Why I don't like Michelle Malkin, reason 4,202

She spends her time writing long blog entires about things like how the ACLU is editing Wikipedia entries.

Seriously, Michelle, who cares?! It's not as though the ACLU is making these in an official capacity. It's more like... the ACLU employs liberal whackjobs. Liberal whackjobs, just like everyone else, surf the internet at work. Liberal whackjobs enjoy editing wikipedia entries such as George Bush and Tom Delay. Therefore, IP addresses from ACLU register as the origin for editing of such entries.

This is why I can't stand sites like Michelle's or radio shows like Sean Hannity's. According to them, every time a liberal takes a dump, it's an attack on conservatism and if we're not careful then this one attack will lead to the downfall of western civilization. It's alarmism, it's arrogant (in most cases), and it's downright annoying.

Find a better way to spend your time, Michelle. Maybe grow a sense of humor about politics, a la IMAO or Rachel Lucas. Then you might finally be tolerable to read. Until then, you're annoying, obnoxious, and fairly disliked on both sides of the aisle by anyone rational. Conservatives aren't always pure and holy, you know.

Off I go to eat and pack for college!

The 10 Commandements of Burgers, Buns, and Other Edibilia

1. If a burger contain less than one half-pound of meat, it shall not be deemed fit for consumption. If it were to contain less than said amount, it is possible that thou, with thine Wholesome and Virile appetite, would not be able to satisfactorily quench thine hunger. If thou art a woman, thou may put it in the Fridge or a handy styrofoam boxe for later enjoyment. However, a burger of a quarter-pound is a travesty and should be shunned.

2. It is permisible to "stack" the so-called "quarter-pounders", to create a half-pound, three-quarter-pound, or even a pound of meat.

3. The bun of any burger or, especially, barbecue sandwitch shall not be of quality bread. It shall be spongy, white, and not dry. Thy bun serves as an edible napkin, and is not any sort of flavore enhancer. It exists purely to soak up excess animal oil and/or grease, as well as any extra sauce that may accompany the meat. If thou useth a french roll or similar frivolities for thy sandwitch of hearty meat, thou shalt be subject to the punishment of twelve lashes with a wet noodle for thine excessiveness. Yon starving Children in Africa crave such fine french rolls.

4. Steaks shall be of an appropriate size and tenderness. Thou shalt not bestow thine approval on any steak of smalish proportions, nor if it doth resemble the hide of the cow from whence it came in texture. If, however, it oozeth juice and the slightest touch and is of such size as to appear to have come from an entire haunch of the Livestock which previously bore it, thou shalt praise thy Creator Mighty for His Benevolence in bestowing upon thee such mighty chow.

5. Curry is not to be tolerated if it bear with it the shade of a yellow highlighter.

6. Thou shalt not attempt to change the composition or flavore of thy ground beef by mixing in foreign substances.

7. Thou shalt not accesorize thy hamburger with American Cheese. If thou accesorize , and verily, thou shouldst, it shall be of an apropriate flavore.

8. French Fryes are to be of Potatoes, and of apropriate length as to be evident as such. Thou shalt not refer to them as "Freedom Fryes", for this is silly and petulant. Further, if thou art compelled to use catsup, thou must reassess thine consumption habits, for thy french fryes are deficient in flavore and texture. If thou dost attempt to baste with catsup fryes which are not in need of such salvation, thou shalt be severely punished.

9. No food is to be excessively burdened with garnishes or sauces. If thy food is so flavoreless as to be in need of such accompaniments, thou shalt throw it out and start afresh.

10. Thou shalt not cook thy steak until it is thoroughly browned. It shall be at the least moderately pink in its center, and at best a deep red. It shall not be purple, nor shall it be gray. Thou may put Marks of Searing into the surface of thy steak, however, thou shalt not make excessive efforts to inflict these marks.

Thou may post thine Comments and Additions in the apropriately designated section.

The good, the bad, and the ugly

Good first. The Iraqi National Soccer Team has made it to the Asian Cup Finals, where they will face the Saudis. Iraq's defense has carried them to Jakarta thus far - they've surrendered just 2 goals in 5 games. Meanwhile, the Saudis have scored 12 times in their last five. However, here's to an Iraqi victory, and may defense win the championship, as always. On the way to the final, the Iraqis have beaten World Cup sides Australia and South Korea.

Ahh... I love that story. Good stuff. I wish I had more to say about it but it really speaks for itself.

UPDATE: The Iraqis won the final, 1-0.

