Right. Something like what you are describing has the potential potential to be thought-provoking, educational, or even funny. But was this any of the above? Nah, just a nearly empty box and a grumpy old wheat-brain reciting passages from the book of make-believe. Also, way too short.

Ali G. talking to Noam Chomsky was rather more entertaining, I must say.

ps. it is clearly possible that I am the son of a god. I do not believe it to be true, but who am I to claim that it cannot be so? If anything, humility and compulsive brilliant reasoning are my biggest character flaws.

What I saw was similar to this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gish_gallop#Debates

Paul has a seemingly unending string of points, and Krugman goes after them as he can but he's just overwhelmed by the volume and doesn't have the time to frame and respond to each point. In my opinion this presents a false sense of equivalence, giving legitimacy to many of Paul's points that aren't valid.