I agree with what John's said. As someone who didn't grow up with a CLI (unless you count my Commodore 64) I sympathise with the frustration people feel when expected to type in incomprehensible things in order to achieve a (seemingly) trivial task like permanently mounting a filesystem or installing a driver.
It's not that the CLI shouldn't be there, just that ordinary users shouldn't be forced to use it to accomplish one-off and/or simple tasks. Someone typing (to them) gibberish into a command prompt isn't learning anything or experiencing the power it provides, they're just being put off.
I do think there is an important related point though: I don't think the CLI should be hidden away and I do think new users should be guided towards it. There's a perception outside of, and sometimes even amongst, Linux users that the command line is old fashioned and deprecated. And this simply isn't true, it's one of the great strengths of Linux. It's incredibly powerful and is often the best tool for the job.
Linux should never be ashamed of the CLI but... that's a marketing problem. The CLI needs to be presented as the efficient, modern, elegant way to get things done in contrast to primitive box-ticking, button-bashing and scrollbar tugging. Because it is.
But yeah, some people don't care what's the best tool, they just want the easiest tool. And that's fine. Newbie-friendly distros should never require the command line for straightforward or everyday stuff. A big problem there is that it's much easier to tell someone what to type into a console than to tell them which menus and settings to navigate to achieve the same. I guess the solution is to ask them which they'd prefer and, if it's the CLI, explain what each command is doing as well as just telling them what to type.