Greetings, loyal minions. Your Maximum Leader is feeling rather petulant. Why? Because he lives in a nation of idiots. Complete. Total. Freaking. Idiots.

The final straw probably came today at lunch time. Your Maximum Leader was partaking of an Asian buffet (something remarkably plebian), alone, and chanced to overhear two older ladies at the next table. The first woman was discussing her niece’s situation to the second woman. The first woman said something to the effect of her niece being a financial burden on her family. The first woman said, “Well you can hardly blame the girl. She is 22 years old. She’s living at home. She’s unemployed. And she’s caring for her 5 year old child.”

What? You can’t blame her? What can’t we blame her for? As best I can tell about the only thing you can’t blame the girl for is being 22. I can blame her for just about everything else.

But we can’t just go around blaming people can we? That isn’t nice. It damages people’s self-esteem. It doesn’t “celebrate diversity.” It is so judgmental.

I really wish that we could pinpoint the moment at which the hearty people of these United States became such pansy wimps. I do. Then at least I could focus my anger at some specific event and rant, “Goddamn it! If it wasn’t for everything that happened on August 18, 1989 we wouldn’t be in the mess we’re in.”

If our Anglo-Western heritage was a book, we’d be tearing out the pages one at a time and mixing them in a huge manure heap of modernity and relativism. Social norms? Too restrictive. Personal responsibility? Too hard. Understanding right and wrong? Too judgemental. Calling a thing by its true name? Too pushy. Our hard-won liberty, our freedoms, our civilization. It is all being tossed into a dung-heap that will be spread on a weed-ridden field and left to grow untended. Neglected.

Here’s a quotation that got my dander up:

… But if people want to practice polygamy, who am I to say anything? I think that’s what’s great about America, is you can practice any religion. It’s unfortunate though when it’s forced upon young people, and that’s when I really have the biggest problem with it.

That was Chloe Sevigny.* One of the stars of HBO’s Big Love. Frankly, I’ve got no major issues with the show. I tried watching a few episodes and it didn’t do anything for me. But I’ve got a big problem with this sentiment.

Who am I to say anything if you want to practice polygamy? Humm… What if your religion happens to endorse shooting women for wearing nail polish in public? What if your religion happens to condone locking girls in a burning building because releasing them from the building without head scarves might titillate and/or offend some old geezers? How about stoning young girls who are raped because they are dishonored?

I suppose all those religious practices are okay too. You know… You don’t want to judge anyone. It might hurt their feelings. Make ‘em feel bad.

Of course, I shouldn’t go around bad-mouthing religions. Have you heard about one of the newer ones? The Church of Oprah? Okay. It isn’t a real church. But you’d think that Oprah was the focal point of some religion the way people go on about her. Did you see the bit on the USA Today website? “The Divine Miss Winfrey.” Here’s a sample:

She’s no longer just a successful talk-show host worth $1.4 billion, according to Forbes’ most recent estimate. Over the past year, Winfrey, 52, has emerged as a spiritual leader for the new millennium, a moral voice of authority for the nation.

…

“She’s a really hip and materialistic Mother Teresa,” says Kathryn Lofton, a professor at Reed College in Portland, Ore., who has written two papers analyzing the religious aspects of Winfrey. “Oprah has emerged as a symbolc figurehead of spirituality.”

I wish to God I was making this up. But no. It’s out there. Oprah Friggin’ Winfrey the new, hip, materialistic Mother Teresa? Excuse me while I go and vomit. On the one hand we condemn any sort of established religion - because they’re bad and have rules and all. But give us some new-agey-feel-good-I’m-not-responsible-for-my-pathetic-life guru and we’ll just sop it up and ask for seconds (and thirds).

Oprah Winfrey the voice of moral authority in America? Has it come to that people? Really. Because if it has let me know. I’ll just get some more guns, buy some livestock, and move away to Montana or something and just give my house to some Oprah worshiping fool. Because if I didn’t give it to the undeserving bastard they’d just pass a law taking it from me.

Then again… We are passing lots of stupid stupid laws. You know why? Because a nation of idiots elects idiotic people to office. The voters are too damn dumb to understand or care what their elected officials are doing.

Symptomatic of this phenomenon, today I happened to catch a snippet of the NPR show “Day to Day.” Noah Adams, the host, was interviewing John Wells the producer of “The West Wing.” At one point Adams confessed to Wells that he has trouble following the dialogue on the show. The dialogue is technical and sharp you know. Wells says that’s okay. Most people don’t understand the “wonky” language but are still able to get the “feeling” of what is being said.

I can hardly begin describing how many things are wrong with that. Noah Adams has been at NPR reporting on politics and what-all since 1978. 1978! That is twenty-eight years he’s been covering politics and current events. And he doesn’t fucking understand the dialogue on a TV drama about politics? Doesn’t understand the dialogue? I’m only 37 years old and I’ve never had trouble understanding the dialogue on “The West Wing.” Last time I checked, I’ve never been a political correspondent who’s traveled the world bringing the listeners of NPR the news. But I can understand, intellectually understand, “The West Wing.” What does that say about Noah Adams?

