I saw a rerun in ploked.com of a popular blog entitled “Why I Eat a Frog for Breakfast.” See video above.

My first thought was that I date frogs. I don’t eat them, even after kissing them.

After understanding the frog-fetish blogger was dealing with the issue of procrastination, I still disagree. Doing the hardest thing first is like obeying the commandments. It’d be nice if you did. It’d be nice if you could. But mostly you don’t and really you can’t. Not in the real world.

It’s the same with a Kermie for breakfast.

My philosophy is to do the easiest things first and just keep on a’doing them. Clear your plate and leave the frog sitting there next to the grits, which I would eat second to last.

You will get more done. And when you get in the habit of gobbling down everything put before you, you might even scarf down the little green guy without even being aware it was a toughie to swallow.

Momentum is what is important. Getting into action is what gets things done. Nobody can eat a frog without a second thought. And second thoughts are what slow you down in getting thru your things to do list.

The biggest problem with looking down on a fat green fly-eater with your first cup of coffee is that you won’t eat it. And you won’t do anything else while you’re trying to figure out how to eat it. And then you find yourself caught up in the old “paralysis by analysis.”

If you must eat a frog because you took a vow on your mother’s grave or have a deadline to write a blog about it, I suggest making it more edible by deconstructing it. Break your frog-issue into bite-sized pieces. Then start with pieces you can handle. I’d start with the frog legs which the French say taste a lot like chicken which is just a grown-up egg. And who can’t handle eggs for breakfast?

We upscale home-based executives whose office is our computer chair appear to have a new uniform. Business Jammies for the ladies and Executive Skivies for the gentlemen.

We like these casual outfits because they are cool and comfortable, and they look okay, even on Skype. We roll out of the rack in the morning and we’re already dressed for work, assuming we don’t have to take time to kick a new acquaintance out of bed so we can read our email in peace.

So what could be the problem with such efficiency? The problem occurs that when the FedEx guy rings the doorbell at 8:30. We’ve got to rush to find some cargo pants and a t-shirt to throw on so we don’t endure an embarrassed panic because we look like college students, hookers, or worse yet jobless jabonies who just jumped out of bed, and are such losers we do not even own a pair of pants.

The Sensei solution is a new dresscode. But not for us. This new exec dresscode is for all those old behind-the-times people who schlep out to work in previous-century type offices. Their new dresscode is to dress just like we do.

I would like to christen this the Executive Skivies dresscode. It should include boxers for the guys as oppossed to something that a pudged out Euroslob wears while vacationing on Miami Beach. Topped by T-shirt or hoodie. A ballcap worn backwards is optional, but only if you are under 30 or a brutha.

The Ladies dresscode is Business Jammies. BizJams should not be shorter than teddy length, or of a material that distracts from the powerpoint when standing in front of the exterior conference room window. Except maybe on a dress-down Friday when anything goes but crotchless panties, of which I have none, I want you to know. A robe is optional, but recommended for business women who always intend to go on a diet and exercise regimen, but haven’t quite got there, yet.

I feel that this manditory business dresscode will help the world economy. It will not only help improve overall worker attitudes, it will increase productivity, create new jobs in the garment industry, and will be a boon to lawyers handling sexual harrassment cases.

Then when the meter man suddenly knocks on my door, even if I’m only wearing an old sweatshirt, I will feel as sartorialy splediferous as Nancy Pelosi, but without the over-sprayed hair.

Fear is an ugly emotion. Ugly to feel. Ugly to see in others.

Fear twists something down deep inside people that warps feelings and judgments.

Fear is what precipitated the screaming at the Town Hall meetings. Not logic. Not a desire to do what was right — fear.

Fear brings out the worst in people, making a good person care more about protecting themselves than what might happen to others, even if that means hurting others.

We had Gitmo and Abu Grahib, and enhanced interrogation techniques because our leaders lived in fear. Cheney and the Bushies understood fear. They felt it deeply. But they also knew fear is a sharp tool that can be used to manipulate others, to appeal to their worst instincts. And they used it quite effectively for eight long years.

Fear is now the tool of choice of the Neo-Cons. Death Panels. Death Books. The euthanasia of old people and babies and veterans. All so illegal aliens can be covered by health insurance.  The Neo-Cons wield their weapon well, too.   The recent polls prove that.

I’m afraid FDR was wrong when he said, “we have nothing to fear but fear itself.”

We should fear those who spin their flashing fears close to our eyes like a weedwacker.

We should consider it our moral duty to stop them from spreading fear.

America and the world are not facing Armageddon. If we seize the opportunity, we can look forward to building a better world, one that is not stampeded by the Fear Riders.

I have heard it said many, many, too many times by too many pundits that the GOP problem is that it has become a regional party, a southern party. And the dems are saying “Yee-Haw!”

Regionalism is not the GOP’s problem. Losing the all the northeast congressional delegations is a symptom, not the disease. Regionalism is the end result, not the cause.

The cause of the problem is that the GOP has accepted the Boss Hogg premise that it is every man for himself. If you judge by the latest actions in the town hall meetings, Republican party members seem to believe that every individual fighting for his own short-term self interest will be what’s best for America. And they will shout you down if you have a different opinion.

There does not seem to be a sense of responsibility for the greater good either among the leaders or the rank and file. There seems to be no sense of caring what the other person thinks or feels. The goal is to stop the other side from winning, to shout the other side down. The goal is to shut down the process, to protect the status quo, because the status quo seems to be working for those it is working for. And if it doesn’t work for others, too bad.

This attitude may be a trickle down evolution of the old adage of what was good for General Motors was good for America. The idea back then being that what was good for American business was what was good for America. And because that was true to a certain degree, it caught on. It was extended to the idea of what’s good for my business is good for America. And now it’s all about each individual looking out for Numbero Uno, sorry number one. We don’t want to infect this blog with foreign language of people who don’t vote Republican anyway.

I believe this me-first-ism comes with a dose of short-sighted-sism. I believe Republicans have become so near-sighted they can’t see the forest for the forest fires they are lighting. They care so much about themselves in the short term, they are sacrificing what is good for them in the long term — both for individuals and for the party.

The GOP leaders seem more concerned with tactics rather than strategy. And on a tactical level, the Republicans are winning. But I see that as winning the battles on the way to losing the war.

When Republican leaders inspire the party faithful to extend their vision, and think strategically about the bigger picture and to understand the concept of the bigger pie, the Grand Old Party will make its comeback. And if they don’t, the Dukes will continue to kick their big ole Boss Hoggie butts.