Here’s a bit on the Mount Soledad Cross, posted by Michelle Malkin. As we all know, Michelle is much cooler than most other A-List bloggers, because she was born in Philly and moved to South Jersey. Therefore, she knows how to roll hard.

Let’s get back to this whole cross controversy. Here’s my short take: Do we pay taxes in order for our elected officials to act stupid?

Here’s the long take:

The bill was signed by President Bush, but City Attorney Michael Aguirre issued a legal opinion last week saying the donation would be for a religious purpose and therefore infringe on state law. The City Council rejected the transfer on Tuesday.

“For us to transfer our cross from city ownership to federal ownership leaves us in the same constitutional position,” Councilman Scott Peters said.

So which is it? Is this going to violate state law, or the constitution? Or is this one of those cases where you have someone who figures, “If I don’t like it, it must be against the Constitution.”

Apparently, there is a state law prohibiting the city from making donations for religious purposes. Ok, so when did the Federal Government become a religion? What, is Los Angeles worried that people are going to be up there, sacrificing bulls to George Washington? Are they expecting people to go there to chant “Woodrow Wilson” at dawn? Exactly what religious purpose does donating some land to the National Park Service serve?

You do realize this means California is about ten minutes away from a court order dynamiting the California Missions.

Couldn’t some City Councilman, or Park Rep or someone come up with the bright idea of selling that land for $1 per acre? If you get money, it’s not a donation, right? Or are we at the point where the city can’t sell land to anyone they suspect might build a church or something? I mean, if they were going to put a strip club up there, that’s fine. A church, that’s a whole other thing though.

I guess you have to check your brain at the door once you go into government.