirements around the use of absentee ballots, I hear screams from Democrats and others on the political left that such efforts are nothing but “suppression of black voters.” These protests have never made sense to me, especially because it’s never been a secret that absentee ballot fraud goes on all the time in certain areas. (Everybody knew it when I worked in politics.) The people who engage in such fraud are rarely caught — often because the local political establishment approves of the crime — but a Democrat who won a primary election in Clay County, Alabama, last year has pleaded guilty to this sort of cheating. Terry Andrew Heflin was running for a place on the Clay County Commission. He was caught ordering seven absentee ballots in the names of various voters and sending them to his post office box — after which he used the ballots to vote absentee for himself seven time. Did he have other people cast additional fraudulent ballots? We’ll never know. But in a primary in which he was able to win with only 141 votes, it wouldn’t take many fraudulent votes to change the election. The next time you hear “civil rights activists” claim that it’s just “voter suppression” to hurt blacks which is at the root of efforts to stop this fraud, remember Terry Heflin. If you care about fair and honest elections, ballot security and voter identity should matter to you.

A state legislator in Maine has been stripped of the ability to speak in the state Legislature — and her votes are not being counted on legislative issues — all because she made a truthful social media post. Rep. Laurel Libby (R-Auburn, Maine) opposes allowing boys to compete against girls’ teams in school athletics and she’s become known for making an issue of it. On Feb. 17, she posted on Facebook about a recent example that she found outrageous. She posted side-by-side photos of a boy named John who competed last year in a state track event and won fifth place against other boys two years ago — and a photo of the same boy (now called Katie) who won first place in the same event this year against girls. Whether you find this outrageous or not, Libby is clearly being honest and truthful about the objective facts of an issue of public importance. But the state Legislature censured her. Democrats decreed that she could not speak in the House and that her votes would not count on legislation — until she apologized for the outrage of telling the truth. She refused and her constituents have been unrepresented in the state House since then. The people who promote this ideology are out of touch with reality and won’t rest until they force the rest of us to join them in this delusion. But even if you agree with “trans” ideology, you should be appalled at this heavy-handed attack on political speech.

The late Steve Jobs was at the center of our culture’s transition from analog to digital. He co-founded Apple Computer. He led the team that revolutionized personal computing with the first Macintosh. As CEO of Apple, he led the development of the iPhone and later the iPad. You would think the children of such a man would be surrounded by technology. But Jobs and his wife Laureen didn’t let their children use iPads. Their home had few screens of any kind. Even though Jobs spent most of his time developing and selling Macs and iPhones and iPads, he was home with his wife and children for dinner when he was in town. The family ate together at a simple wooden table in their kitchen — and there were no digital devices or focus on popular culture. Instead, he’s said to have guided his family toward deep discussions of art, philosophy and education — with no iPads to be found. If the man who guided the development of such products chose a different path for his own children, does that suggest that his digital experience taught him that children need human connection, not screens? And does it suggest the possibility that we might be better off if we made the same choice for our families?

Related Posts