The Mystery of “Tolerant” Gay Liberals

A friend who reads the blog was recently quoted in a New York Times article about lesbian conservatives. I was surprised – it was very tasteful, something I hadn’t expected from the Times. My hope that we might be looking toward actually being respected for once was immediately dashed when Bruce over at GayPatriot linked an op-ed from Advocate.com about “The Mystery of Gay Republicans.”

If I wasn’t angry before, I certainly am now. In fact, I’m downright pissed off.

Broadway diva John Carroll is the author, and considering the fact that I’ve been openly hated (and even threatened) in the comments section of multiple articles on that website – to the point that I no longer post comments there – I guess I shouldn’t be surprised. I am appalled at his open hatred and intolerance. I have to ask, where is all of this tolerance the gay left keeps preaching?

Carroll sings the worship of Obama and describes his elation at the President’s re-election, then goes on to detail everything the President has done for the LGBT community. True enough, he ended DADT – it didn’t happen in a vacuum, though. There were Republicans who wanted to see the policy end. I have friends and family in the military who never saw a point to banning gay and lesbian troops from serving, all of them conservative in nature. What else does Carroll claim the messiah has done?

Well, he signed the Mathew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Act into law. So what? How many times have I asked why we need a law to make our lives more valuable than the lives of straight people? Why do we need a hate crimes law in cases where the murderers were already sentenced to death? What are you going to do – resuscitate them then execute them a second time? If you’re like most liberals who are against the death penalty, what more can you give Matt Shepard’s killers than life in prison without the possibility of parole? Do you really think that sentencing them to 400 years is going to send a message that people should stop and ask, “hmmm, maybe I shouldn’t beat this guy to death…after all, I might be kept in prison until my corpse has rotted!” It’s one step closer to hate speech legislation. Sorry, but that’s no great leap forward in gay rights.

What about his executive order to all facilities that accept Medicare/Medicaid patients to immediately allow patients to be cared for by their same-sex partners? That wasn’t just for us, kids. It was a blanket order forcing hospitals to allow patients to decide who they wish to see and who will make decisions for them. What that order doesn’t have power over are situations where the patient is incapacitated and there’s no living will in place (I learned in EMT school to have one, and my significant other is listed on it along with my father). If you get into a wreck and you are brought to the hospital in a state of unconsciousness, the hospital still has every right to restrict your visitors to immediately verifiable relatives. We’re still not onto anything major here.

He announced that the Dept of Justice would no longer defend the Defense of Marriage Act, or DOMA. I’m sorry, but how is this supposed to make me happy? He didn’t say he was going to work to repeal it, he just said he wouldn’t defend it anymore. That is what we riding the fence, and it’s a tactic commonly employed by politicians looking to seal the gay vote in their bag. By not openly supporting DOMA the way he did during the 2008 elections, he gets on your good side. It’s his way of making you happy without having to anger the rest of the liberal base. Believe what you will but there are many Democrats who still believe that homosexuality is wrong and gay marriage is an abomination. Ask Bill Clinton, who signed it into law. Ask Democrats Robert Byrd, Dick Gephardt, James Clyburn, Gary Condit, Dick Durbin, John Edwards, Steny Hoyer, Jack Murtha, Chuck Schumer, and Bart Stupak – every single one of them supported DOMA when it was passed, and not a single one has come out to say it should be repealed although most of them are still in Congress (two of them died while in Congress, having never admitted they were wrong to vote for it). Republican Bob Barr, on the other hand, helped write the bill and he has vocally come out in saying he was wrong and DOMA should be repealed.

I’m sorry…that last bit didn’t fit the narrative very well, did it?

He expanded benefits for federal employees to unmarried, same-sex partners. Fantastic. My life is already better. Not much to sing about, since the VERY Republican state I live in, along with the very Republican state that Sarah Palin hails from, allow the same kind of thing for the same-sex partners of State employees as well.

He directed all federal agencies engaged abroad to “promote and protect” the human rights of LGBT people in foreign countries. That’s rich…you mean the rights of 12 men currently awaiting execution in Libya for being accused of being gay? How about the rights of gays in Uganda who face stiff jail sentences or even death for engaging in homosexual sex acts? Oh, I know – they’re talking about protecting the rights of gay people in Egypt, Iran and Gaza! (Meanwhile, back on the farm…) Barack Obama has favored Sharia-led nations and their rights for his entire administration, and we have heard him pay lip service to protecting the interests of gay people abroad, but action is scarce. I sincerely doubt that Carroll (or any other gay liberal) could name a single instance in which any member of Obama’s cabinet has made even a half-hearted attempt to intervene on behalf of any gay person in a foreign country.

Oh, but he came out in support of gay marriage! WOOHOO! Hold on there, Sparky. All he did (yet again) was pay lip service to the issue. He may claim to support our rights to marry, but he currently calls it a “state’s rights issue” (the same thing the gay left got mad at McCain for saying back in 2008, as I recall) and told MTV flat-out that gay marriage was not going to be an issue he is willing to take up in his second term. Here’s the telling part, though: he blathered about his supposedly personal beliefs about gay marriage for a couple of minutes before getting to the part where he said he wasn’t willing to approach the issue. Not one of you have called him out for merely claiming to support it and not being willing to do anything. He was playing every one of the gay liberals who voted for him like a fiddle and they let him get away with it.