Then the Executive Producer of the show tells Adams that one shouldn’t feel badly about not understanding the dialogue on “The West Wing.” It is a pretty high-brow show and if one just understands the feelings of the characters on the show you’ll be okay. If I just understand the feelings? How the hell am I going to understand their feelings if I can’t fucking understand what the they’re saying? You know language is generally used to convey meaning. If you can’t convey meaning and information with language does it really have a purpose? I suppose if I pay extra close attention to Bradley Whitford and Martin Sheen I’ll miraculously get clued in.

Since our chattering classes can’t understand a damned TV show it should come as no surprise that they can’t pass laws to keep down frivolous lawsuits. You know, tort reform? Or is “tort reform” too technical a term. If you could see me now you’d know that I was looking as sincerely as possible at the monitor with big ole tears welling up in my brown eyes and trying to convey how important tort reform is. Do you feel it? Do you feel my concern? Do you feel my lack of compassion for the idiots? Trust me, if you were here you’d feel it. You’d feel how important the issue is.

Or isn’t as the case may be. You see, I am not an idiot. I am thus offended by nonsensical lawsuits brought by nonsensical persons to advance nonsensical causes. Like the asshole (Michael Cohn) who is suing the Los Angeles/Orange County/Anaheim/Southern California Angels because they didn’t give him a tote bag on Mother’s Day last year. Yup. Mr. Cohn was discriminated against because he wasn’t a woman over 18. Frankly if Mr. Con is so covetous of an Angels tote bag he probably could have just stayed after the game finished and picked up as many as he wanted from those discarded in the stands… But noooo… He’s got to sue the team because they wanted to give those people most likely to fit the profile of a mother a gift on Mother’s Day.

Of course, not all frivolous lawsuits are about tote bags and baseball games. Many of them have to do with life - or more likely death. Medical malpractice is a common type of lawsuit. Too bad 40% of the lawsuits are goundless. Groundless as in no harm done.

But we can’t stop those lawsuits. We can’t punish people who bring frivolous lawsuits. Why? Because that might prevent a truly aggrieved person from bringing a lawsuit in the future. We must accommodate the lowest common denominator so that everyone feels better.

Of course, if we can’t get all worked up about frivolous lawsuits I don’t see how we could get worked up about the government collecting records of who we call on the phone. I mean really. The language we’d have to use to describe that situation is really complicated. If we can’t handle The West Wing then I’m not sure how we’ll handle government intrusion into our personal lives.

But they aren’t really intruding are they? No. Just recording what numbers I dial and look for a pattern. (By the way… If you want know the most frequently called people from my phones they are: my mother in-law, my sister-in-law, the mothers of girls in the Girl Scout troop the Villainettes are members of, the Air Marshal, and the Smallholder. That is it. If there is a connection there to a terrorist threat please let me know…) Looking for patterns isn’t like listening in on the calls. Is it? Noooo…

Then again… The issues are complex and hard to comprehend. Very difficult ideas you know.

Perhaps they are difficult if you are a complete boob.

Oh yes… My countrymen. They are complete boobs. How could I have forgotten?

You know… Someone out there reading this and thinking that if we’d all just use our words to explain ourselves to one another we’d all feel better. We don’t have to get angry or strike out. You know violence never solved anything…

Damn. If I hear one more sanctimonious fool say to me that violence never solved anything I think I will use violence to solve the problem of me having to listen to idiots. I will not say that violence should be your first reaction to any situation. But it can come in awful handy you know. Violence has, in fact, solved many many things throughout history.

Of course, we don’t have the taste for violence being used to solve problems like we used to. I don’t know what would happen if we were facing an enemy bent on our destruction and hoping to impose their ideology on all mankind?

Oh yeah… We are facing such an enemy. But when they hide in mosques, well, we just have to wait them out. Normally I’m all for doing everything possible to spare non-military targets. But if you put a bunch of armed people in a mosque, school, hospital, or other structure of historic/cultural importance; well then it has become a military target. I think that military targets held by an enemy ought to be destroyed. But that is just me I suppose.

And you know… Back during WWII if you supported the Nazi’s (actively or passively) you were likely to get your house blown up - at the least. Nowadays we can’t even call the vast majority of Muslims who passively support the terrorists/jihadi cause collaborators. They are you know. Collaborators that is. I’m not advocating blowing up the homes of every Muslim. But perhaps by labeling a person what they are you might find out who is and isn’t on your side.

Ack…

I’ve gone on and on with no purpose… I don’t even know ho I’m writing this for or why I am bothering. If you are reading this you fall into one of two descriptions.

The first is that you are a regular reader of this site. In which case, you’re probably not an idiot but a person seeking out other non-idiots in an effort to keep your sanity.

The second type of person reading this is someone who googled something like “Jennifer Love Hewitt naked” or “Giada DeLaurentiis naked.” Of course, this makes you an idiot. It is likely that if you are an idiot, you are scandalized by all this (if you understood it - that whole I-can’t-understand-The-West-Wing-factor) and will just click away. Before you go allow me to ask you to give up. Your life is meaningless and you are too stoopid to realize it.

There might be a third description of a reader out there. The idiot who realizes they are an idiot and is trying to better themselves. I doubt you’ll be successful. But that shouldn’t keep you from trying.

I’m gonna have a scotch and turn in.

Carry on.

* - I don’t want to be uncharitable towards Ms Sevigny. Indeed, she is a fine actress. Also, her name is beautiful. It looks and sounds perfect. Chloe Sevigny.