From the Jolt:

I think I’m pretty good at interviewing people, but I’ll readily admit I do not have the prosecutorial cross-examination style of Hugh Hewitt. Nobody does but him, it seems, and when he’s at his best, you wish he would draw a rapier and with three slices carve an “H” the way Zorro carves a signature “Z.”
Here, Hewitt interviews New York Times columnist Nick Kristof, about his recent work defending the Ground Zero Mosque or whatever you wish to call the structure:
HH: I think your argument was three-fold — it’s not really a mosque, it’s not really at Ground Zero, and the imam and his wife are “the real deal.” Is that a fair summary?
NK: Yeah, yeah, to some degree. I mean, not so much that it’s not a Mosque, but that it’s not really Ground Zero.
HH: Let’s start. If it was just a mosque, and not a community center, not like a YMCA as you argue in the column, would that make a difference to you if it was just a large mosque? Would you change your position?
NK: No, that would not.
HH: And if it was closer to Ground Zero, would it change your position?
NK: It, I mean, if it were, you know, a little bit closer, I’m not sure that would.
I have three points, but two of them don’t matter.