Talk about thin skins.  I guess it comes from cranking up the thermostat too often.

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee has decided to muster their acorn-fattened automatons to heave righteous froth at Rush Limbaugh via an online petition.  Why?  Because Rush told his listeners that his response to the President telling GOP leaders last week that “You can’t just listen to Rush Limbaugh and get things done” didn’t need more than 4 words:  “I hope he fails.”

Does this sound like adult conversation, let alone civilized conversation?  I didn’t think so.  It reminds me of 2 little boys mucking around in a sandbox and trying to one-up each other or dogs running around peeing on trees.

But be that as it may, it is important to note that once again Barack Hussein Obama is attempting to influence the media to cast him in what he believes is a favorable light.  Stifling criticism – first by unsuccessfully trying to get the courts to pull McCain’s television campaign ads and now through some phantom grassroots outcry – this is his modus operandi but this is one thing he has absolutely no business trying to squelch.

Let us remember this:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;
or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press;
or the right of the people peaceably to assemble,
and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

 For those who have never bothered to read it, this is the First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America.  It’s purpose is to assure that every one of us – whether occupant of some Orchid Office, a broadcaster, or just a man or woman on the street – has the freedom to voice our opinion.  Even, and including, those whom we may choose to label as wrong or flat-out stupid.  I personally don’t listen to Rush Limbaugh, but you know what?  Reality is that his OPINION doesn’t affect my life.  And reality is that neither does the OPINION of Barack Hussein Obama.

But it does affect me when 2 grown men use up air time and font to have a pissing contest over what boils down to which one is more popular and therefore, by some magical default, “right”.  And you know what?  I then make the personal choice to label them both egotistical idiots and change the channel or turn the page.

Try it sometime.  It makes you feel so…so…free.

Unless, of course, you’re still addicted to that Kool-Aid.

Attorney General Eric Holder called Americans “cowards” this week when it comes to race, pointing out that while workplaces and even cities are integrated, most Americans spend their free time segregated inside what he called “race-protected cocoons.”   He thinks that not talking about race means there’s a problem.

I have a little newsflash for him.

Frankly, I’ve always been color-blind (as have been most of my generation) and in my time have happily cavorted with anyone of any ethnicity within my sphere of dealings (and they are admittedly often quite broad) whose personal values match or complement my own.  Unfortunately, remarks like these tell me there are still some black Americans who are still trying too hard to “integrate”, who continue to see a country made up of blacks and whites instead of a collective of fellow Americans; who are more content to waste their time – and my time – drawing lines rather than simply being their best selves and pursuing our Constitutionally-protected right to chase after their own happiness.  For heaven’s sake, the law is on the side of equality for all so why continue to make an issue of it?  They sound like spoiled brats and reinforce the stereotype of the “entitlement mentality”.

Did it ever occur to anyone that constantly being reminded of something that doesn’t exist is the surest way to make it real?  You know, like those politicians…errr, those people who actually believe the lies they tell others.  I don’t need someone telling me to be nice to anyone, regardless their race or gender or any other thing that makes them appear on the surface to be different than me.   But, as an example, I have nothing in common with what I’ll call the hip-hop mentality, so no, I am not going to invite someone who lives that lifestyle over for dinner just because they happen to have black skin and it’s someone else’s idea of the “right thing to do”.  Yet if I’m in a situation where I have to deal with a hip-hopper on a regular basis, and in getting to know one another we find other things in common, then maybe I would invite them over for that Saturday afternoon barbeque.  And I’d expect a similar invitation from them.  (Maybe, because who can afford to put anything on the grill these days if that grill isn’t on the White House lawn?)

The bottom line is that opening my home to others is my choice, based on an individual-by-individual assessment.  And that does not make me a coward, Mr. Thinks-We-Must-Still-Be-Beholden.  That makes me a normal human being living in a culturally-diverse society.  That makes me a normal American who gives everyone a chance and doesn’t want to spend my own, personal time with someone whose values are in conflict with my own.

