Here Comes The Crazy!

I don't normally pay any attention to who wins the Miss USA or Miss America or Miss Hemisphere or whatever, because I kinda find the whole thing pretty creepy, women being paraded around and judged like livestock at a county fair, seems sort of, um I don't know, not good?

But I happened to see the new Miss USA mentioned on the Yahoo News homepage and when I saw her picture and her name, I figured we were about to enter a new chapter in the book of craziness.


Rima Fakih? Oh, God, here we go!

Turns out, I was wrong. Debbie Schlussel had already started the crazy train rolling before Ms Fakih had even won the crown.

May 12, 2010, - 1:59 pm

EXCLUSIVE: Miss USA Contestant is Shi’ite Muslim Hezbollah Supporter, Used Pageant Name to Promote Muslim Female Subjugation

A couple of years ago, I told you that Donald Trump moved the Miss Universe pageant, which he owns, from Dubai because it would not allow Miss Israel into the country to compete.
But now, Trump has brought the Islamic intolerance INTO the Miss USA pageant, rather than escaping from it. Rima Fakih, Miss Michigan USA, who will compete in Sunday Night’s pageant broadcast on NBC, is a Dearbornistan Shi’ite Muslim who is a supporter of Hezbollah. . .

Really? What evidence do you have to back up this claim?

She was born in the Hezbollah stronghold of Srifa in South Lebanon,

Well, it's hard to argue with that logic!
Okay, that wasn't fair. I was just being a wise guy. She has more evidence than that!

Her devout Muslim family comes from the Hezbollah-controlled South Lebanon.

Okay, there. See? That settles it.

Intelligence sources confirm that at least three of Fakih’s relatives are currently top officials in Hezbollah and that at least eight Fakih family members were Hezbollah terrorists killed by the Israelis in past Israel-Lebanese wars and interventions.

Yeah, I gotta figure the odds that Debbie Schlussel has "sources" in the intelligence community are about as good as the odds of her making it into the WNBA. (pretty pretty tiny)

Don’t let her lack of a headscarf and her donning a bikini in public fool you. Miss Michigan USA, Rimah Fakih is a Muslim activist and propagandist extraordinaire. She recently participated, using the Miss Michigan USA name to promote Islamic subjugation of women, in a Henry Ford Community College’s tax-funded forum promoting Islam, featuring many Shi’ite extremists.

Now that sounds serious! I clicked on the link Ms Schlussel provided to find the story of this College Forum of EVIL EXTREMIST TERROR WOMEN!!!!!!! (Dum Da Dum!)

The many faces of Arab women
By Dijlah Assayegh
Sunday, 04.25.2010, 12:30pm

DEARBORN — Henry Ford Community College's (HFCC) Arab Cultural Studies Program on April 8 hosted a conference entitled "The Many Faces of Arab Women."

The conference was an opportunity to discover new possibilities for growth, dispel some old assumptions, and develop network connections for future use, such as business organizations and community resources.

Oh, wow! Yeah, nothing says "subjugation" like business networking!

Rima Fakih, Miss Michigan USA and former HFCC student, explained what it means to her to be the first Arab American Miss Michigan. After each speaker, smaller break-out sessions were organized and led by Arab American women experts in their own fields who discussed in detail several areas of interest and encouraged further audience involvement.

Clearly, discussing what it means to her to be Miss Michigan is the same thing as promoting the subjugation of Arab women! And the subjugation continues with these discussion groups organized and LED BY WOMEN who are experts in the subjects being discussed.


My intelligence sources [the voices in my head] laugh at the overwhelming praise and bragging over Fakih on several Lebanese Hezbollah Arabic language blogs. After all, she will be parading around on-stage–as all Miss USA contestants do–in a bikini, a complete no-no according to Hezbollah’s strict Muslim rules about covering women up. But, as we all know, and as one source confirms, Muslims frequently go against Islam in this way for propaganda purposes. It’s a form of taqiyyah, the Muslim concept of deceiving infidels.

