Crush Liberalism

Liberalism: Why think when you can “feel”?

The absurdity of "hate crimes" laws

From Harry Jackson:

Last Thursday, I nervously entered C-SPAN’s Washington, D.C. Studios. The program format normally includes remarks from different points of view, call-in responses from its national audience, and commentary from its host. It was a great opportunity for me to speak to the nation concerning the encroachment that a new law, HR 1592 “Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2007,” represents to our freedom of speech and freedom of religion. This law promises to grant protected status to “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” – essentially mandating unequal protection under the law, which will pave the way for criminalization of thoughts and religious beliefs contrary to politically correct ideology.

I was opposed to this legislation for two reasons. First, as a Christian I am aware that this kind of legislation has opened the door to the arrest, fines, or incarceration of Christians in Sweden, Australia, Canada, and the U.S. In fact, in Philadelphia in 2004 such an incident occurred during a protest rally at a gay convention. A 75-year old grandmother of three was arrested, jailed, and charged under existing state hate crimes law for attempting to share the gospel of Jesus Christ. Ironically, no one was hurt, wounded, or even intimidated by her actions. If anything, law enforcement officials sent the citizens of their state a message – “Gays can protest, intimidate and harass anyone anywhere but Christians had better not speak.” HR-1592 would embolden this kind of law enforcement.

So-called “hate crimes” treat victims of crimes unequally under the law. As the illustration above shows, even non-violent crimes are prosecuted unequally. Basically, you have to be in one of the “favored groups” or you’re out of luck. Killing someone for having too much money wouldn’t be nearly as bad as killing someone for being black. Repeatedly punching and kicking someone for being a Chrstian could be punished much less harshly than intimidating someone for being gay. Only in lefty la-la land does that make any sense.

In short, “hate crimes” laws criminalize thought, nothing more and nothing less.

May 7, 2007 Posted by | "hate crimes" | 2 Comments

MSM smears Fred Thompson over…a role he played on TV

I swear, I couldn’t make this stuff up if I tried. From the LA Slimes, via Hot Air:

Fred is now on the MSM’s hit list:
So can “Law & Order” actor and former Sen. Fred Thompson (R-Tenn.) become the first presidential candidate with this credit? Thompson played a white supremacist, spewing anti-Semitic comments and fondling an autographed copy of “Mein Kampf” on a television drama 19 years ago.

His colleagues say that he was just an actor putting everything he had into playing the role of a charismatic racist, named Knox Pooley, in three episodes of CBS’ hit show “Wiseguy” in 1988. “Do you call Tom Cruise a killer because he played one in a movie?” asked show creator and writer Stephen J. Cannell.

Yep. He’s a bigot, ‘cuz he played one in a movie. By that perverted logic, James Woods and John Lithgow are gay, Sharon Stone and Ed Norton (among countless others) are killers, and Eddie Murphy can talk to animals (and hear them talk back). One would think that the L.A. paper might be somewhat more familiar with acting. Then again, one would think.

Nope…no liberal media bias!

May 7, 2007 Posted by | media bias | Leave a Comment

Moonbats: God leveled Kansas with tornados because of Bush

For a recent visitor who was unclear of the meaning of the word “moonbat”, here’s an illustration of how moonbats operate (hat tip to Hot Air):

These are the same morons that said New Orleans and the Mississippi gulf coast deserved to be destroyed by Hurricane Katrina, because both states voted for Bush. When it was pointed out that New Orleans voted for Gore and Kerry to the tune of 80% – 20%, they tempered their vitriol and stated that New Orleans deserved sympathy…but the rest of LA and MS did not. Compassion for your fellow man’s suffering is to be measured by one’s voting tendencies. By the way, I wonder if anyone points out to these knuckle-dragging spittle-spraying rubes that the governor of Kansas is a Democrat.

A liberal isn’t stupid enough to believe this crap. A moonbat is. Are we clear now?

May 7, 2007 Posted by | moonbats, shameful | Leave a Comment

Dems finding out that leading isn’t their cup of tea

It sure is a lot easier to b#tch about problems than actually doing something to fix them, isn’t it? From the Washington comPost:

In the heady opening weeks of the 110th Congress, the Democrats’ domestic agenda appeared to be flying through the Capitol: Homeland security upgrades, a higher minimum wage and student loan interest rate cuts all passed with overwhelming bipartisan support.