Gay liberals talk about how we, as conservatives, are willing to merely take scraps from the Republicans’ table. What on Earth do they think they’re doing? They’re supporting a party that lies to their faces. At least I know exactly where I stand with Republicans. Plus, they’ll sit down and talk to me while they won’t give the likes of Carroll the time of day. Why? Because they know that I care about their rights, too, and I’m not being so brazenly insulting that they can’t stand to be in the same room with me.

Instead of wondering how their bastion state, California, could possibly pass Prop 8, now they’re breathlessly asking what Obama can do during this term to further the rights of gays in America. Sorry, folks. This term won’t be one for the record books. He’s not actively trying to repeal DOMA, he’s not interested in fighting for gay marriage, and he’s not even broaching the subject of adoptions for gay couples.

The comment that really roasts me is where Carroll says, “So basically a vote is cast for their bank account while they remain spiritually bankrupt.” Wait just one damned minute. Is that not the exact same kind of line that the gay community has so despised American Christians for? Super-religious Christians are famous for calling gay people spiritually bankrupt. I listened to it all throughout my childhood. He’s willing to make a moral case out of his arguments, but he dismisses the moralizing of the other side as being…what, irrelevant? Who decides who is right? Whose morality is the right one? How do you know that your brand of moralizing is somehow better than the ones you’re so mad at in the first place? Somehow, in an article written about the desire for tolerance, you manage to come off as a self-righteous, arrogant cretin, especially when you congratulate yourself for turning your back on a gay Republican at a party.

Maybe I should tell myself that it gets better.

Fake It

About a month ago, an acquaintance emailed me about a hate crime in Lincoln, NE. His only commentary was, “when are you going to wise up?” That remark was followed by a link to a blog post about the attack, including photos that couldn’t be posted by major news outlets. According to the story, an unnamed 33-year-old woman was viciously attacked in her home as she slept by three masked men who stripped her naked, bound her hands and feet with zip-ties, carved homophobic slurs into her arm and her stomach, spray-painted similar slurs on the walls, poured gasoline on the floor and lit the house on fire.

As soon as I read the story, I smelled a stage act. I didn’t want to immediately post about it because there wasn’t much info in the news reports I was able to find. The spray-painted slurs were on the inside of the house, not the outside – in the basement, no less. The slurs cut into her skin were on her stomach and arm, places she can easily reach. I’ve studied the psychology of people who commit hate crimes, and none of that makes any sense.

A person who would go so far as to attack a person for their sexual orientation or their race or religion is doing so in an attempt to humiliate and intimidate that person AND all of the people in the vicinity who are associated with that person. When a hate crime involves defacing property, they’re trying to publicly identify that person as gay, lesbian, black, Hispanic, Jewish, whatever the bias may be against. They want everyone in the neighborhood to know what they see that person as being. When a hate crime involves arson, they’re usually trying to destroy evidence; whether it be DNA, footprints or blood spatter, there’s a purpose to trying to burn the home down and they make sure that the fire gets rolling (meaning they don’t just pour gasoline on the Formica in the kitchen and run away). Hate crimes rarely involve mutilation – that’s typically something that a jilted lover does when they’re killing the object of their affection, and it’s not usually superficial. It’s brutal.

If this were a genuine hate crime, any of these things could potentially have been done. All three together, and all very superficially? Extremely unlikely.

Today, it was announced that 33-year-old Charlie Rogers, formerly #33 for the Nebraska Cornhuskers women’s basketball team, was arrested on a misdemeanor charge of false reporting to the police. Among the evidence police released were inconsistent statements from the victim, gloves (with Rogers’ own DNA inside them – she told investigators they were not hers and were left by the perps), zip ties and a utility knife, and no blood on the bedspread where Rogers was allegedly attacked.

At first, Rogers didn’t want her name or face publicized. Then, when a handful of people questioned whether the attack might have been staged – it was never questioned by the MSM, and the major players in the conservative blogosphere still haven’t picked up on it – she suddenly decided to talk to the press. In the entire interview, I didn’t hear her talk about herself once. She makes statements about “my world” and feeling like “a pawn”, but she largely only talks about everyone else.

According to Lincoln police chief Jim Peschong, Rogers had written the following online: “So maybe I’m too idealistic but I believe way deep inside me that we can make things better for everyone. I will be a catalyst. I will do what it takes. I will. Watch me.” Beth Rigatuso, the president of Heartland Pride, said, “If in fact she did do this to herself, it points to a much larger issue of self-hatred. It doesn’t diminish the fact that hate crimes happen all the time all across the U.S.”

Rigatuso is wrong on both counts. This had nothing to do with self-hatred, and to claim that kind of thing is an enormous cop-out. She’s making excuses for Rogers’ behavior in the hopes of not having to accept responsibility, and the gay community should take some. She’s not the first to stage a hate crime or falsely claim a hate crime took place, yet the gay community, rather than calling these people out, pretend the incidents didn’t happen.