This is really a no-win situation. Debbie says you're a Muslim extremist. You stryt around in the least Muslim of outfits, which only proves to Debbie how committed you are to your Muslim extremism. If there's a flaw in that reasoning, I sure can't spot it!

Former Giuliani adviser, Campus Watch founder and all-around moron Daniel Pipes, eschews the phony "Oh My God Terrorist!" theme in favor of the more sophisticated "Oh My God, White Girls Didn't Win!" approach.

Affirmative Action in Beauty Contests?

Right, because there's no way this girl:


could win a contest for being pretty! It must be a fix!


News that Rima Fakih, 24, of Dearborn, Michigan, won the Miss USA beauty pageant today prompts me to recall some prior instances of Muslim women winning beauty contests in Western countries.

Juliette Boubaaya, 19, was Mlle Picardie in 2009.

Julliette Boubaaya.

Nora Ali was America's Junior Miss in 2007.

Nora Ali.

Hammasa Kohistani, 19, was Miss England in 2006.

Hammasa Kohistani.

Sarah Mendly, 23, was Miss Nottingham in 2005.

Sarah Mendly.

They are all attractive, but this surprising frequency of Muslims winning beauty pageants makes me suspect an odd form of affirmative action.

Four pretty Muslim women in the last five years? And that's only in the US and Europe! How could this be possible? Will further research bear out this suspicion?

My suspicion is borne out by the selection of Anisah Rasheed as Miss A&T at North Carolina Agricultural and Technical State University.

Oh. My. God. It's true! It's all true! If an Araby sounding woman is chosen prettiest student at North Carolina A&T, then what local beauty queen is safe? I assume Miss Canada-Plus is their next target,

followed by Princess Pedophilia.

And someone wrote this comment in response to Pipes' post:

No surprise here. Affirmative action was first applied in beauty contests for black women to win in the 1980s, then it was the turn of Latin, brown skinned women, and now it's Muslims. That's why most people ignore these rigged "events." They are money losers and require controversy.

Because anytime the white girl doesn't win, it must be fixed!

Here's Something Interesting I Learned

While writing that last post, I wanted to be sure I had spelled "Merkin" correctly, so I typed it into Yahoo.

And this came up:

Origin of term

According to The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language the term stems from a corruption of the obsolete word malkin, meaning a lower-class woman or mop,

Yes, Malkin means " a lower class woman or mop," and is the basis for the word "merkin."


I'm never going to be able to look at Michelle Malkin the same way again.

Every time I see this:



I'm going to have no choice but to think of this:



And now, neither will you.

You're welcome.

Was This Really Necessary?

Donald Trump Proves His Hair Is Real

After years of speculation as to the true nature of his hair, Donald Trump cleared up all speculation Monday when he sat in studio with Ryan and let Ellen K. feel the famous golden locks.

Really? Was there really a lot of speculation about Trump's hair?

Was anyone really looking at this:

and thinking, that looks like something a wealthy man would pay good money for?

Why, if I had that kind of money, I could have a dead muskrat to sit atop my head, too! How stylish I would be, how chic! Oh, if only I could afford a large, lumpen rodent pelt to carry about on my head. I would stroll down the finest avenues with such insouciance, a coyote merkin perched jauntily upon my cranium! Oh, how the ladies would flock to me!

Seriously. If Trump was going to wear a toupee, he could afford a good one. Not even a bald hobo would pay money to have his hair look like Trump's.

Was this investigation really necessary?

Leave Britney, I Mean Bushie, Alone!

Neil Cavuto, perhaps the tooliest tool in the FOX news tool chest, thinks we should stop blaming W for the things that he is, um, responsible for.

The Statute of Limitations for Blame

Tuesday, May 11, 2010
By Neil Cavuto

Is it me, or is George Bush the gift that keeps giving? Now he's the reason for this big old Gulf oil spill.

