It looks like the media is getting a head start.
From the exclusive Pancake City poll:
After the Presidential debate this Thursday, the press will:
Come on, monkey story! interview ten audience members after the debate, and quote the person whose comment can be fitted into the story they wrote the night before.
say: “Both candidates made misstatements and distorted their opponent’s position. Hey, did you catch our monkey story?”
“He wants to turn the White House into the Waffle House.”
Who said it, to whom, and under what circumstances?
Has anyone read “America: The Book” written by Jon Stewart and The Daily Show Writers? Amazom.com has a pretty funny video intro by Stewart on their site.
I’ve read a fair share of “Questions to Ask the Candidates” articles in reference to tomorrow’s Presidential debate. This one is the best by far. The questions are directed to President Bush, so if anyone has a good article with questions Kerry should be asked to recommend, go ahead.
Speaking of which, you may see a few cut-a-ways during the debate of John Kerry scratching his crotch, or George W. Bush waving a pair of flip-flops to the camera and making a jerk-off motion with his hand. Guess who’s going to control the camera shots during the debates? No, really. Guess! You’ll never guess who it is. Not in a million, bazillion years. Okay, here’s a hint:
IT’S FUCKING FOX NEWS.
That is the Zen of Design. And the design of Zen. Embodied by Oprah.com.
Only the crazy squirrel seeks the nut. Ommmmm…
“If Bin Laden shows up in October, somebody better check him for freezer burn.” (source, first comment)
You know, if Bush actually figured out a way to deep freeze someone–and I mean Bush himself, not the administration–if President Bush figured out how to freeze Osama and defrost him so he looks recently alive, I’d vote for him, because that’s pretty damn cool.
Maybe the instant popularity Osama bin Laden’s capture would bring is why many editorialists are chatting about a soon-to-be-released movie that may change the election: “Weekend at Bernie’s 4–All the President’s Men”.
Synopsis: To secure his re-election, President Bush attempts to reanimate Osama bin Laden, captured and frozen in June 2002. But after announcing the capture to the public, the President hits “cook” instead of “defrost”, and Osama’s flaming beard becomes only the first of his problems.
Sample scene: Congressional hearing on terrorism.
BUSH: “See? It’s him. He’s being very stubborn, so don’t bother asking questions. If that’s all, I’ll just…”
JOE BIDEN: “Wait a minute. Osama, why is there duct tape under your arm pit?”
BUSH [falsetto, pulling Osama's mouth with a string]: “Uh…because I like John Kerry?”
Dennis Hastert: “That’s him, all right!”
(If you visit the Dennis Hastert link, keep in mind this is the man two degrees from the Presidency in case the President dies in office.)
…the last time the terror alert level was green?
At least 9/11 didn’t happen in 1952. The calm color would have been white, and it would have escalated several shades of grey up to a dangerous black.
The blue to red color scheme we use is appropriate. One, it is consistent with the scheme for traffic lights, although at red lights most people don’t pee in their pants. Two, Democrats come from blue states, and Democrats are pussies about terrorism. They think the world is calm and Osama bin Laden is prancing around the daisy field. “La la la!” sings Osama. “I hope George W. Bush wins. Then John Kerry will hold a bake sale for my next al Qaeda recruitment drive. Dick Cheney said so. I love Kerry’s brownies.”
Yes, that is what Democrats think. But the third reason the terror alert color scheme is ideal surpasses the first two. It matches the spectrum of the rainbow. The terror alert system, in addition to protecting us from terrorist attacks through its irritating shades of orange and red, is also a gay alert system:
Gay people are A-OK.
Gay people help us dress.
I like the funny gays, but not the ones that have sex.
Dem people are going to destroy marriage like a pink Godzilla on Tokyo!
We need Alan Keyes as President.
The system ties in nicely with the red and blue states, doesn’t it?
Have you ever seen such a scared baby?
You may have heard of Billionaires for Bush, a parody protest group whose members follow the Bush campaign around, dress in ball gowns and suits, and shouts messages like “Thank you, little working people, for paying our taxes.”
As political commentary, it’s too witty and roundabout to influence anyone’s opinions, but as political comedy the group is hilarious.
They just released a music video with a catchy song and surprisingly professional production values (link from atrios). It’s entertaining.
The Republican National Committee, best known for their hit single “I Hide My Love From You in My Bunker,” is sending out a mailing to
As Fred Smoot, chairman of the 193rd district, said in the sewer cavern where we meet: “These people will do anything the Bible tells them too. All we need is to infiltrate a few major printing houses and we got it made.”
Religious conservatives bleat about the “gay agenda” and how legally-recognizing a loving relationship will cause the Earth to split open and for Satan to rise up and make us do evil things, like eat candy corn and wake up without hitting the snooze alarm.