Joseph Baken claimed that he was attacked in the street outside a gay bar, even posted photos of his facial injuries – except he got the injuries while trying to do a back flip off of a curb outside the bar. Aimee Whitchurch and Christel Conklin called police over the words “kill the gay” being spray painted on their garage door and a noose being hung on their front door, but it was determined they did it themselves. Quinn Matney claimed that a complete stranger walked up to him on his college campus, said “here is a taste of hell”, called him a derogatory name and then branded him, leaving third- and fourth-degree burns on his hand – but he did it to himself. Ryan Grant Watson claimed he was attacked by a black man who called him a homophobic slur, but it was invented, too. Alexandra Pennell claimed that someone was stuffing anti-gay threat letters under her dorm room door at Central Connecticut State University, but that was also determined to be a hoax.

Rigatuso is correct – hate crimes do happen. Only it seems that these days there are far more fakes out there. We all know the stories of Mathew Shepard, Brandon Teena and Gwen Araujo, but here in the United States those stories are few and far between. In the interim, we’ve just had a major upheaval over comments made by Chick-Fil-A CFO Dan Cathy – I think that has a lot to do with this recent spate of staged anti-gay hate crimes. The purpose of these incidents, I think, is twofold: first, these are people who want attention. Second, they want to find some way, any way, to prove that we need to put a stop to these right-wing hatemongers.

They think if they have to fake it, the ends justify the means. The problem with that belief is that none of the people involved in beating, raping and killing Mathew Shepard, Brandon Teena and Gwen Araujo ever claimed to be Christians or right-wingers.

I’m at a loss as to how we’ve determined that Christians and conservatives are responsible for crimes committed largely by non-religious rednecks. I’m at even more of a loss to excuse the intolerance of the gay left; of the Quinn Matney incident, Jeff DeLuca said, “He still needs our support. It’s a different kind of support than we originally anticipated having to offer. He’s still a valued member of our community and we want to make sure his health, safety and peace of mind are at the forefront of what we’re doing for him.”

When was the last time a gay leftist was so compassionate to any conservative, let alone a gay conservative?

Put The Candles Out

With cute shows like Glee on the airwaves to make gay seem chic, it has become surprising to most adults just how cruel kids are still being to each other. The problem with this is that bullying isn’t cute. The victim usually doesn’t have a small army of friends nearby (especially not ones on the football team) to come to their defense. I can’t stand that show because it never works that way in real life. I was VERY different, and I didn’t have anybody there to come to my defense. Girls particularly didn’t want to be around me, not with rumors flying about that I was a lesbian. I learned to watch my mouth because I knew it would get worse if I didn’t. Besides…a gay guy usually has a girlfriend or two with shoulders he can cry on. Who sticks up for the lesbians? It sure as hell ain’t the boys. I had it pretty rough as a kid. I was soundly beaten the one time I told a girl in the 6th grade that she was beautiful. I didn’t stop acting like a boy bent on being a rock star, but I kept my thoughts and feelings to myself because I knew it wasn’t normal.

On February 12, 2008, 14-year-old Brandon McInerney pulled a .22 pistol out of his bag in the middle of an English class and shot classmate Lawrence “Larry” King twice in the back of the head as the class worked on a WWII assignment. In the weeks leading up to the shooting, a lot happened. There was also a lot of history prior that is simply being ignored, and regardless of what King’s adoptive father Greg says, gay groups have made a crusade out of his murder. So have anti-gun groups.

Larry King started accessorizing like a girl when he was just ten years old. By the time he was 15 – the day of his death – he’d come to school wearing stilettos, knee-high pink boots, brightly-colored clothing, hair gelled into different styles, and enough makeup to put Elizabeth Taylor to shame. By the time he arrived at E.O Green Middle School, he was chasing other boys, openly expressing affection for them, and staring at boys in the locker room. He was tormented, but he didn’t make it easy. Here’s where I piss off every gay liberal on the planet.

Larry didn’t know how to control himself. Teachers didn’t know how to guide him. As a result, his classmates, for the most part, didn’t know quite what to do with him. His behavior was out of control, and no amount of bullying excused his reactions.

Newsweek did a surprising article on the incident in which they actually flirted with an unbiased opinion. They quoted his father as saying, “I think the gay-rights people want it to be a gay-rights issue, because it makes a poster child out of my son.” He doesn’t like the idea that Larry turned into a cause celebré overnight because of what happened.

I learned early on to not cross the boundaries with people. Every kid has to go to some extreme at some point; mine ended up being religion. I got into my religion in a huge way and wore it in neon lettering on my sleeve. Other kids go goth, emo, country, rap, metal, nerd…or gay. When I was a kid, nobody could get away with openly admitting to being gay. Things have come a long way, but they have a long way to go yet and we are openly lying to ourselves if we think kids are really capable of comprehending the issues involved.

If a 15-year-old boy sexually harassed a girl the way Larry is purported to have harassed Brian McInerney, he’d be disciplined harshly. The instant it came to light that the boy was asking her out, whispering “I love you” in the hall and claiming to have scratched her arm during sex, there would have been major meetings with the parents and the two would be separated immediately. If the boy then broke the new rules and asked that girl to be his valentine, he’d have been immediately suspended.

Why is it impossible to conceive of doing this when a boy acting out as a homosexual makes overtures to another boy?