Today, Massachusetts Democratic Congressman Ed Markey saying: "For years, the Bush administration's oil strategy placed the granting of drilling leases ahead of safety review."

Ipso-facto — Bush to blame for the big leak-o.

If you can't refute the accusation, you can always fall back on sophomoric rhyming! I think I learned that in Debate class.

Just like he's apparently behind that big thousand-point swing-o.

Just like he's to blame for the unemployment rate that's higher than when he left office, and the deficits that are much higher than any year he was in office.

All problems, all Bush, all the time — probably until the end of time.

Right, why would he bear any responsibility for policies enacted by his administration? Why should a recession that began on his watch be laid at his feet?

It's the NCAA recruiting violation principle. See, if a coach for State U. breaks the rules, say, offers recruits money, hookers, and booze to come play for State, and the NCAA finds out, there are sanctions to be levied. So the first thing that happens, is the dishonest coach leaves State U. and gets a job at A&M Tech, where there are no sanctions, because A&M Tech's previous coach didn't break the rules. Meanwhile, the new coach at State U. gets saddled with a program that has lost its right to offer scholarships or whatever because his predecessor was a cheater. See, once the old guy leaves, the new guy gets held responsible for whatever shit the old guy pulled. In the world of college sports, this is considered totally fair.

So Cavuto is not being a dishonest, whining little douchebag here. He's just following the NCAA's example. Once Bush left office, he is no longer responsible for things that he did. Whoever occupies the Oval Office at this moment is culpable for every mistake ever made in that office. So I look forward to hearing Barack Obama's excuse for Teapot Dome. And I will never forgive him for the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution. How dare he?

I've heard him ripped for everything from making our kids fat, to our allies furious. Everyone still furious at him for destroying us, all the while forgetting how he might have had a tiny role in protecting us.

You know, except for that one day in September, but that's really such a minor blip on the radar. Also, offer not valid in New Orleans.

But those in power now seem to be admitting they were all powerless then — pretty much useless then. Mere marionettes then, whose strings were apparently pulled by a guy they're calling an idiot now.

Yes, those in power now were not in power then. How is this a confusing concept? Just because the Democrats are in the majority at this moment does not negate the fact that they were recently in the minority.

Oh, I'm sorry Neil. "Fact." It's a noun meaning:

1. something that actually exists; reality; truth: Your fears have no basis in fact.

2. something known to exist or to have happened: Space travel is now a fact.

(dictionary.com)

Think about that now, and ask yourself this: When does the statute of limitations run out on blaming someone?

I don't know, when it stops being true? When will it no linger be my fault that I sideswiped another car and took off the sideview mirror? God! That was like five years ago. It's not my fault anymore! Once someone else is in the driver's seat of that car, it's their fault that the mirror is missing!

Conservative Mad Libs!

The Republican objections to any Democratic nominee are starting to feel like a game of MadLibs.

Okay, fill in the name of the nominee, then choose from this list of words & phrases:

Left.

Liberal.

Extreme.

Activist.

Outside the Mainstream.

Radical.

Reverse Racism.

Legislating From The Bench.

Marxist.

Socialist.

Elitist.

Out Of Touch.

Agenda.

And go!

Here's Kathleen Parker writing in the Washington Post (and when did the Washington Post become such a joke? Didn't they publish the Pentagon Papers? Weren't they a good paper even pretty recently?)

Elena Kagan is miles away from mainstream America

Much has been made of Kagan's career path and her professional trailblazing. Despite a lack of any judicial experience, she is the first of her sex in two previously male-dominated domains -- first female dean of Harvard Law School and first female U.S. solicitor general.

No small accomplishments. But though we are what we do, what we do is not all of what we are.

(we are, we do we are to dee too? Is this just mental gymnastics to justify minimizing her accomplishments?)

We are also products of place. Where we grew up and how we experienced the physical environment of our formation are also a part of who we are.