But now that initial progress has foundered as Washington policymakers have been consumed with the debate over the Iraq war. Not a single priority on the Democrats’ agenda has been enacted, and some in the party are growing nervous that the “do nothing” tag they slapped on Republicans last year could come back to haunt them.

“We cannot be a one-trick pony,” said House Democratic Caucus Chairman Rahm Emanuel (Ill.), who helped engineer his party’s takeover of Congress as head of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. “People voted for change, but Iraq, the economy and Washington, D.C., [corruption] all tied for first place. We need to do them all.”
…
The voters seem to have noticed the stall. An ABC News-Washington Post poll last month found that 73 percent of Americans believe Congress has done “not too much” or “nothing at all.” A memo from the Democratic polling firm Democracy Corps warned last month that the stalemate between Congress and Bush over the war spending bill has knocked down the favorable ratings of Congress and the Democrats by three percentage points and has taken a greater toll on the public’s hope for a productive Congress.

“The primary message coming out of the November election was that the American people are sick and tired of the fighting and the gridlock, and they want both the president and Congress to start governing the country,” warned Leon E. Panetta, a chief of staff in Bill Clinton’s White House. “It just seems to me the Democrats, if they fail for whatever reason to get a domestic agenda enacted . . . will pay a price.”

Leon Panetta has a quote that even I can agree with: “This leadership, these Democrats have shown that they can fight,” he said. “Now they have to show they can govern.”

May 7, 2007 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a Comment

France elects conservative, rejects socialist

Maybe there’s hope for the Frogs yet. From the Boob…er, Beeb:

Conservative candidate Nicolas Sarkozy has won the hotly-contested French presidential election.
The final count gave Mr Sarkozy 53.06%, compared with 46.94% for socialist Segolene Royal, with turnout at 85%.

Mr Sarkozy, 52, the son of a Hungarian immigrant, takes over from the 74-year-old Jacques Chirac.

Riot police have fired tear gas at a small group of demonstrators who were protesting in central Paris against Mr Sarkozy’s victory.

I see the Democrats have made their way to Paris! Anywho, good news and bad news resulted from the victory. Good news…

He said the US could count on France’s friendship…

…and bad news…

but urged Washington to take a lead in the fight against climate change.

Oh, well, nobody’s perfect. Finally, this caught my attention:

But the BBC’s Caroline Wyatt in Paris says he will have to work hard to unite the French, and try to win round those who voted against him.

Why? Seriously, why does he have to win over those who voted against him? He had a mandate, having both a majority and a near 7% margin of victory. Those who voted against him can continue to oppose him (much as those of us who voted against Democrats last year will be doing), or they can give him a chance. Sure, working for common ground in and of itself is noble and probably a good idea from a political practicality standpoint, but I disagree that it is incumbent upon Sarkozy to “reach out” to those who oppose him.

By the way, the Socialists are in disarray after their third straight defeat. From the Financial Times:

Let the finger-pointing begin. Ségolène Royal’s defeat on Sunday night left the French Socialist party in disarray and searching for someone to blame. There is hardly a shortage of scapegoats.

It is the party’s third consecutive presidential defeat. The Socialists now face the question of whether they can ever regain power without ditching their anti-capitalist rhetoric, as the mainstream left has done across almost all of Europe.
…
”The left is not credible on so many issues (yeah, no kidding! – Ed.), from the 35-hour working week to immigration and law and order,” says Dominique Reynié, professor at Sciences Po university.

“It is the fault of the left collectively. Ever since their [parliamentary election] defeat in 1983 they have never questioned their fundamental ideology, only thinking they needed to change tactics,” he says.

Well, that was the American left’s approach for so many years, too: hide your true beliefs and focus on tactics, not the message. That approach always failed until 2006, when (as a result of Iraq, spending, and immigration, among other things) the tactic finally paid off. The approach has yet to pay off in France, though.

Perhaps France will finally return to relevancy on the international stage. Only time will tell.

May 7, 2007 Posted by | France, socialism | Leave a Comment

   

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 25 other followers