Most of the teachers and executive staff apparently didn’t help. Some did try to formally complain about the lack of discipline concerning Larry, but they were told nothing could be done because of California state law that banned gender discrimination – including gender identity discrimination. Larry was allowed to continue wearing outrageous clothing, makeup and hair gelled to a bouffant because nobody wanted to stop the distracting behavior. Never mind that every kid in school talked about him constantly. The lesbian assistant principal reportedly encouraged him and stifled dissent among teachers who tired of his antics. Another teacher brought him a gift in the form of a green formal dress that Larry immediately ran to try on.

We’re talking about a group of junior highers. They don’t understand sexuality yet. They certainly don’t understand homosexuality, and because it isn’t the norm (get used to it, folks, it isn’t and never will be) it results in the sometimes-violent ostracizing of kids who display same-sex behaviors.

What Brandon McInerney did was reprehensible. He deserves to go to prison for the rest of his life for his actions. We cannot, however, make Larry a poster child when his behavior cannot be excused, either. He did blow kisses at straight boys. He told Brandon he loved him. Two days before his murder, he trotted onto the basketball court to ask Brandon to be his valentine in front of the whole school. None of that was okay. If we delude ourselves into believing that it was just harmless fun, that neither Larry nor Brandon should have been hurt, then we do a disservice both to gay and straight kids alike. Gay rights groups need to learn to stay within the same boundaries that everyone else operates in.

For once, we need to put the candles out and start really holding ourselves up to the same standard that we expect everyone else to live by.

Civil Discourse

Social events in our country over the past year have driven many to clamor for a new form of civility – the University of Arizona even founded a National Institute for Civil Discourse in the wake of the shooting of Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords and five other innocent souls in Tucson (the home of U of A). The suicides of multiple young kids after months – sometimes years – of gay-related bullying (even when those kids weren’t gay) brought on a fresh round of cries for people to start caring and lawmakers to pass anti-bullying and hate-crimes legislation.

Our actions, however, tell a different story.

It amazes me that liberals are usually the first ones to squeal about the horrors of bullying and hate crimes because it is often those identifying as liberals who display the most hatred and ignorance (see my post on Nazi comparisons for further extensions). I can’t get used to it because they continually lie about wanting society to do better. They clamor to end all religious influence over society yet when asked why human beings are basically good, they have no response. They insist on teaching that we humans are essentially just highly-evolved animals, but they believe that we’re somehow better than animals…all on our own. There is no God, and my faith is culturally unacceptable, but human beings are supposed to be better than other animals?

It’s no wonder that our society displays so much hatred and ignorance. On April 18, an unbelievable display of such wanton emotion was captured on cell phone video in a McDonald’s restaurant in Baltimore. According to multiple news sources, a 22-year-old woman was attacked in or near the bathroom by two girls, one 14, the other 18. The two attackers showed open hostility to everyone who tried to intervene – and even after leaving the restaurant TWICE, they came back to beat their victim again. The third attack had the suspects ripping the victim’s wig off and dragging her by her hair to the door while an older woman with more balls than the male manager tried to stop them. Incredibly, the two girls assaulted the older woman as well.

The video carries on for more than three minutes. What’s more, the incident was caught on a cell phone camera owned by none other than Vernon Hackett, an employee of the restaurant, and the video catches him and a fellow employee laughing hysterically at the violence. The manager is caught doing nothing more than yelling “stop!” at the two thugs – he didn’t even reprimand his employees for taping and laughing at the fight. He never even tried to stop them. At the end, the victim is left having a seizure on the floor, chunks of hair litter the floor, and the aspiring filmographer warns the suspects to get away because the police have been called.

This isn’t the first time that a video of a pile-on beating has been posted to the internet, but coming on the heels of all these calls for civility and concern for bullying victims, the fact that such an incident could not only occur but go viral online is astounding. It gets even worse from here…multiple sources, including the local ABC affiliate linked above and LGBTQ Nation, are reporting that the unnamed victim was a transgendered female…and the attack was over the fact that she was trying to use the women’s latrine.

Personally, I believe that if you’re transgendered but still genetically the gender you were at birth, you should use the corresponding facility for the corresponding plumbing. If businesses want to install unisex bathrooms, fantastic; that is their decision. Whatever your belief, however, there is no excuse whatsoever to react violently and then try to excuse your outrageous behavior by pointing out your victim’s perceived character flaws. I’ll tell you right now, if I had been there and had witnessed that scene firsthand, neither of those two girls would have left that establishment in one piece. Regardless of what I think I would have stood up for their victim and use the gifts the Good Lord gave me to do so. I might have even turned on Hackett and just said, “oops…sorry!” afterward.

I’ve also got good money that says every one of the employees and perpetrators involved is an Obama fan. If this is what they call hope and change, they can keep it.

If you want a good look at just how “civil” liberals are, take a look at the vicious attacks on Sarah Palin over her son Trig. A Wonkette writer recently attacked Trig himself, saying, “what’s he dreaming about? Nothing. He’s retarded.” (It’s worth pointing out that so many conservatives were rightly outraged that Wonkette deleted the post…h/t to Steven Crowder for the info). Worse yet, “comedian” Louis CK went on the Opie & Anthony Show and verbally assaulted “that baby that came out of her disgusting c–t” and flayed her for mentioning the difficulties of raising a Downs Syndrome child, continuing to say, “this is hard? It’s a baby, put your tit in its mouth!” The commenters, which include the user who posted the clip, are just as evil – and the singular comment I posted garnered six positive marks, yet the poster removed it. I guess he’s too much of a coward to face the same criticism he offers.

