Will anyone have the guts to ask President Barack Obama and Mitt Romney whether they prefer sausage or pepperoni pizza at the live, town hall-style debate on Tuesday?
Pizza Hut is trying to find out, and is willing to pay for results.
That's right, anyone who asks the meaty question will either receive a free large pizza each week for 30 years or a check for $15,600.
In this economy, could anyone be blamed for taking Pizza Hut up on the offer? Even if they got banned from similar events in the future, they could sit at home and watch the debate with free pizza or on a new TV purchased with the $15,600 check.
Yes, a question like this would lighten the mood and show a different side of the candidates.
It may even show a similarity between the two.
However, elections are already a popularity contest and the last thing this country needs is uneducated voters finding out on Facebook that a candidate shares their pizza preference and basing a vote off that commonality.
Editor Randy Cauthron satirically responded to the news of Pizza Hut's offer by saying, "I wonder if Fruit of the Loom is going to have someone ask if the candidates wear boxers or briefs."
While they're at it, questioners might as well ask if the candidates prefer chocolate or vanilla ice cream. Maybe Le Mars-based Wells Blue Bunny could sponsor it as part of their campaign to become the largest ice-cream producer in the world.
Better not ask, "Ford or Chevy?" because that could be tied to the auto industry bailout. "Ethanol or big oil?" would be off the list for the same reason. And don't even think about asking "Big Bird or Barney," because both appear on the Public Broadcasting Service that Romney wants to cut.
Satire aside, politics are already commercialized far too much, thanks in a large part to the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in the Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission case.
Corporations can already spend as much as they want to affect political races and discourse. They shouldn't have to bribe citizens to do their dirty work.