'Tis the season of the folly that afflicts us quadrennially, when we are exposed to the overwhelming mass of rhetoric and underwhelming trickle of truth on which we're expected to base the selection of our next president.

During the current replay of that bizarre circus, more than a half-billion simoleons will reportedly be incinerated in a bonfire of bombast and bull poop that will generate huge blasts of heat, but minuscule flickers of light.

While partisan prattlers point with pride to the flawless curriculum vitae of one candidate, those of opposite prejudice fashion a doomsday scenario for America should, such a devious, incompetent scumbag take the oath of office next January.

TV and radio ads will pollute the airwaves with a degree of tastelessness and exaggeration eclipsing that of all penile enhancement and feminine hygiene products combined.

Hordes of robotic loyalists, festooned with more body decorations than a NASCAR entry will cheer, jeer and guzzle beer at their respective political conventions. Such raucous and pointless mob scenes are supercharged with all the suspense and unpredictability of a Shaquille O'Neal slam-dunk, as the pawn-like participants rubber-stamp decisions that had been made long before they left home.

(Isn't it strange, by the way, that Miss America is chosen from among 50-plus finalists, while we get to pick only one or t'other of the pre-chosen two? And it's even stranger that his understudy is chosen by that one individual, solely based on his judgment as to who would "help the ticket?" SHEESH!)

Once these carefully orchestrated charades have been played out, Madison Avenue will invade Main Street, as talking points, party lines, stump speeches, half-truths, rumors and downright lies seek to penetrate every human consciousness, in an all-out effort to solidify the support of friends, shake the resolve of enemies and sway the opinion of mugwumps.

Count on your mailbox, in-box and think-box being under full siege by the spin doctors and shlockmeisters who purvey promises that won't be fulfilled, accusations that can't be proven, figures that don't add up, "facts" that are less than factual and slogans that sound profound, but reveal nothing of substance.

While, contrary to the old saw, all is not fair in love and war, there are no holds barred in either the intercourse or combat of politics (do what you will with the former metaphor).

In a better world, the presidential candidates would be given a large number of topics to address on a large number of occasions, with inquisitors empowered to cut through the side-stepping, tap-dancing, subject-changing and pontificating that characterize the so-called debates. These spectacles have, in the past, amounted to little more than an exchange of monologues prefaced by passing references to the issues raised.

What to do about it? Well, for one thing, don't add fuel to the bonfire by responding to appeals from either party for more of the money you could otherwise divert to loftier causes, such as a mini-vacation, a pay-down of plastic debt, or contribution to your charity of choice. The $500 billion already headed for the political pyre will provide more than enough flame and shame.

You might also take to hitting the "mute" button on your remote at the first sight of campaign badvertising and discard snail-mail from partisan sources - unopened.

Also, make free use of that "Del" button on your computer keyboard when the subject line suggests another dose of political pimpery. Better still, if you want to do something constructive, test the incoming "facts" on Google and/or the hoax/urban legend web sites, rather than blindly passing on what is usually bum scoop.

Finally, here's a three-part test that you can apply to anything you see or hear while the bonfire rages:
1. Who says so? (Is the source reliable and knowledgeable?)
2. So what? (Does it matter in terms of evaluating the candidate's qualifications)
3. Is it specific? (Enough details on which to make a judgment?)

Above all, concentrate on the hard news between now and November 2 and run everything with even a faint whiff of punditry or prejudice through a mental sieve of skepticism - even when the source tends generally to see things your way.

If you stray into journalistic Opinionland, be sure to recognize it as such and at least nibble on contrary views. (Sycophants of Rush Limbaugh and Michael Moore are equally myopic and intellectually neutered.)

My name is Joe Klock, Sr., and I approve of this message.