Liberals embody the very same intolerance they attack conservatives for. Somehow they manage to exalt themselves whenever another teenager commits suicide by claiming that it’s all the fault of conservatives. I have news for you, folks…our society will never grow up as long as this kind of thing is acceptable. As long as teenagers watch the adults in this country launch personal attacks against politicians like Sarah Palin, liberal commenters bully conservatives into submission with accusations of racism and intolerance, teen-mom reality “stars” caught on video beating their baby daddies and ex-friends, and trans-phobic beatdowns at McDonalds, kids will keep getting the message that bullying is perfectly acceptable, and the more shock value you garner the more popular you become.

Civil discourse is beginning to look an awful lot like gang rape.

Immigration Hysteria Reaching Fever Pitch

Any time an issue in which emotions run high hits the news, there are always those who use it for publicity or other personal purposes. With the passage of Arizona’s new immigration law there are people quite literally from all over the world weighing in – and the media is eating it up. Rarely do you hear reports about those who support the bill NOT being the racists and/or Nazis that the protesters paint them as. You don’t hear stories about the hardworking Americans who support the bill, good people who work hard, obey the law, and pay taxes that end up going to provide all kinds of services (legal, medical, educational and otherwise) to people who shouldn’t even be here. You don’t hear stories about the victims of illegal alien criminals who have to find a way to adjust to life after being assaulted, burglarized, molested, raped, robbed – or, worse, having to bury a loved one who was murdered. You don’t hear about the ones who got that knock at the door to find a police officer and crisis counselors there to tell them that their family member had been killed in a wreck and how they dealt with later finding that the drunk driver who stole that light from their lives had been arrested for DUI before and was in the country illegally.

Now, the incessant screeching from the pro-illegal open-borders crowd is reaching a crescendo into wailing and gnashing of teeth. On Thursday, May 6 – just last week – news hit that 50-year-old Gary Kelley got into a fight and shot his neighbor, 44-year-old Juan Varela. One witness, Varela’s brother, says he heard Kelley use a racial slur (he apparently called Varela a “wetback”). There are several rumors, but the scuttlebutt that seems to be consistent is that Kelley and Varela were once drinking buddies and got along but somewhere in the timeline a dispute rose between them and for a few years, there was a chilly silence. Their dispute was, for the most part, peaceful until last week. Kelley was drunk when the major confrontation began and at some point, Varela threw a swing or two. Then Kelley pulled his gun from his waistband and shot Varela.

Now, a week later, Varela’s family is claiming that SB 1070 – the new immigration bill – is to blame for Kelley’s dastardly crime.

It’s a hate crime, they say, because he used a racial slur. They’re blaming the bill for the climate that supposedly made Kelley feel it was acceptable to commit murder. They’ve also claimed that Phoenix Police Chief Jack Harris came to visit them in an attempt to “intimidate” them into “not connecting this to racism.” This is a fabrication in whole on their part – Chief Harris has never spoken to the family. He certainly never visited them. If Chief Harris went to visit every murder victim’s family he’d never get the rest of his job duties done. They’re saying that the Phoenix Police Department is trying to sweep a hate crime under the rug. Considering the pace at which most murder investigations progress, one week is awfully damned fast for anyone to expect the police to make a decision of any kind, including whether it was a hate crime. There has to be pretty significant evidence beyond a single racial slur, one that can only be verified by one person, to come to that conclusion.

This is well beyond getting out of hand. City councils in both Los Angeles and Austin have voted to boycott Arizona along with San Francisco. They fail to see that they’re only exasperating the issue. The very people they’re trying to help will be the ones most severely impacted by their decisions, not us. Boycotting South Africa was one thing. Boycotting Denver didn’t work because it didn’t have any teeth. Now they’re not just running against Arizona, they’re running against a reported 60-70% of Americans who support the bill.

This isn’t about religion. It isn’t about racism. It’s not about who was here first. It’s about who is here NOW and the rule of law in America. Instead of the emotional, knee-jerk “you’re breaking up families you racist pigs” reaction that we’re accustomed to, please, by all means, somebody give me a well-thought response that will make me think.

I sincerely doubt we’ll get one. People, when in mobs, lose all sense of reality. If a single person ensnared by the mob thinks, “woah, wait, someone is going to get hurt,” but the mob refuses to stop, do you think that single person is going to stop? No. They’ll do whatever they can to avoid being run over, which means they join the mob.

Gary Kelley was 200% wrong for what he did. While I’m sure he won’t even face such punishment, I think he should get the death penalty for knowingly taking the life of another person for purposes other than personal self-defense. Juan Varelas’ family deserves much more swift justice than they’ll ever get. My sympathy stopped when the family began to use the incident to feed the mob, however. You are all absolutely wrong for that.

