For years I have listened to right wing lunatics, like Rush Limbaugh, describe a liberal who does not exist. Right wing radio is full of non-stop blathering about what Liberals think and say, usually without documentation of any sort. Basically, the right wing has created a Frankenstein type monster, made of up liberal parts. It is the Frankenliberal and it serves one function: To keep the right wing hordes afraid and active, always working against their common enemy.

The Frankenliberal wants to abort all babies three days before they are born, and then toss them in dumpsters. He wants to lose the war because he hates the troops and loves the Iraqis. He wants to hug and talk to al Qaeda, instead of fight them. He hates America. He lives to slander America. He will do anything to make sure the Palestinians destroy Israel. He wants to teach sex education to children. He wants gays to be able to have sex anywhere, anytime and probably in front of children. He believes that most people are stupid and should be cared for at all times. He wants the government to do everything, except go to war. He thinks illegal immigrants should be able to do whatever they want. His taxes can’t be high enough. He has no morality. He is a socialist. He hates all religion, but especially Christianity. He wants to take away everyone’s guns. He wants to discriminate against whites to help minorities. He hates all rich people and wealth.

On and on the list goes. If you are a liberal, think of the most insane position you can, and Limbaugh has probably told his audience that's what you believe. That's all they do on AM radio.

O'Reilly

Hawkins.

Limbaugh.

Savage.

On and on they go. Blah blah blah, day after day. Never mind that this person they so fear does not exist. They’ve taken some random person’s opinion here and some random person’s opinion there and placed them altogether in the Frankenliberal; a giant, scary monster to terrify their right wing audiences. And it’s very effective.

But there is no liberal politician that holds those beliefs. You won’t find one. The collection of accusations is so insane or fantastical it is amazing anyone actually believes it. Of course, that appears to not be true for the right wing. They appear to have found a person who embodies the most frightening ideas the left can conjure up: Sarah Palin.

Over and over again, I have heard right-wingers say they love Palin because she makes liberals crazy. Wow, great reason to support a candidate. You must be proud. Of course, they have their own beliefs explaining why we hate Palin.

The right wing blogs are littered with that kind of simplistic and juvenile thinking. But I won’t disagree with them on this point: I am scared shitless of Palin ever becoming president, because she is the Frankenright-winger. She is the exact opposite of everything I believe – to an extreme.

She believes we are fighting a religious war in Iraq.

She doesn’t believe in abortion, even in cases of rape or incest.

She wants to expand the powers of the Vice Presidency.

She does not believe man is responsible for global warming.

She received a church blessing to keep her safe from “witchcraft.”

She believes in religion over science.

She was raised in a church that takes the book of Revelations literally and believes the endtimes will come during our lifetime.

She puts special interests (Oil) before the environment and sound science.

She believes in book banning.

She tried to have the polar bear removed from the endangered species list.

I mean, come on, the fucking polar bear. She is literally the right wing lunatic we fear in our worst dreams. A religious lunatic who appears to make decisions based on what she thinks God wants and seems to have an aversion to any book that is not The Bible. After years of running around making shit up about what liberals believe and what they don’t’, the right wing has chosen a woman who is cartoonishly conservative. And it is quickly becoming a major anchor in their campaign.

Imagine if the Democrats had chosen an equally extreme candidate? The right wing would be losing their minds. That Frankenliberal they so love to talk about has never, and will never, be chosen as a Democratic candidate, mostly because he’s not real. But also because the Democratic Party wouldn’t stand for a lunatic as their VP. Unfortunately, the right wing nuts seem to be using liberal’s fear of Palin to continue to Frankenliberal myth. On and on it goes….

FearTheReaper is a writer, actor and stand up comedian. Check back each Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday for more from FearTheReaper and read his blog, Stop All Monsters.

If to err is human, then Joe Biden, a.k.a. the human gaffe machine, is a super human. He loves to talk to just about any one. Generally this is considered a good quality since it makes people like you, however, the problem with Biden is that his mouth seems to work a little faster than his brain, a phenomenon that can lead to some spectacular blunders. Take for example this little gem C-Span picked up where Biden says “You cannot go to a 7-11 or Dunkin Donuts unless you have a slight Indian Accent."