But the truth about what we want is much more harder to argue against. Gay people, as the more enlightened of you know, merely want to eat your children and then use their bones to club your unborn babies.
But where is the photo of the zombie gay man feasting on the flesh of the living? Where is the photo of the Kerry campaign worker holding an expectant mother in a head lock while another campaign worker slams a crowbar in her stomach?
I’ll tell you where: in mailings to
BIBLE: BANNED!
HAND HOLDING: ALLOWED!
Candidate X claims that his opponent “steals babies from their mothers, glues the babies to a giant wheel, and charges parents who want to adopt $100,000 to spin the wheel for a chance to win the baby of their dreams. Or a toaster.”
Candidate Y claims that while Candidate X was flashing children in a schoolyard, he was wearing a blue overcoat, when, in fact, the overcoat was turquoise.
The news headline? “Candidate X and Candidate Y both play loose with the truth.”
My exaggeration aside, read this article and try to tell me that stupidity under the guise of fair-mindedness isn’t at play here.
And if John Kerry has said anywhere near the same number of falsehoods about George W. Bush’s words, and with anywhere near the same amount of gall, then this reporter failed to do her job by listing those falsehoods.
The wonderful USPS label hack you saw weeks ago on Pancake City has been picked up by Boing Boing. Although it is technically a felony, and his new popularity may bring him some unwanted attention by the authorities, you should still watch the short video that my friend, Carlos Guinerra, made at the post office in Jugtown, PA, if you haven’t seen it already.
It is impossible, absolutely impossible, to write a bad monkey story.
Need proof?
Sept. 24, 2004
CIUDAD JUAREZ, Mexico (Reuters) - Monkey pooped. The end.
See?
I love writing about politics and much as I love writing comedy. But I know most people don’t visit my page for the third rate-political analysis. They come for the second-rate comedy. (And for those of you who thought that joke was predictable: see “second-rate comedy”, “previous sentence”)
So I’ll get back to the jokes soon. But I have a request to make. Is there anyone registered to vote and undecided on who to vote for (or if to vote at all)? If so, are you open to hearing an argument about why one should vote for Kerry?
I can promise not to hound you, to be shrill, and to back up what I say with evidence. I’ll even recommend that you vote for President Bush if your beliefs and values aligns closer with his and are also based in fact (see previous post).
If you’re interested, please send me an email at monkey(dot)on(dot)keyboard (at) gmail. Thanks.
The TNR’s Noam Scheiber is exactly right with his post on how John Kerry’s new focus on Iraq will change media coverage on the war. Kerry’s new line of attack against President Bush in the past week has been the best move his campaign has made so far.
I say this for a few reasons. Read Shneiber’s post for the first one. The second reason is that there is a gulf between the assumptions of people who support the war in Iraq and those against it. In short, most people who support the war on Iraq hold the false assumptions that Iraq had ties to 9/11 and al Qaeda. Kerry is finally directly contradicting these assumptions. The details are in this awesome study PIPA did a few weeks ago (summary PDF), but here’s what to me is the most important part:
Likewise, among those who thought Iraq was directly involved in the 9/11 attacks, 73% thought going to war was the right decision, and among those who thought Iraq was giving al Qaeda substantial support 69% thought this was the right decision. But among those who thought there were only a few contacts between Iraq and al Qaeda, 21% thought war was the right decision; and among those who thought there was no relationship at all, only 16% saw war as the right decision.
(page 9)
As I hope you all know, the 9/11 Commission report stated that Iraq had no WMDs or a major WMD-program. It also concluded that there were no substantial ties between Iraq and al Qaeda.
Furthermore, while a shockingly high number of people still hold these incorrect beliefs, the number has declined a bit since their last survey in March, likely due in part at least to the 9/11 Commission report that came out in July. From PIPA:
The percentage saying that Iraq was giving substantial support to al Qaeda has dropped from 57% in March to 50% today. The percentage saying that Iraq had WMDs or a major WMD program has dropped from 60% to 54%.
None of this guarantees that if people realize their rationales for suporting the war are in error, they will reverse their support of the war, punish President Bush for fostering these views and vote for John Kerry. I mean, who can compete with the powerful logic of “Support our Troops!”? But if the Three Stooges of politics, logic, truth, and rationality, can stop running away from mummies long enough to poke the eyes out of even a few hundred thousand Americans, that alone could shift the election towards John Kerry.
And the Kerry campaign knows this. Check out these passages from a speech Kerry gave only days ago:
(
What I love about Kerry’s new focus is that not only is it hard-hitting and confrontational, it’s backed by the truth. Isn’t that strange, a biting political attack that’s also true? Yes, his strategy is based on at least 50.1% of the American public having the ability to reason and make decisions based on that reasoning. And that’s always a risky strategy. But in a democracy, the leaders are no better than the average intelligence of the people who elect them. We will get what we deserve.