Twisted Minds (…And Words)

With last weekend’s passage of the health control legislation, tempers flared and a lot of accusations were thrown about. The press extensively covered reports that Tea Party protesters on Capitol Hill hurled racial epithets and even spit on one lawmaker (who later declined to positively identify the spitter and had his aides issue a statement that he refused to identify the spitter to avoid the man being arrested…I don’t know about you, but if a person spits on me I actually want them arrested, wouldn’t you agree?).

Yet the media never questioned the claims. They merely presented them as fact without challenging the alleged acts of violence, something the MSM often does when dealing with conservatives in the protest scene. There’s much more to it than has been offered. Even FOX dropped the ball on this one.

Georgia congressman John Lewis claimed a Tea Party protester called him a “n—er” and claimed it was caught on camera, but the YouTube videos used only prove nothing of the sort was said. Interestingly, if you click here you’ll see a 48-second video at the start of John Lewis walking through the crowd, then if you click here you’ll see a second video with a caption claiming it was taken “five minutes” after Lewis was “rushed by the angry mob” (you don’t see that in the first video). What else is interesting? You’ll see at least two of Lewis’s staffers holding up cameras and taking footage. Not one of them caught the supposed N-bomb. Brazenly, Andrew Breitbart offered a $10,000 donation to the United Negro College Fund if anybody could provide proof that the word was used. Nobody has taken up the challenge, not even with a fake.

One supposed protester called Barney Frank a “fa–ot” while protesters called for his attention. The MSM played it up big time, but none of them called it out in the least. What you didn’t hear was the story provided by those who were there, the protesters themselves: they didn’t know the guy using the epithet, and admonished him for having done so. The man apparently dropped his head and all but ran away when they did this. Now, I don’t like Frank but I absolutely hate that word (for those who don’t know me well, “hate” is a word I almost never use) AND the other slur that was supposedly used that day. If I thought a Tea Partier had used it I would have been all over it. Now you know why I wasn’t: I knew there was more to it.

Russ Carnahan claimed that protesters left a coffin on his lawn. The story, pushed by every news agency in the country (and wailed about by Frank Rich at the NY Times), claimed that the coffin had been LEFT on his LAWN. If you look at the story on Politico, they finally say that the coffin was placed near his home but never retracts the statement that originally claimed it was physically left there. MyFoxStLouis had to ask the questions nobody else would. It was in the hands of protesters the entire time. It was not placed on his lawn nor was it left. It went home with the protesters who had it.

We’ve seen countless instances of hate crimes being faked against liberals. We’ve also seen actual hate crimes perpetrated against conservatives so many times that nearly every conservative radio host and writer has written an entire chapter in at least one of their books about said hate crimes. Most notably, this week Republican Eric Cantor reported his offices had been shot at and there was evidence of the crime. How many news agencies reported on that? I think I read about it on FOX. That’s it. If someone else knows where, please provide the link.

Instead, we have liberal pundits screaming that the gas line was cut at the home of Rep. Tom Perriello’s brother when we don’t even know what the hell happened. Didn’t the libs learn from the Bill Sparkman dustup? The man staged his death to look like a hate crime murder so his son could collect the life insurance benefits. The body wasn’t even cold before liberal outlets and the MSM were pinning Sparkman’s death on conservatives. At least now we’re scaling back from murder to cutting gas lines. Once this is disproven I guess we’ll scale it back to the tardiness of the takeout delivery guy (you were late because of protesters down the road?!? HATE CRIME!!!).

Representative Anthony Weiner (D-NY) took all of the claims of hate crimes over the past week and rolled them all into one incident when he decided to take aim at Sarah Palin. Palin’s speeches have advocated “reloading” and “taking aim” at congressmen (via the vote, she has clarified that every time she’s used it) who voted for the health control monstrosity, and Weiner threw a snit fit over it, claiming it was threatening and saying, “there are too many people who have twisted minds who might think that she’s being literal.”

On the very, VERY few occasions that a right-wing activist has been caught in the commission of a hate crime, all conservatives have joined the liberals in absolutely condemning the act (including when abortion doctor George Tiller was shot). When a liberal commits a hate crime, the Democrats have no comment. There are twisted minds on both sides, but at least we flesh ours out and hand them over to be dealt with appropriately.

Who They Are

In the past couple of weeks, a defense appropriations bill was hashed out and finally passed, sending it to President Obama’s desk. He signed it. What irks me about this?

Democrats tacked a completely unrelated piece of legislation onto the bill: an expansion of the federal hate crimes law. The expansion isn’t what you think, either.

Oh, sure, it expands the definition of a “hate crime” to include those who are gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgendered, as well as the disabled. It also includes those with disabilities (because we all know how prevalent hate crimes against the disabled are). An act of Congress that was originally intended to protect racial minorities after the assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr. now includes other groups who largely have few or no genetic indicators.

The reach of this new extension is incredible. It flies in the face of Constitutional protections against double jeopardy by providing an in-road for federal courts to try people a second time for the same crime–both those who were convicted of crimes and those who were acquitted. Janet Reno supported this exact same piece of legislation back in 1998 as a way to “give people the opportunity to have a forum in which justice can be done if it is not done in the state court.”

This is expressly forbidden by the Fifth Amendment: “No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.”