Wow that’s a pretty stupid and slightly racist slip up; even if his intentions were good he should have realized that that sounds pretty fucked up. That incident was from a while back, but since taking the vice presidential nomination Biden has made some clear mistakes. The first major gaff was on August 27, and was duly reported by The Hill.

Sure this was a small mistake but then on September 3 Biden made the same mistake once again:



Hmmm, isn’t he supposed to be a big foreign policy expert who knows his military stuff? How come he still has a hard time figuring out if it’s a matter of battalions or brigades? Although, to be fair, two days before, he didn’t even know if he was running for President or Vice President according to CBS.

Seems Biden mistakes titles all the time. On September 4 Biden called Sarah Palin a Lt. Governor when in fact she is the Governor.



Biden also seems confused about his own positions on issues. On September 17 Biden contradicted himself while talking about clean coal (a very important issue in Pennsylvania):

Here's the video of the exchange.



Then on September 21 Biden called himself “a hard-coal miner” even though he opposes coal. In fact it was his grandfather who was the closest thing his family had to a miner (he was a mining engineer). Hmmm, so a person that is against the use of coal (even clean coal) whose only tie to the coal industry is through his grandfather is all of a sudden a hard-coal miner? I wonder how that worked out?

Biden has a signature style of slip-up, saying something that sounds good at first, but then, as your brain processes his confused syntax, you realize how retarded his statement really was. Here's an example from September 20 which was reported by ABC

I'm not bad with it. So give me a break. Give me a break[i/] –– if that isn’t an out of nowhere comment I have no idea what is.

It also seems Biden could have done better during his own Katie Couric interview. First off, he said that his own campaign ad criticizing John McCain's computer use was "terrible," see video:



It’s generally not a good idea to call your own campaign ads terrible (that's what the other guys are supposed to do). Also, in the same interview, he clearly shows he failed his US History class when he said:

Correct me if I'm wrong but, I always thought it was Hoover that was president in 1929 when the stock market crashed and not Roosevelt, not to mention the television wasn’t even invented yet.



This is just a small look at the gaffes that Biden has made so far; Until Biden is cured of his foot in mouth syndrome I doubt these will be the last. On the other hand, though gaffes can be funny, they're a poor way to judge a person –– its better to judge someone for what they have acomplished and stand for.

Louis, by the grace of God, King of France and Navarre, to all US citizens, greeting from the year 1708:



You might wonder why I am writing this article - I, the Sun King, symbol of absolute royal power, and certainly anything but an advocate of democracy. But my position, as well as my long experience as a statesman, may give me a somewhat outside view of how you handle democracy in the States. And let me tell me you, you’re doing it wrong. Not all of you, but one third of you US citizens.

Don’t misunderstand me; I’m not questioning democracy itself. Personally I’m not a big fan of giving the power to the people, but that’s not the question here. You wanted the power, you got it, and you are proud of it. You call it “freedom,” but please, those of you who are not sure whether you will vote on November 4, tell me one thing:

Did you really think that power comes without duty?

In my kingdom, all power is concentrated on my person. I didn’t ask for it; I was born into this job. But I have the power, and with the power comes the duty to use it. And believe me, absolute power is hard work. All evening I sit at my desk reading documents, folders, reports, maps, history books, acts, letters, legislative proposals, and I make decisions – sometimes hard decisions, difficult decisions, cruel decisions. Do you think revoking the Edict of Nantes was an easy decision? Do you think making France a European superpower was easy?

I often have to decide between a bad thing and another bad thing. Take the War of the Spanish Succession: In 1701, I had to choose between loosing Spain and going to war. I didn’t like either of these options, but a decision had to be made. I decided to go to war. Was it a good decision? I don’t know. But I had to decide.

Sometimes I’m tired of making decisions. Sometimes I would like to abandon this job. But I can’t. It’s my duty, the duty God gave me, my duty for France. The duty that comes with power.

What do you think would happen if I neglected this duty? If I did nothing? There is no need to speculate over this question – all you have to do is to open a French history book at a chapter on Louis XVI, my grand-grand-grand-grandson. He did nothing. He waited for history to happen without his intervention.

And history did happen – it steamrolled him. You all know what begun in 1789: The French Revolution, the end of the monarchy and the prelude to the reign of terror of Robespierre. Whereas I personally regret the end of the Ancient Régime, I don’t really feel bad about the fact that Louis XVI was beheaded – he deserved it. The only thing I regret is that he wasn’t beheaded in a slower, more painful way. When I meet him in afterlife, the first question I will ask him will be:

Did you really think that power comes without duty?

