Reading deeper, I'm not sure if it is so much a case of liking Charlie Sheen as disliking what has happened to “Two and a Half Men” since he left. One of you compared the revamped show to “bilge water.” (I had to look that one up. For the record, it's not a complimentary term.)
You also said, “Ashton Kutcher couldn't act his way out of a wet paper sack.” I beg to differ. I'm pretty sure he could act his way out of a paper sack. Getting you to believe in, or care about, a character he's playing is another story entirely.
Surely, Ashton and Charlie are more well-known for their off-screen antics than their mediocre (at best) acting skills. Sheen is best remembered for playing an obnoxious ladies man; Kutcher, a not-so-bright slacker from the '70s. Wow, there's a stretch. They are full of something, but it isn't necessarily talent. Themselves, maybe?
Can a reality show be far behind where the two of them live together, a la “The Odd Couple?” Think of the hilarity that would ensue when their respective exes stop by for a surprise visit. Throw in Martin Sheen and Bruce Willis, and you could have a knock-down, drag-out dysfunctional family reunion.
I can't believe we are discussing the acting merits of Charlie Sheen vs. Ashton Kutcher. That's kind of like debating who would make a better brain surgeon — Gilligan or the Skipper.