I’ll tell you something, though.  You, and those who continue to create a problem where none exists, are most definitely NOT on my Saturday afternoon barbeque invitation list.

Let’s see now.  A captive chimpanzee goes on a rage and critically injures someone.  It is fatally wounded by police.

Someone with both a sense of humor and a sense of outrage over the wreaking stench of pork emanating from our nation’s capital decides to draw a cartoon that uses dark humor to make their point:

Do I have to spell it out for you?  The point here is that what comes out of Congress is no better than what would come out of a monkey assigned the same task.  And because that one monkey is now dead, we have to find another one to take its place.

Like most average Americans, it never occurred to me to see it as a slam against either blacks or against our half-black President.  As for it being seen as a call to assassinate our half-black President, well, frankly, a nutcase who wants to take him out will do so whether or not someone draws a political cartoon.  (Note this was said by someone who is named “Jealous”.  No joke.)

I find it very telling that those who most wish the world to be so similarly color-blind as me (and probably you, too) are now jumping up and down and screaming in outrage as they grab their crayons and connect the previously invisible dots so that the rest of us are forced to consider whether chimpanzees somehow equate to black people.  Those who most wish there were no lines between races are using a political cartoon to draw a big, fat one right down the middle of our lives.

The NAACP is now calling for a boycott of the NY Post and the firing of its editor and the cartoonist.

How do you spell “stupid”?  If you’re going to force me to consider the intelligence level of a chimpanzee versus a black person using this situation of creating divisiveness as the measure, well, I’m afraid the chimpanzee is going to come out on top.  Because there is no expectation that a chimpanzee has the cognitive skills to understand more than what it sees on the surface of something.

Like mama used to say, when you point your finger, there are three other fingers pointing right back at you.

It must be another slow news day.  Foxnews.com is reporting on the shocking upset in which a January 2009 Harris poll found President Obama topping a list of people that Americans admire enough to call a hero, thereby knocking the previous winner, another smooth-talking political agitator, Jesus, into second place.

Of course, Harris asked only 2,634 people.  Online.  People who who have agreed to participate in Harris Interactive surveys.  Using the Magic 8 ball sleight-of-hand called statistics to accommodate various situations, their responses are then extrapolated to purportedly reflect the views of the general population.

The multiple-choice reasons from which the 2,634 people selected to justify their choices for their hero included:

• “Doing what’s right regardless of personal consequences” (89%)
• “Not giving up until the goal is accomplished” (83%)
• “Doing more than what other people expect of them” (82 percent)

Also reportedly popular were such reasons as “Overcoming adversity” and “Staying level-headed in a crisis.”

I find it interesting that God, not included at all in the top 1% mentioned in the 2000 survey, came in #11.  You could see this as a sign that the country is losing its faith, but I think the current state of the country is a reflection of its decided lack of faith in something greater, and merely evidenced when someone like the perennial campaigner, President Obama, is more admired than the likes of God or Jesus.  On the flip-side, though, it could be said that God getting into the top 1% mentioned this time is a sign that some people are starting to look a little farther than their television screens or computer monitors for some modicum of an example of morals and ethics. 

Surely that’s more hopeful for the future of this country than calling someone a hero when he’s never held a real job in his life yet has written 2 autobiographies by the age of 46.  At least Jesus left the biographies up to his followers.  And after his work was finished.

News flash.  Janet Jackson’s breast is now being looked at by the Supreme Court. 

Well, ok, not her breast, per se, but the matter of the resulting fines incurred by CBS as a result of FCC sanctions for the unexpected “wardrobe malfunction” at the 2004 Superbowl half-time show that caused a whole lot of comments.  The Philadelphia-based Third Circuit Court of Appeals let CBS off the hook for the accident but the FCC disagrees with its decision.

