Bush is probably just afraid of being accused of nepotism.

Heh. When I saw the header, I thought the post was about food preparation... "Monkey Helper."
Heh.

Oh well............youse guys beat me to the best two snark mines on this topic.

Wow... thank you for sharing that, Bob! That's a wonderful video! :) I never knew there was such a thing or that monkeys could be trained enough to be helpful in that way.

The Bush administration revels in its ignorance, so I expect they didn't know either. :(

**********************

BTW -- as a presidential scholar/hobbyist, what's your opinion on this: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/01/07/inauguration-attire-bring_n_155843.html ?

I'm such a sentimentalist - I'm in favor. :)

QT

awww Monkey Helpers! better then Monkey Butlers!

@QT

The top hat is good with a tux/tails, but not with a regular suit. So if they returned to a white tie tux dress code, then yes. Top hat.

Overall, I think we need to return to 1940s men's fashions, including the fedora.
http://artofmanliness.com/2008/10/30/mens-fashion-well-dressed/

Did you see what the Monkey Butler did on "Malcolm in the Middle"? I can understand the fear :)

Seriously, though, I hope that this kind of stupidity will be ushered out along with Bush.

I don't hate monkey helpers. It's the monkeys I can't stand. If your monkey needs help, why shouldn't he get it?

;o)

Well this is one more reason I hope an IED doesn't blow off my limbs in Iraq. I am sure there are tons of people who could really benefit from a monkey helper. Thanks for one more FUCK YOU Bush.
This is why it is really important that we elect a President that is intelligent and likes to read. I am sure the monkey helper was further down the page that bush didn't want to read so they got the shaft.

There are so many easy jokes to derive from this topic.
I'm not going to sink to the level of cracking jokes about Chimp's simian face because I respect the office, and I recognize that there is a clear distinction between the dignity of the office and the masses' selection of the person who occupies it. Actually, as David Hume wrote a long time ago, there is absolutely no distinction.
SOOOO here we go.
THEY REMIND HIM TOO MUCH OF CHENEY. HAAHA! WHEEEWW!

By the way, those ladies are hot. (Cenk Uygur voice) How YOU doin', ladies? I gots me da B.S. (bachelor of science, folks) degree with an emphasis on behaviorism in psychology. Does that turn you on? It doesn't turn on employers.

Ah, the life of the filmmaker...

The Bush administration has clearly never heard of Monkey Helpers.

There are only two reasons that Bushies would change this regulation:

1. A corporation paid (bribed) them to make the change.
2. Some aspect of it conflicts with mad-dog neocon ideolgy.

   Now consider that Seeing Eye is a for profit corporation and Monkey Helpers is a not for profit organization. In the neocon world everyting worth doing is worth doing for a profit. Only fucking degenerate communists do things without profit.

   So my theory is that Seeing Eye probably made a large neocon donation and then had a word about screwing Monkey Helpers. Since Monkey Helpers are fucking degenerate commies perhaps having a word with the Bushies was enough.

   Corporatists suck. The people running Seeing Eye are known to be reich wingers. They make huge profits selling trained dogs to the blind. The trained animals they sell are top-shelf so I am not critical of them for that. They have often interfered with anyone they perceive as competition including directly using legal attacks against 'not-for-profits' that attempted to sell trained dogs at a lower price to the Blind. Did I mention that Seeing Eye's profits are obscene?

@Bob: that's a great page. I forwarded it to my son. :) And I agree - formalwear, tophat and all, for the inauguration. Guess that won't happen this year.

QT

Can't you just hear a hayseed in a West Virginia Wal Mart reciting her lines?

"We didn't allow Mrs. Clumperfudge's monkey in the store 'cause, and such as, due to the nature of her monkey not bein' legally a service animal, as defined as such, by the law. She's welcome back with her dawg, as that is defined by the constitution as legally a service animal."

The DOJ's new proposed service animal definition is: "any dog that is individually trained to do work or perform tasks for the benefit of an individual with a disability, including a physical, sensory, psychiatric, intellectual, or other mental disability. Other species of animals, whether wild or domestic, trained or untrained, cannot be service animals."

I read a little bit of the article. These are proposed changes to "Title III Regulation 28 CFR Part 36: Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability by Public Accommodations and in Commercial Facilities."

What committee would be overseeing the DOJ on these changes so that we can flood a few members with emails?

Nano: http://scienceblogs.com/culturedish/2009/01/newsflash_doj_ada_changes_leak.php

QT

All joking aside. That is an amazing program.

I want a monkey that will open a fridge and bring me be... stuff

I want a monkey to help me put away the dishes. I've been domestically challenged since birth it seems.

And in case anyone is wondering, monkeys can code HTML. Watch out Bob. Oh wait, its name is Halperin.