Of course, absolute monarchy is certainly not the only way to rule a country. Look at my kingdom’s neighbour, the Holy Roman Empire – what later will be known as Germany. Ever since the Peace of Westphalia, the Emperor has been bound to the decisions of the Council of Princes (Reichstag). Furthermore, he is not crowned by the grace of god, but elected by prince-electors. (At least in theory, as in fact the House of Habsburg has secured succession since the 15th century.) What would happen if a new Emperor needed to be elected if most of the prince-electors were too lazy to vote? It would be a mess. The Emperor would be elected by two or three random electors – no, not exactly random electors, but the most fanatical or ambitious prince-electors. You can imagine what kind of Emperor they would elect. And the other prince-electors who didn’t use their power to elect a wise and reasonable Emperor would then have to consider that same question:

Did you really think that power comes without duty?

In your time, prince-electors and Sun Kings are history. In many countries, the power is in the hands of the people – in your hands. You asked for it, you got it, and you are proud of it. But what do you do with it? Use it and go vote? Or throw it away, stay on your chaise longue, drink chocolate and watch your television apparatus too see who is elected by some random people? Your opinion is not required for every political decision – that would be a mess – and I’m sure you often are not happy with the decisions. But once in a while, on Election Day, you are asked for your opinion. Do you answer? Did you on last election?

In 2004, the voter turnout in the US was only 64%. That means, one out of three US Citizens was too lazy to vote! Seriously, people! Can you imagine one out of three prince electors not voting? Can you imagine me leaving one out of three decisions to random? That’s ridiculous! A state led by such lazy people would turn into a mess before long – as France did in 1789.

If you don’t give your opinion when you are asked for it, you can’t blame politicians for not doing what you would like them to do later on. If I don’t care who conducts the royal string orchestra, I can’t complain about the music. If I don’t care who's appointed court chef, I can’t complain about the food. If I don’t care who gets the Superintendent of Finance gig, I can’t complain if the treasury is empty. It’s the same with politics: If you don’t care who rules your country, you can’t complain if they do a bad job. In other words: Either you get your ass off the chaise longue, put your wig on and go vote – or you shut up and don’t complain about politics for the next four years!

If you wait for history to happen without your intervention, it may steamroll you and your family, as it steamrolled Louis XVI and his family – and you won’t have the right to complain, because it will be you who will not have stopped it. It will be your fault.

Maybe you don’t like any of the candidates. Maybe it’s like losing Spain or starting a war. But a decision has to be made – and there's no king to decide for you. The king is gone - you chased him off in 1776. Now it’s your turn to decide.

So it’s not only your right to vote – it’s your duty. And don’t complain! The whole voting thing wasn’t my idea – certainly not! It was yours. You asked for power. You got it. Now you have to live with it.

Did you really think that power comes without duty?

Given at Versailles in the month of October, in the year of grace 1708, and of our reign the sixty sixth.

Picking Asshole Fuckfaces is not easy. It can be quite stressful and, in my case, has led to the end of 16 marriages. So, to help with the stress, every Thursday night I grab a soak at my local public hot tub joint. I sit, with several other naked dudes, enjoying the hotness of the water and the occasional bubble. Last night was special because David Brooks joined me in the liquid warmth. He quietly and calmly explained his opinions on the Vice Presidential debate and when he was done, I looked him in the eyes and said, “You do realize you are one of the biggest Asshole Fuckfaces of all time, right?” David then turned his back to me, which is weird when you are two guys in a hot tub. I told him his behavior would not change my decision. He wept.

For this Asshole Fuckface Roundup, I have to take you through David's summary of the VP debate. He is the sole Asshole Fuckface of the week. Let’s start with his love of the walk.

One wonders why she even had to continue with the debate at that point, it was such an exceptional walk. One also wonders how a columnist could pen that sentence and not follow it up by immediately downing a shot of whiskey, picking up a revolver and sending a slug though his brain.

Sadly, the sentence was not complete.

Boom! You've been first-named. Welcome to second place, bitch!

I’m glad David brought up the glory of the assertive salesman. I, for one, when greeted by a first-naming, assertive salesman, will bow down and struggle not to address him as, “My Lord.” First naming is a shocking example of leadership that is rarely seen in this world. Obviously, legends will be told and songs will be sung about this epic Palin moment.