Honestly, if accidentally showing a boob during a live broadcast is that horrible, why isn’t every television station that broadcasts those boobs we send to Washington being fined as well?

Now from the title of this little blog, you might think I’m going to talk about politicians, but no, it’s a real monkey and its deadly shenanigans that’s got my panties in a wad.  One 15-year old, 200-pound chimpanzee named Travis, who lived with 70-year old Sandra Herold as, it is said, a member of the family.

Note the past tense.  Travis was shot to death by Stamford, Connecticut police after he attacked and came close to killing a friend who’d come visiting.

Though so many heads are shaking in disbelief you could power enough electricity-generating windmills to light all the homes in a stereotypical small city, the unfortunate truth is that Travis was only doing what chimpanzees do.  It was the Disneyesque perceptions of the humans who held him in captivity, greedily using him in television commercials before he was retired to live with old Ms. Herold that is the root cause of this horrible tragedy.

A wild animal may become habituated to humans and some, I dare say, even love the hands that feed them, but Nature’s love remains a wild-at-heart love and the bond of trust that exists is therefore a very fragile thing.  So fragile that more often than not the human is totally unaware of its boundaries, but even the tamest wild animal never forgets them and when Nature’s terms are breached, life defaults to Nature’s ways, leaving the clever but naturally defenseless human in tatters. Of course the clever human continues to try to trump Nature, “blaming” the animal who must then suffer the ultimate penalty.

Certainly I feel sorry for Charla Nash, the friend who found herself on the receiving end of a chimpanzee’s angry outburst, but the truth is I feel far sorrier for Travis.  No wild animal asks to be held captive, no wild animal sets their sights on living their life as nothing more than a slave to a human’s overinflated ego. 

Ms. Herold and all the others like her – from Siegried & Roy to Lu Ann Best & her Twiggy the waterskiing squirrel, as well as every roadside “attraction” and circus – those who think wild animals are exploitable commodities or “pets” are idiots, plain and simple.

I wish I’d written this.

Having spent a lifetime working with so many of the “highly-degreed” I know firsthand the arrogance that often accompanies it.  Particularly in the younger ones, upon whom the leveling hands of Time and Real-Life Experience have not yet come to bear.

Moving them from the bell jar of ivory towers right into the rarified atmospheres of executive leadership apparently really is the worst thing we, as a society, can do.

Mark the words, if it’s not already obvious to you, the current administration is going to be proof positive of this.

Here is one of those trainwrecks of which the human species is so inordinately fond.

Nadya Suleman made news recently when she gave birth to 8 babies.   Ms. Suleman is a single mother, and already has 6 children.  They all live with her parents.  She has not worked since 1999, instead drawing disability due to an injury occured while working in a California state mental institution.  Three of her first 6 children also receive disability benefits due to various problems.

Medical care for her latest litter will total at least $1.3 million.  All paid for courtesy of Medical, California’s Medicaid system.  Which is in turn partially funded by federal money, courtesy of the American taxpayer.  And this is just to get those babies home.  The long-term costs have not yet even been adequately addressed.

Senior judicial analyst at the FOX News Channel, Judge Andrew Napolitano, has written that Ms. Suleman “has done a positive good by bringing these children into the world.”  He goes on to state that there is no law against having 14 children, and certainly that is true, however, to use in vitro fertilization to go against Nature’s apparent wish for someone to not reproduce, with the resulting expenses then expected to be borne by the American taxpayer, is morally and ethically wrong.  Exponentially wrong when in vitro is purchased over and over to result in 6 children, then again to add 8 more.

Ms. Suleman intends to return to school for a master’s degree in counseling.  I suggest this world would be a better place if she’d been a patient at that mental hospital and afterwards been on the receiving end of counseling.  For she puts us all in a Catch-22:  refuse to support her mental illness and her children suffer.  Help her children and we continue to encourage this kind of idiocy.

I guess I understand why the stimulus bill contains so much welfare money.