Meanwhile, Barry Bonds is one home run away from tying Hank Aaron at 755, and, of course, two from becoming the all time leader. This one... well, there are two sides to this. The personal side - for me - is that I, like many people, don't like Barry Bonds. The guy is an absolute jerk by nearly all accounts. This isn't to say he doesn't have somewhat of a difficult go of it - dealing with as much negative press as he does can't be easy - but the way he regularly behaves towards fans is not what I would expect from someone. At some point, basic human decency has to kick in, and even if he's snippy with the media (Now THERE'S something I don't have a problem with) he should really treat his fans better... see Garcia, Sergio.

Then there's the professional side of it; the guy cheats. Yes, yes, I know, innocent until proven guilty, and so on and so forth, but at some point rationality has to kick in. The guy's head swelled like a gallon of milk left out in the Texas sun in July, he started hitting ~20 more home runs per season, and we're supposed to believe he didn't use anything illegal? I may be trusting and naive, but that's asking a bit much. He used an unfair advantage. Is he alone in doing so? Undoubtedly not. Does this make it ok? Absolutely not. The guy has one of the sweetest swings in baseball, steroids or not. But what he did should alienate him from baseball and its fans? YES. Compare him with Ken Griffey Jr., who still has his hair, hasn't changed hat sizes recently to my knowledge, and has an even better swing than Bonds. Griffey's numbers never skyrocketed like Bonds' did. That's how you do it, even if it doesn't earn you the record Bonds has attained (not earned.)

We know it can be done, folks. Aaron did it, presumably without steroids. Bonds is a cheater and should be ostracized from the game.

Finally, there's Michael Vick. Yet another case of innocent until proven guilty, I suppose, but things certainly do not look good for him. He buys a house shortly after being drafted in 2001 by the Falcons; approximately 3 months after this, the property is being used for dogfighting. You're telling me Vick never knew about it? It's more plausible than the Barry-did-it-with-meditation theory, but not much so. 6 years this has been going on on his property, and now we're supposed to believe he never had anything to do with it. Sure he didn't. And I'm moonlighting on the PGA Tour under the nom de guerre of Tiger Woods. Look me up some time. There are also witnesses who will testify in Federal Court that Vick was a regular bettor on these fights.

Suffice it to say that while Michael Vick is still innocent by rule of law, things really, really, REALLY do not look good for him.

Additionally, there's the weight of a Federal Indictment against him. In general, Federal investigators do not indict unless they are nearly certain of obtaining a conviction (see: Libby, Scooter.) The United States District Attorney's Office carries a 95% conviction or plea bargain rate on their indictments. So this isn't exactly Duke Lacrosse material, and Mike Nifong isn't prosecuting.

Is it possible that he's innocent? Certainly. He'd have to be remarkably stupid to be innocent (Then again, he was a football player at Virginia Tech. *baboom-TSHHHHH*) But it just doesn't look good for him, and on top of all that, his family does not have the best reputation (see Vick, Marcus.)

Well, there, I finally stuck a post on here about something other than politics. I need to be more regular about posting things on here, I know, but I'm lazy and there's a lot of other stuff to do when you're home for the summer. Like play video games.

Genocide? Who cares about that?

Barack Obama doesn't think we should stay in Iraq to prevent Genocide.

It's a little tough just to know where to start on this one.

"SUNAPEE, N.H. (AP) - Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama said Thursday the United States cannot use its military to solve humanitarian problems and that preventing a potential genocide in Iraq isn't a good enough reason to keep U.S. forces there."

Stunning. Simply stunning. Preventing a genocide and the deaths of potentially MILLIONS of Iraqis (It's a country of 26 million) is not a good reason to stay the course at the cost of (at a guess) another 1,000 U.S. Troops.

That isn't meant to trivialize the lives of our soldiers in the least. Each and every death of a US Soldier is a tragedy. However, it does not mean that it was worthless. I think the vast majority of the Marines and the Army (almost the entire ground force in Iraq today) would choose to stay in Iraq if presented with the option of leaving immediately and causing genocide or staying there, being in danger, and finishing the job by giving the Iraqis their own stable military and police force would choose the latter. Speaking personally, I would, regardless of danger to myself, simply because some things are just worth it; I'd say preventing genocide falls under that umbrella.

