The deadline has now passed for Mr. Chris Davis to agree to the live debate I challenged him to have with me.

Davis has offered a great number of excuses for not participating but has repeated the following three in particular: 1. that a live debate would be a waste of his precious time, 2. that a debate would not benefit anyone else, and 3. that debates are “what blogs are for.”

The first of these is interesting, given the amount of time Davis has already spent writing blog posts and comments on the subject throughout this past week. It’s an enterprise he continues to recommend, as he did with his first of many responses to my challenge, saying, “Our readers can moderate.” This afternoon, Davis reiterated the point, “This is the debate… Right here, right now.” If Davis has so much time to write and surf the web, how is he unable to debate me in person? The fact is, it’s never been about time, it’s been something else.

Maybe his second excuse is a better fit — perhaps Davis really doesn’t believe that engaging in a debate will offer something to the community. But that’s been proved incorrect by the heightened interest on his blog and mine, for an exchange that is drawing plenty of attention locally, statewide and beyond. And that’s not to mention the influence he already claims to wield: “I should point out that this blog is fairly well read by members of the media and local civic leaders, so I believe it has an impact.” If the debate has no virtue or impact, why continue it anywhere, even online? The fact is, it’s never been about value for the community, either, it’s been something else.

So could it be that Davis simply doesn’t want to leave the friendly confines of the blogosphere, where his boosters can celebrate his achievements with photos of (and I’m not even making this up) masturbating monkeys? It could be. But, again, why engage in a debate online if you don’t have time and it won’t benefit anybody else? Furthermore, if Davis were so interested in the online debate, why hasn’t he responded to my last post on the subject, written several days ago and knocking out several of his main points? The fact is, taking advantage of “how blogs work” has never been an honest reason, either.

I wouldn’t deny anyone the liberty to advance multiple reasons for making a decision; that’s expected. But if any of these were sufficient excuses, why bother offering half a dozen more?

I would say that Davis knows very well why he’s dodging the debate — and not for any of these previously-stated reasons — but that might be crediting him with far more self-awareness than he deserves.

If he were that self-aware, he might betray some glimmer of recognition that he’d been played the fool, having been sucked into arguing the same points he ridiculed me for posting last week.

Indeed, if the biased headlines were to be applied to our situation, they would look something like this:

Davis Blocks Debate on Iraq

That’s because each time he claims that we’re already having the debate, right here, he ignores the parallel to the story I commented on in the first place. Even his editor at the Memphis Flyer got the joke (early on, I might add), but not PeskyFly.

The Fly was too busy reciting his holy book of insults, the most recent of them being “crybabies.”

In a debate, what kind of person does nothing but offer a million excuses and call people names?

I’ll take crybabies for $100, Alex.

Perhaps Davis was being serious when he suggested I send out a press release declaring myself the winner. I have no choice but to conclude that he was, based on his latest spin of a Senate GOP memo, in which he suggests the reverse has already happened.

Still, I’m a bit puzzled why Davis continues to turn my one-on-one debate challenge into a mock debate that is biased in my favor (”Hell, pick Hollihan so you’ve got a head start.”) or, alternatively, a team sport (”…I would happily take on you, Mick, Mike, and whoever you want to add to your team with the left half of my brain tied behind my back.”).

That’s a tremendous amount of swagger for someone who’s not only dodging a debate, but who has already lost it. Badly.

I think the real reason is that he’s simply afraid.

And you can run to press with that if you’d like, Chris.