By Matthew Schofield, Kansas City Star editorial board columnist

The racism chatter has started again.

Missouri's Roy Blunt is in the center of it this time, with a speech to the religiously conservative Family Research Council. It started because he used a tale involving golf and monkeys.

Blunt talked about how British soldiers, trying to play golf at a course they'd built in India, had to adapt to the fact that monkeys would run onto the course, pick up golf balls and toss them.

The Republican noted; "I could go into great and long detail about how many things they did to try and eliminate the 'monkey problem.' But they never got it done, so finally at this golf course and this golf course only, they passed a rule and the rule was - you have to play the ball where the monkey throws it. And that is the rule in Washington all the time."

The assumption on the left-leaning blogosphere is that "where the monkey throws it" is a reference to President Barack Obama. Obama, after all, is an African American. Now, I'd argue that monkey equals black guy connection isn't nearly as mainstream in the United States as it is in, say Eastern Europe or, perhaps at Spanish soccer matches. In the U.S. it's a very vile, very fringe racist reference.

So, is Blunt's story racism? Is it a nod to racists? Is it a tale that intentionally echoes the rather appalling cartoon characterizations of Obama as a monkey?

Or is it simply a story about the difficult positions conservatives find themselves in now in a Washington controlled by the center and the left? Could it even be a statement about the general chaotic nature of the nation's capitol?

I'm not so sure we should be tossing out racism allegations as easily as we are these days, and I'm not at all sure it's fair to do so in this case. As Obama recently, said during an interview, "I was black before the election." And, yet, somehow in what we want to view as a minefield of racism in this nation, he was elected, by a pretty good margin.

In this case, let's take a look at Roy Blunt. He's been in and around public service for a quarter century, including in Congress since 1997. He's not an unknown, certainly not around here. Has there ever been cause to accuse him of racism in Missouri?

I can't think of an instance. If you can, please share. But unless there's a reason to label Blunt as a racist, we shouldn't do it. And this talk isn't necessarily that reason.

I think tossing racism into the mix on this one is a bit irresponsible. In the end, it's un-American.

The fact is, every administration oversees a nation including lots of folks who don't like the politics, the policies, the personalities of that administration.

And, every term, people dislike a president for reasons beyond politics. A lot of people despised George W. Bush for his grammar, his style of speech. People detested Bill Clinton's smirky-smile, and his waistline. The list goes on: George H.W. Bush's clunky hand-gestures; Jimmy Carter's smile; Ronald Reagan, well, politics aside, he was really nice, wasn't he? ( Okay, I went out of order to accommodate the joke ).

Still, the point is: Many Americans will dislike Obama for stupid reasons.

Now, we can't ignore the sad fact that some will dislike him because of his race. Race is a serious issue in this country.

But he's also a Democrat, and in a country that is as evenly split between Democrats and Republicans as we are, a lot of folks are going to dislike him simply because their party lost.

And, the problem I see in the current rush to paste labels, is that this is an important period for this country. It requires an open, frank and adversarial discussion. Fedding the polarization that haunts this nation doesn't make this a better place, doesn't make Washington work any better.

It doesn't serve anyone's interest to inject allegations of racism where they aren't needed (just as it would be irresponsible not to bring up racism where it is a factor).

Salon.com critiqued Blunt's speech by wondering if to Blunt, Obama and the golf course monkeys: "both like to screw up the white man's golfgame?"

But, you know, Obama is not a monkey, and what's going on in D.C. is not a game.

Maybe, given the times, all monkey references have to be eliminated from public discourse. And I'll concede, Blunt, given these times, could have picked a better analogy (Alligators also mess up golf games, right?).

But, if there's no context, no reason to jump to conclusions of racism, should we do that? In this case, move along folks, there's nothing to see, here.