""Well, look, if that's the criteria by which we are making decisions on the deployment of U.S. forces, then by that argument you would have 300,000 troops in the Congo right now—where millions have been slaughtered as a consequence of ethnic strife—which we haven't done," Obama said in an interview with The Associated Press. "

That's not what the criteria are, idiot. It is, sadly, not always feasible militarily to ENTER a country to stop genocide - twice as sad is that someone who actually has the collective might (see: Nations, United) refuses to because they're a bunch of pansies. The criteria here are staying in a country in which we already have a military presence to avoid DIRECTLY CAUSING a genocide. That is completely and absolutely indefensible. For someone whose father is from Kenya - not too far removed from the Congo which you reference, Senator - you display a remarking attitude of indifference towards those who were not as fortunate as you, to come to America and become a citizen. But who cares? The lives of millions of Iraqis aren't much compared with a little political gain among the moonbats.

I'm such an angry person. I think I need a vacation.

IT'S DIVISION ONE FOOTBALL!!!

Too busy to really post anything of note.

Instead, get off your computer and go see Transformers.

NOW.

that is all.

EDIT: As a little bonus, here's a little Dan Hawkins for you. I love this guy. (WARNING: Loud noises. Careful on the volume.)

http://www.hipcast.com/export/Pd190622cd185f6dfdff06a176b76d88dZlp/S1REYmF3.mp3

Click the link, it should open in your default media player of choice.

Another Year, Another Independence Day

Fireworks will be set off, speeches will be given, and people will get the day off from work.

Why?


Because over 225 years ago, a group of the greatest men the world has ever seen laid the groundwork for what would become the greatest country man has ever known by pledging their "Lives...Fortunes... and Sacred Honor" to declaring independence from Great Britain and King George III.Now? It's 2007, the Age of Enlightenment, or so it's called. A significant number of citizens of the US think we're the greatest agent of evil in the world, and the nation which told the world to


"Give me your tired, your poor,

Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,

The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.

Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,

I lift my lamp beside the golden door."



and unified those huddled masses into this great country, the most powerful in the world, is being slowly but surely fractured and torn to pieces by a flood of immigrants, legal and illegal, who refuse to assimilate into the culture. The great melting pot is now termed the "great mosaic", full of individual pieces, many of whom carry no common thread, no unifying name of American, and identify themselves proudly as Mexicans, Japanese, or Cubans who happen to live in America. These people claim all the benefits of a free society and yet want no part of the culture.

Years ago, you had to want to come to America desperately to make it here. Millions spent weeks or even months living in horrible conditions to come to America and enter at Ellis Island, desperate for a chance at streets paved with gold and the chance to live free as an American. In the 1850's, the roots of my mother's family came to the US from Prussia. Less than 10 years later all the men in that family enlisted and fought for the US Army in the Civil War. I am directly descended from a man who lost his eye in that war. My father's family immigrated from Mexico somewhat more recently. His grandfather never identifies himself as anything but American, and served proudly in World War II. Not even Mexican-American, even though his name is Emilio. How many of today's immigrants - even many of the legal ones, let alone the illegals - would pick up arms to fight for this country so quickly after arriving, or at all? Not many.

Come to think of it, how many Americans, born and bred, would take up arms and fight in defense of our country? Again, maybe a few more, but still, not all that many. Or am I being overly pessimistic of the state of the American Union? I don't think so. Between the pacifists and the people who believe that America needs to take some punishment for her misdeeds, I think that if it came to it, a significant number of Americans would refuse to take up arms, even in the case of invasion. In a case that extreme, of course, a huge majority of Americans would. But the fact that some would even then refuse sickens me.

It's easy to put a magnet on your car that says "God Bless America" or "Support the Troops". And it's easier still to decry the "war for oil" that we're supposedly engaged in. Yet how many would be willing to sacrifice their car or some other integral part of their way of life to free us from having to buy Middle Eastern oil?

Well, we're not being invaded, not by a military wearing the uniform of a foreign government. Our country is not in imminent danger, thank God, of being subjugated to a foreign power. But we are being invaded by terrorists who would kill citizens indiscriminately, given the chance; see the plots to blow up airliners last fall, and the plot to destroy JFK with gas lines, a plan which would have killed hundreds or possibly thousands of civilians. This is without even mentioning the far more recent - and failed - plan to bomb popular places in London, again killing hundreds or thousands of Americans.This fight is no less a fight to the death, and in some ways more so, than World War II was. And if we do not fight back and carry the fight to their shores with all the force our country can muster, then make no mistake, they will bring it to ours and they will destroy us.

For this reason, among others, I will fight.

Would you fight and die to defend what it stands for, if called on?

Barbara Streisand and Surrender Monkeys

So this French Sarkozy guy told Barbara Streisand that she's "the America we love."

Well, just so someone likes her.