Oooo, I’m on the edge of my seat. Can the governor of a state complete a sentence? We all wondered so, in this tense moment after the power walk and first-naming. Obviously, we had all forgotten about our group orgasm just one month ago, when she gave the greatest speech since Reagan at the RNC.

Exactly! And that is what we so desire in a leader! Someone who talks like Lou the mechanic or Linda the waitress. We don’t want someone to talk down to us, like they know stuff, or have an education. Keep it simple. That is exactly what a writer in the New York Times, the most respected American newspaper of all time, should hope for. He, of all people, shouldn’t hope for an elevation of intellectual speech or ideas.

Yes! Norman Rockwell was probably as simple as his paintings. When he was painting, he probably spoke out loud, “Dog pulling down pants.” “Boy doesn’t like dentist.” “He’s eating corn.” Rockwell certainly didn’t enjoy a robust conversation, as much as he loved simplistic phrases meant to touch the lowest baseline of our intellect. And comparing Norman to Sarah Palin is very appropriate because he created so many paintings about 15 year old girls being raped and having to keep the baby because abortion was illegal. Good old Norman.

I do love a “never-ending flow of words.” Of course, I call it “babbling,” but I think we are on the same page. And I was warmed by her fearlessness, which was especially evident by her repeated, and often distracting, reading of her cue cards. And I completely agree with David that her bemusement was a delightful quality. When people ask me what I look for in a presidential candidate, I always say, “Strength, honor, honesty, knowledge and lots o’ bemusement.”

Bemused
A adjective
1 baffled, befuddled, bemused, bewildered, confounded, confused, lost, mazed, mixed-up, at sea.

Yes, there is no greater quality to look for in the possible leader of a nation.

Please. Thank you. We out here in America are so tired of candidates with their “I’m so serious about the financial meltdown, Iraq, terrorism, health care and immigration” nonsense. Lighten it up. Give us a smile. Act bemused. This is the highest position in our country she could have, after all. Turn that frown upside down. At the very least, after talking about your dead child and wife, give us a wink. It’s “folksy!”

THANK YOU! I never thought anyone would make this obvious point! Look, in 1984, we were all in suits. It was WAY before casual Fridays. Casual Fridays basically changed America. Up until that point we wanted a female leader who was pretty darn serious, but after casual Fridays were introduced, we realized we just wanted a lady who says, “Gosh darn it” a lot. Same with “boxers or briefs.” Don’t get me started on “boxers or briefs” and how that has changed America! I’m going to save it for the book!

And how. She made a really big house out of not having done a whole lot in her life. That’s called leadership, for those of you keeping track.

We’ve been waiting for some brave soul to take on an entire coast of the United States. And here she is, our brave soul from the Northwest, condescending and ridiculing an entire coast. Brava! And she’s not afraid to use peoples FIRST NAMES! Honestly, I’ve never seen anything like it. It was “relentlessly clear” when she called Senator Biden “Joe” that she was from another place that is NOT on the East Coast.

Relentlessly
A adverb
1: Showing or promising no abatement of severity, intensity, strength, or pace.

It’s not often you see someone being relentless with just one sentence, but Palin did so. And that is what we need in a leader; non-stop, intense first-naming and coast attacking. You've been served, Joe. And large percentage of Americans.

So true. Those of us who live in the “hammock states” are now tremendously excited about Sarah Palin. My father, who only wears Vans, a loose T-shirt and Baja shorts, could not be more impressed.

Thank the sweet Lord! Throughout this entire presidential campaign, I’ve been waiting for someone to stand up, hoist a thumb over their shoulder and say, “What the heck is that?” at the past 8 years. Cause seriously, what is it? You tell me, because I don’t know. All I know is it is a bit curious and now somebody speaks for me on the subject.

Ding. Ding. Ding. Hello? How was this not discussed at length by the “pundits?” Do you know how many letters are in that name? It’s really, really hard and Sarah just said it. After she said his name, I looked at my wife and said, “She totally said that better than McCain.” My wife nodded. That’s the kind of stuff we care about. We’re Americans and we want the VP to be able to pronounce names better than the president.