The same Constitutional Amendment that says we cannot be required to say anything that would be self-incriminating also forbids the government from coming back and trying us a second time after we’ve been found innocent. The hate crimes legislation that Obama has now signed into law attempts an end-run around the Constitution and it’s been something the Democrats have salivated over since the Clinton Administration. It will have an unprecedented effect on criminal justice.

Here’s how it’ll work. Say two white teenagers attack and savagely beat a Hispanic man (this actually happened in Shenandoah, Pennsylvania). The victim dies two days later of his severe injuries. Police quickly arrest the teenagers on information provided by many witnesses, and the perps all start spilling it. Prosecutors go for the gusto: they charge them with everything they possibly can, including ethnic intimidation. The jury acquits, however, refusing to convict the boys of anything more than simple assault. The perps have been convicted of some charges, acquitted of others, and they’ll be punished.

Not so fast. Now, the new legislation gives the federal government the ability to step in and prosecute a second time.

Congressional powers were supposed to be limited; the States were supposed to be the authorities on prosecuting crimes unless several states were involved, in which case the federal government would have the power to prosecute a string of crimes in one case. This new legislation turns that ideal on its head. Federalism is not supported by the Constitution, but Obama and the Democrats are trying to force it on us. The Morrison decision by the US Supreme Court may have set the precedent, and this legislation may be scrapped after all–or it may not.

The original hate crimes law was protected by the Thirteenth Amendment, which gave the federal government the power to protect freed slaves. This addition, however, is absurd. What is more bothersome, however, is that Democrats have all but crucified Bush for the USA PATRIOT Act, saying that in passing the Act Bush “wiped his ass with the Constitution.” What do you call what Obama is doing?

Janet Reno said that hate crimes were especially deplorable because victims are chosen “based on who they are, not what they’ve done.” This argument is incredible. How many crimes are committed against a person based on what that victim has done? I suppose if my neighbor were to be mugged and beaten it would be because of something he did to piss someone off, right? The woman I talked to who was raped for an hour must have deserved it because of something she did, is that it? No. Hate crimes are no different from any other crime. In the event that I were badly beaten or killed by someone who did so because I was a lesbian, I would want that perp to be charged with actual crimes. I would not want him slapped with hate crimes, because that places my life in value above others, and I’m not worth more than any other law-abiding citizen in society.

The common argument I’ve gotten from some Democrats I know is that hate crimes are committed to terrorize an entire group, and that needs to be stopped. Okay…then let those acts fall under terrorism laws, if it can be proven. Hate crimes laws equal thought crimes laws. Our founders would be mortified.

Bringing Down the House, Part I

Some time ago, a 15-year-old girl was found barely conscious in a garbage bag outside an apartment complex where she’d one lived with her family. Once she arrived at the ER at a local hospital, her burned, torn clothing was cut away to reveal that her body had been smeared with feces and various racial epithets had been written in charcoal. During a 20-minute interview with police, the young white teenager only spoke one single word; through drawings, nods of the head and shrugs the girl described a scenario in which three black men–all upstanding members of their communities, all well-loved by their families–had taken her to the home of one where she described being repeatedly raped and beaten. She said she had been burned by cigars then deposited where she’d been found four days later. Two lawyers and a prominent victim-rights advocate championed her cause in the press. “We have to stop this hateful violence against white people,” they said. “these black folks committing such horrible crimes need to be told that they cannot continue.”

But soon, the girl’s story began to unravel. Reports of her being spotted at a party with friends while she was supposedly missing and multiple inconsistencies in her story (including the racial slurs being written upside-down, as if she had to read them to write them, the incredible lack of any injuries, and evidence nearby suggesting the girl had done the tangible damage herself) led the grand jury to refuse to indict the three accused of the crime. They were later exonerated when the evidence more conclusively proved the girl was a liar.

Can you imagine the uproar if this scenario had played out as I described it? First, the black community never would have allowed themselves to be maligned along with three men, and rightly so. Also, however, the very instant the girl had been discovered to be a liar, they and the media would have been all over this like flies on a cow pie. There is no way this would have been allowed to go away quietly. White people all over the country who had cited this story in their attempt to convince the populace that this was a widespread problem would have been called race-baiters, hatemongers, and worse. Riots would have broken out. There would have been no escape from this fiasco by any person with white skin, whether they’d agreed with it or not.

But Tawana Brawley DID get away with it. As did her lawyer advisers, Alton H. Maddox and C. Vernon Mason–along with the Reverend Al Sharpton. Oh, Maddox’s law license was suspended and Sharpton was ordered to pay Steven Pagones (the prosecutor accused by Brawley in the case) $345,000 for defamation. But the public and the media let the group off scot-free. This happened in 1987.

The other two men accused by Brawley were police officers. Can you imagine the hell their lives decended into when these accusations were made? What kind of questions their wives had to ask, the taunting their children endured at school when this hit the news? The protests outside their homes? Brawley and her mother, Glenda, claim to this day despite the mountains of evidence that prove otherwise that they were mishandled by a supposedly racist system, and that white men in places of power just covered the incident up to protect Pagones and the two officers.