What is Kagan's geography?. . . Coincidentally, she shares the same home town as the other two women on the court. Assuming Kagan is confirmed, all three women will hail from New York. Kagan grew up on the Upper West Side of Manhattan, Sonia Sotomayor is from the Bronx and Ruth Bader Ginsburg is from Brooklyn. If diversity on the court is our goal, we may be missing a region or two.

I think anyone who has spent any time in New York can tell you, they may be the same city, but those are three different worlds. But still, Three New Yorkers? Yeah, it sounds way better to object to that than to object to having three women or one kinda butchy woman, if you know what I mean. . . Yeah, let's go with the New York thing so we sound less like assholes!

These facts ultimately may be more anecdotally interesting than significant in terms of how a justice might perform.

Or, or, um they could be neither!

Then again, spending one's formative years walking past the infamously crime-riddled Murder Hotel en route to school, as Kagan did -- and, say, walking past the First Baptist Church to ballet class -- are not the same cultural marinade. The latter hypothetical is proffered only for the sake of contrast and metaphor. It seems remote to unlikely that a woman whose life has involved Baptist churches and ballet slippers would find herself on a track to today's Supreme Court, though that ought not to be the case.

Oh, I don't like where this is going! Let me just skip ahead a little bit, and. . .

with Kagan, the court will feature three Jews, six Catholics and nary a Protestant.

Oh my God! You're really going to go with the "there are too many Jews and Catholics" argument? I thought we agreed we were just going to trash New Yorkers, and everyone would just know that "New York" is code for "Jews and swarthy immigrants." You can't just come out and say, "hey, we've already got two Jews!" without sounding like a paranoid racist asshole.
And if you're going to claim that there are too many Catholics, you're gonna sound just a tad disingenuous considering the Catholics are:

Scalia (Reagan Nominee)

Kennedy (Reagan)

Thomas (Bush I)

Alito (Bush II)

Roberts (Bush II)
and
Sotomayor (Obama)

So, if you have a problem with all the Catholics, seems like you should have objected a while back. Just saying.

Also, having a problem with too many Catholics? Kinda makes you sound like this guy:

Roman Catholics control the US Supreme Court

The members of the US Supreme Court are papal soldiers.

When the One World Government is introduced to solve an emerging global crisis in the Great Tribulation, a papal controlled US Supreme Court will not object to a US President handing over his executive powers to the Vatican. Even today, both the Vice President and The Speaker on Capitol Hill are Roman Catholics.

Not to be outdone, GOP Chairman Michael Steele put out a statement which reads in part:

". . . what Americans want is a justice who will stay true to the Constitution and defend the rights of all Americans, adhering to the rule of law instead of legislating from the bench. Given Kagan’s opposition to allowing military recruiters access to her law school’s campus, her endorsement of the liberal agenda and her support for statements suggesting that the Constitution 'as originally drafted and conceived, was defective,’ you can expect Senate Republicans to respectfully raise serious and tough questions. . ."

Of course, the statement he refers to was made by none other than Thurgood Freakin Marshall, but yeah, let's pretend it's some radical hippie commie thing.

Mr. Steele, here's a quick rule of thumb, just for future reference. If, during a discussion of Constitutional Law, one finds that one is in agreement with Thurgood Marshall, one can pretty much go ahead and assume that one is right.
Also, the particular defect to which Justice Marshall was referring was the enshrinement of slavery as legal in the original Constitution, so um, you know. Kinda tough to argue that one.

And also, even if you don't bother to find out to what defect Marshall was referring, the mere fact that the Founding Fathers felt the need to amend the Constitution 10 times before it was ratified (Bill of Rights? Maybe you've heard of it?) and that it has been amended several times since, would indicate that Marshall wasn't the only one who saw a few flaws in the document.
But hey, good job working "liberal agenda" and "legislating from the bench" into one short paragraph.

Nice Work!