Yes. And that is why John McCain should be elected president, because we are furious with Washington! We’ve had it with all of their old Washington ways! We want new fresh blood and that fresh blood’s name is McCain!

Kudos, David Brooks, Asshole Fuckface of the year. The fact that an individual writing for the New York Times could write such tripe and not be a cutter is amazing. Brooks is the ultimate example of where our country has gone wrong. The New York Times should be where we go to read intellectual opinions based not just in fact, but in reality. Brooks just created a reality where none existed. His facts are actually hopes, hopes that there is something where there is clearly nothing. The man has no shame and no respect for or understanding of the history of the newspaper for which he writes. And that’s a big deal, considering the last eight years and the current state of our country. It's nonsense like this that lead to George Bush, the Iraq War and the current economic meltdown. It's dangerous stupidity.

So, David Brooks is the sole Asshole Fuckface of the week.

FearTheReaper is a writer, actor and stand up comedian. Check back each Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday for more from FearTheReaper and read his blog, Stop All Monsters.

Canada's federal Leaders Debate has never seen a talk like this before. In a debate first, the official Leaders Debates (held October 1 in French and October 2 in English) were changed from a podium setup to a roundtable format. While this decision was partially motivated by space concerns after Elizabeth May, Leader of the Green Party, was confirmed as a participant, it made for an interesting discussion, actual personal replies, and -- at times -- more academic conversations, rather than country club cat fights.

For my own personal first, I live-blogged the English debate, and am here to offer you summaries of each party leader's performance –– y'know, because most of you were busy watching Biden and Palin.

Elizabeth May, Green Party - Winner
No one went into the debate with more hype than Elizabeth May, with the first few days of this election campaign centering around the question of her inclusion. In the French debate, May proved herself capably bilingual, and came off as a spunky -- if eccentric -- leader with a passion for her party's platform. In the English debate, May looked more the part of a political leader, and with excellent timing and delivery got in several bombs, including repeated queries directed at Stephen Harper about his as-yet nonexistent platform. She also championed election reform favouring proportional representation. However, her aptitude at speaking unscripted was known before the debate, while Dion's performance was more a surprise. Ultimately, May proved the Green party is here to stay in Canada.

Stephane Dion, Liberal - A Close Second
Surprising viewers, the little beanpole that could proved himself a true party leader and an actual force with an earnest platform in both the French and English debates. English has never been Dion's strong point, but he paced himself well, encountered few difficulties with vocabulary, and got his point across. Support for Dion leaped up several percentage points after the French debate, and it's likely to increase again in the next poll.

Jack Layton, New Democratic Party
Jack Layton's fear of Elizabeth May before the debate was obvious and expected, considering that the Greens' rise has resulted in fewer NDP supporters. Near the beginning of the English debate, however, he agreed with Elizabeth May several times, hinting at a possible future -- many, many years down the road -- with a Green-NDP alliance. Unfortunately, Layton is at best an average speaker, and won no points with his vague answers today.

Stephen Harper
If Canada's controversial incumbent proved anything in these debates, it is his unwavering ability to unite people against him. In both debates, but especially the English, the four other leaders tag-teamed, hitting Harper with snide remarks and attacks one after another. Meanwhile, the Ice King of Canada attempted to restrain himself, teach his facial muscles to smile, and perfect his family-man-who-wears-sweater-vests image. He really didn't succeed, and the fact that he takes credit for government achievements made before his time and fails to produce a party platform keeps him from (everyone's feared) world domination.

Gilles Duceppe - Bloc Quebecois
Well, Gilles Duceppe is nothing if not honest. In today's English debate he was quick to admit that he will never be Canada's Prime Minister, insisting that no one at the table but Stephen Harper would. Duceppe may be right about his political glass ceiling, but his passion for the arts and Quebec, as well as his vast knowledge of political facts and figures, does prove why he still leads the Bloc.

The first of one vice presidential debates will be held tonight in Saint Louis, Missouri. Most expect it to be a spectacular failure of the candidate they don’t like. The right wing has convinced itself that Joe Biden is a terrible debater and the left have convinced themselves that Sarah Palin is an idiot. While Palin is obviously an idiot, she has managed to harness her idiocy and use it as a positive in previous debates. And Joe likey to talky.

First I will start with Biden. The knock on Biden is he talks too much and is too "spontaneous."

