The war is over!

Okay, not the wars that count, but it never hurts to wish. (Take that, Bill O'Lielly!)

Sorry for the month+ of inactivity - it was the result of being very busy at the end of my teaching semester, lots of holiday travel (I'm still in California for another week) and the need to just step back from politics for a bit. Leading up to the election, I was incessantly blogging and reading about politics in all of my spare time.

Anyway, I'm BACK, and over the next few days, I'll have plenty "End-of-the-Year" stuff, and I've got much to say about what's been going on in the world of politics over the past few weeks. And, of course, we have a pretty big date coming up in 21 days - the inauguration.

So, please stay tuned for a whole lot of content in the coming days and weeks, and if you don't get back before the new year, please have a happy and safe one.

I'm off to the Ronald Reagan Library today in Simi Valley for some 80s propaganda history about his presidency. I'll share some photos later.

Malkin made a fool of... again

I know, I know - Malkin and fool is a double negative, but for a moment, you must indulge a grammatical suspension of disbelief.

God, I love the Internet. I know I'm showing my age by writing that, but it really hasn't been around that long. I'm the last generation that will ever be able to say I remember when there wasn't an Internet, which will no doubt bring groans from the younger crust. So be it.

But, try as they might, some people, no matter how smart they think they are, simply haven't yet mastered the Internet, nor realized its power to embarrass. This is especially sweet when it happens to the sanctimonious and righteous indignant -- enter Michelle Malkin. One of my favorite new blogs, Sadly, No! delivered a well-deserved beat-down earlier today to the right's latest screeching xenophobe. Just days after she screeched about a Dunkin' Donuts ad that had Rachel Ray wearing a scarf, she's been busted. (Incidentally, only someone with a whole bunch of time on her hands would interpret said scarf as being a symbol of terrorism.) Anyway, the nerve of Malkin, even touching the cloth of hate (above), after pressuring Dunkin' Donuts to pull its Rachel Ray ad, is just too stunning to contemplate!

Then again, I guess when you're a purveyor of misinformation on the right, you don't have much else to drone on about these days, since the last time there was good news in Republican circles was when President Bush landed on the U.S.S. Abraham Lincoln in his Halloween costume, and we know how long that good news lasted.

For those of you who missed it (and hopefully, anyone reading this blog did just that), here is the beginning of Malkin's rant on Wednesday about the Dunkin' Donuts ad:

The keffiyeh kerfuffle
By Michelle Malkin • May 28, 2008 09:38 AM

My syndicated column today examines the keffiyeh kerfuffle with Dunkin' Donuts and Rachael Ray that I noted on the blog last week. As you'll recall, I linked to an item by LGF's Charles Johnson about the scarf she wore in a recent Dunkin' ad. Keffiyeh chic has been covered on this site and at Hot Air extensively (see here, here, and here). Anti-American fashion designers abroad and at home have mainstreamed and adapted the scarves as generic pro-Palestinian jihad or anti-war statements. Yet many folks out there remain completely oblivious to the apparel’s violent symbolism and anti-Israel overtones.

First of all, anyone who uses the word kerfuffle should automatically have his or her literary credentials called into question, or revoked.

Secondly, I remember a time not so long ago when conservatives used to rail against political correctness. Wait, they actually still do. (See Bill O'Lielly's War on Christmas for the best example.) However, maybe it's time we realize that conservatives have taken up political correctness and certainly bastardized it from its original, noble goals to advance their own causes - blatant nationalism, making the rich richer, the dramatic minimization of our government (consequences be damned), etc. In other words, whenever an individual, group or entity like Dunkin' Donuts doesn't conform to the right's world view, it's... Attack! Attack! Attack! Probably the most prominent example of the GOP's use of PC came when the Dixie Chicks dared to speak out against Our National Embarrassment while touring in England. Of course, Bush said at the time that the Dixies were free to say what they want, but that didn't stop morons like Malkin, O'Reilly and Ann Coulter from frothing at the mouth. And, it didn't go unnoticed that the same people who howled in protest about the band criticizing the president while "on foreign soil" swallowed their tongues when Bush made a disgrace of himself in Israel while calling Barack Obama, in so many words, an appeaser.

The only thing more outrageous than the right's use of PC to advance their own, hate-filled, obnoxiously belligerent brand of nationalism is that Dunkin' Donuts has given these imbeciles a template - people like Malkin on the right are no doubt encouraged and motivated that a major corporation would cave to their stupid, intolerant demands.

It's enough to make me to go Wawa for my next donut.

h/t Sadly, No! for the top two pictures

Armistice signed; no new War on Christmas

Oh yea, we got us a new War on Christmas! Wait, not so fast.

The Marine Reserves’ Toys for Tots program in Los Angeles has decided to accept a donation of Bible-quoting Jesus dolls, reversing its initial decision to not accept them in fear of offending children who don't practice Christianity.

Sigh - all's well that ends well. I'm happy this had a quick resolution , because I know those credible talking heads from the right, i.e. - Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson and Rush Limbaugh, would have had a field day, and let's not forget about Bill O'Lielly, who never met a War on Christmas he didn't like (and threaten a boycott over).

After all, you're either with Jesus, or you're with the terrorists.

Okay, I can't end on that note. For the record, I'm a Christian, and I believe in Jesus, but I don't have enough time to type what turns me off about organized religion and the radical religious right - some day maybe I'll have 48 hours to spare to type that post.

I'll put this to you rhetorically, but does any God fearing Christian honestly believe that Jesus would have been for:

-Spending money you don't have

-Going to war, not as a last resort, but as a pre-emptive move against a country that was no threat

-Caring little about the poor

-Ignoring nearly 30 million Americans who don't have health care

-Vetoing the FMLA Act, as Bush 41 did

-Capital Punishment

-Polluting the planet, global warming be damned

I think you get my point...

God is not a Republican. He may not be a liberal Democrat, either, but then again, I'm not pretending he is, like the other side does.