That’s an example the press has chosen to show Biden at his worst. Please don’t pay attention to the fact that everything he said is true. Biden knows his shit, more than almost any other Senator. He’s been around for a long time, debated hundreds of times and will probably produce a sound bite. Here’s the biggest problem with the “Biden talks too much” criticism. Where did he talk too much? In presidential debates with several other candidates onstage. The point was to stand out from the herd, using your personality and your smarts. It’s completely different than this debate. He’s not trying to stand out, just be better than Palin. All he has to do is stick to the facts and appear presidential. Not hard.

There is fear he will come across as a dick against Palin. He has been practicing against Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm, who has a vagina. But this debate is not constructed so that the candidates can speak to each other. They are very restricted by time and will speak to the moderator. Oh, and Obama and Biden are ahead. He has no incentive to be a dick. You know when people are dicks? When they are behind. Just take a look at last week’s McCain Obama debate. McCain spent the entire time attacking and he suffered because of it. Expect the same out of Palin, not Biden.

That’s one of the reasons Biden will win this debate. Palin has to attack and that’s very bad news for her. People don't want attacks, they want information. She is in the worst possible position. She doesn’t offer up specifics in a time when people are craving specifics. Her rise in Alaskan politics came during a time when all was well. Nobody was freaking out about the economy and foreign policy does not matter in governor’s races. Take a look at what one of her recent opponents said:

Well, that’s not true. Her greatest skill has already been taken away from her. Over the past month, she has had a couple of interviews that have shown a spotlight on her inability to be specific and produce facts. This is now considered to be her greatest weakness, but at the same time considered to be her best debating skill. She'll do it, and it will be mocked endlessly until the next McCain Obama debate. Good luck with that.

Very much so, dummy. That’s the last thing people in the US are looking for right now. The big knock on both McCain and Obama from last weeks’ debate was that they did not offer enough specifics on the economic meltdown. Now she is going to offer up an entire debate of fluff. Her base will love it. The rest of America will grow more concerned at her lack of substance.

The big difference between her run for governor and her run for vice president is that the media and everyone else is looking for her to produce nothing. The sharks are in the water, smelling blood and that blood is the vacant words that come from Palin’s mouth. I would expect a few follow-ups by Gwen Ifill, attempting to get Palin to be more specific, but she will continue to dodge. Against the specifics of Biden, she will look vacant and, worst of all, like a female George Bush.

And that brings me to Sir Alex Ferguson, manager of Manchester United Football Club. Ferguson is the master of getting into other manager’s heads and the referees, as well. Just last week, when the Red Devils were preparing to play the Bolton Wanderers, Ferguson said a particular Bolton player deserved his reputation as the dirtiest player in the Premier League. This does two things: It gets inside the players head and effects his normal play on the field and it gets inside the referees head, unconsciously making him scrutinize the player more. The conservatives are doing that with the moderator as I write.

Ifill has a book coming out called, The Breakthrough: Politics and Race in the Age of Obama. The right wing is claiming she is biased and should not be moderating the debate.



Wow, that’s really biased, huh? It’s called straight up journalism and the right wing wouldn’t know it if it crawled into their ass and opened a Starbucks. Turns out one can write a book about the rise of a new type of minority politician and not have it be an endorsement of a candidate. The right wing minions are falling for it and are frothing at the mouth.

This isn’t about the truth; it’s about setting the playing field. It's straight out of the Ferguson playbook. Ifill will be affected by the attacks, whether they are true or not. Her professionalism and impartiality is at stake and there is nothing more important to a quality journalist. So, I would not expect her to be as tough as she would have been three days ago. Chalk that up as a victory for the right wing.

I wouldn’t expect this debate to be a game changer. Palin will appeal to idiots with her non-answer answers. Biden will appeal to people with intelligence, who can handle a complex thought. This is a debate that will pull on people’s deepest instincts. Do you want someone smart to take care of you, or do you want someone warm and comforting?

FearTheReaper is a writer, actor and stand up comedian. Check back each Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday for more from FearTheReaper and read his blog, Stop All Monsters.

Ahead of tomorrow evening's vice presidential debate, some kind soul has just posted footage on YouTube of lamb-to-the-slaughter Sarah Palin doing the thing she does best: playing the flute.

Before you get too excited, she really is just playing the flute, and badly at that, but she still seems more competent at blowing hot air across the opening of a long hard instrument than anything else we've recently seen her do.

Looking forward to your comments below. Please, don't hold back.

Fine election season apparel for the kids.












Thanks to Phil Gough of Common Sense for the inspiration.

I have to say it is pure joy to watch Sarah Palin’s political career peak and turn to dust in a matter of weeks. It’s actually hard to believe just 27 days ago Sarah Palin stepped on stage at the Republican National Convention and tickled the GOP’s balls. Holy shit, were they excited. It was almost like Jesus had come back in hot housewife form. And to be honest, they should have been excited because they finally had someone on their ticket who was alive.

But those days are over. Sarah Palin was awesome when nobody knew anything about her, but now she is a horrifying prospect. The blame obviously lays at John McCain’s feet for not vetting her and allowing the Christian Right to force a pathetic VP on him. The lack of vetting led to a couple of amazing weeks of information.

First we learned she kills moose. That is, of course, awesome and would be really important if we were some sort of Donner Party stuck in the Alaskan wilderness. Unfortunately, we are a country and killing moose is tragically unimportant. We then learned many other things about Sarah.

She lied about saying “no, but no thanks” to Congress about the “Bridge to Nowhere.” She left the tiny city of Wasilla with an insanely large $22 million debt. She was raised in a gay hating, tongue speaking, witch-stopping church. She tried to ban books. She abused her power by firing town employees without reason. She attempted to have her ex-brother-in-law fired from his law enforcement position and then fired the guy who wouldn’t fire him. She is against abortion in cases of rape and incest. She was mayor when the police chief began charging rape victims for their rape kits. She lied about visiting Ireland. She did not own a passport until 2006. She did not leave the country until 2007. She thinks being near Russia makes her important. It's like an idiot buffet.

Then came the interviews. First Charlie Gibson.



It is generally believed reporters should not have to explain basic facts to vice presidential candidates. She came across as someone who did not know what she was talking about. Mostly because she did not know what she was talking about.

The next interview was with Katie Couric.



She’s gonna bring ‘em to ya!



Russia's right next to her state –– a mere 58 miles across a body of water.



It’s got to be all about job creation!

And she’s not even drunk, like George Bush. That’s just how her brain works. Of course, conservatives began to freak out once they really got a good look at how her brain works. David Brooks wrote...

And now they are beginning to push for her to leave the ticket. The Conservative columnist Kathleen Parker didn’t hold back.

The National Review’s Kathryn Jean Lopez doesn’t think it’s such a bad idea.

But it’s not going to happen. McCain has completely blown it. The election will be over Thursday night at 7:30 PST. At this point, both Biden and the moderator will try to catch Palin with a subject she doesn’t know about. Based on what we are seeing, it won’t be hard. The only way to get out of this mess is to replace Palin before Thursday, but that would also destroy McCain’s campaign, for three reasons.

* Destroys base morale.
* No obvious alternative.
* McCain has overplayed the “game-changer” card.

Welcome to the no-win Palin meltdown. Palin was like a Trojan horse with a thermo-nuclear device inside. McCain could have had a slim shot at the White House without her, but with her, he’s fucking toast.

And I'd like to personally thank Republicans for not choosing Romney, because if he had, Democrats would lose this election. With the current economic crisis, Romney would be talking circles around Obama.

FearTheReaper is a writer, actor and stand up comedian. Check back each Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday for more from FearTheReaper and read his blog, Stop All Monsters.

Yesterday the first volleys were fired by the religious Right against the IRS code that prohibits churches from endorsing candidates from pulpit.

Source

In 1954 Congress amended the tax code to prohibit certain non-profit groups from intervening in a political campaign involving candidates. The provision allows the IRS to strip the offending church of their tax-exempt status.

The Associated Press reported that "...33 pastors in 22 states were to make pointed recommendations about political candidates Sunday, an effort orchestrated by the Arizona-based Alliance Defense Fund." This effort was premeditated and well thought out.

So what exactly was said from the pulpits on Sunday? Did it really violate federal law? Most definitely.

It is sad to see that the Republicans have now resorted organized violations of Federal law in order to win this election. Just when you thought the playing field could not get any more dirty the Right pulls this.

So do these pastors have a chance of fulfilling their goals? Not likely with the current lineup of SCOTUS Justices. Robert Tuttle, a professor of law and religion at