Why would Brawley make it up? Well, she’d been in trouble with her stepfather for staying out late with her boyfriend. Her stepfather, Ralph King, was a violent thug who’d stabbed his first wife nearly 15 times, and he was livid with her for refusing to obey his rules. According to many witnesses–including no less than Tawana Brawley’s boyfriend at the time–mom helped her fabricate the tale to avoid the same fate.

Today, Sharpton has not recanted his race-baiting statements or his handling of the Brawley case. Like the Brawleys, he maintains that Tawana was telling the truth and the case was up to the neck in racism. To hear him and anyone else involved today, it was all about the color of her skin, and the evidence be damned–three good men should be in prison.

Racism may still be alive, but things like this make others want to shut it out and not give a damn when REAL racism rears its ugly head.

In Part II: the Crown Heights Riots and the murder of an innocent Jewish man.

Crying Hate

(NOTE: It has been confirmed that Senator Edward Kennedy has passed away today at the age of 77. I will refuse, for now, to address my misgivings about the man to issue condolences to his friends and family. Theirs is a pain I would wish on nobody.)

Yesterday, the Democratic National Convention headquarters was vandalized. Windows that protected ObamaCare posters, artwork and other such things were smashed. The perps were caught on tape with shirts over their heads and hoodie sweatshirts to hide their identities.

Alas, it was to no avail. The Denver Police Department found the perp immediately and arrested him. 24-year-old Maurice Schwenkler is currently in the hoosegow for his crime; he and one other unnamed assailant broke the windows and rode away on bicycles.

At least the Democrats can thank their lucky stars the hatemongering thugs were doing their best to reduce their carbon footprint. But there’s more to that, too–Schwenkler is a paid Democrat activist.

I suppose when acts of violence on the part of all of those Republican brownshirts failed to materialize, the Dems had to do something about it.

“The Democrats who Cried Hate” has a nice ring to it, I think.

Gay Hate Crimes: Truth or Hysteria, Part III

Here’s the next round.  So far, the first twelve came up with exactly one hate crime perpetrated by a person claiming to be working on behalf of the Christian God.  Even though we all know my intentions are only the best, I’m likely about to anger the gods of the gay community with some of the conclusions I come to.

Danny Overstreet–On September 22, 2000, Ronald Gay walked into the Backstreet Cafe in Roanoke, Virginia.  He sat down and ordered a beer before pulling a 9mm handgun and opened fire, wounding six and killing one–Overstreet.  Before going, Gay had asked a waitress in a small diner where the nearest gay bar was, then pulled his trench coat back to reveal the gun and said he wanted to “waste some gays.”  The waitress called police before the shooting even started; consequently, it took a very short period of time for police to find him afterward.  Gay, a former Marine, had a long history of violence–his ex-wife had a restraining order against him.  While awaiting indictment, he wrote a nearly indecipherable letter to the Roanoke Times in which he talked about “killing and burning” gay men to slow the spread of AIDS and called himself “a Christian soldier working for my Lord.”  While Gay had never before made such statements, he did show a propensity for odd religious beliefs.  His statements to the media about his motive were also made before indictment and have never been recanted.  Verdict: TRUTH.

Sakia Gunn–this one is likely to garner me the most hate mail.  I hadn’t really studied the facts of this case until now and had merely accepted what I’d been told.  On May 11, 2003, Gunn was waiting for a bus with friends after spending the evening in Greenwhich Village.  Two men pulled up in a station wagon and propositioned the group of girls but were rebuffed when all of the girls told the men they were lesbians.  The men got out and argued; invariably, a fight broke out, and when Gunn fought back Richard McCullough stabbed her in the chest.  McCullough later turned himself in, saying he hadn’t meant to kill her.  It is notable that the fight began over a sexual proposition, not because the girls were lesbians.  McCullough denied that he wished to harm the girls over their orientation.  Moreover, he denied a revulsion to lesbians.  The fact that he turned himself in, plead guilty, and maintained that murder was never his intent speaks volumes.  This was not a hate crime, and religion NEVER came up.  Verdict: HYSTERIA.

Daniel Fetty–On October 2, 2004, Martin Baxter, Matthew Ferman and James Trent, Jr. were at the Canal Pub with 38-year-old Fetty for drinks.  Fetty was deaf and gay.  At some point while Fetty was buying drinks, Ferman noticed his cigarettes missing and began to lose his temper.  He accused Fetty, who was homeless after an apartment fire, of taking both the cigarettes and some cash that he’d stuffed into the cellophane.  The three men led Fetty outside, where they beat him with bottles, bricks and wooden beams before stripping him and dumping him into a trash bin.  They took Fetty’s only valuable posessions and money from his car and ran when the police arrived.  Fetty died in the hospital the next day.  Prosecutor Rob Junk added hate crime charges after the original indictment, alleging that the fact that Fetty was found nude pointed to his sexual orientation as a motivation.  This was the only evidence claimed to make this a hate crime; Trent, who plead guilty and testified, said that the whole episode was over the cigarettes, as did the few witnesses who testified.  I do not believe this to be a hate crime, either, and religion again never came up.  Verdict: HYSTERIA.

Guin “Richie” Phillips–On June 17, 2003, Phillips went to lunch with friend Joshua Cottrell in Elizabethtown, Kentucky.  It was the last time he was seen alive.  On June 25, two fishermen found his body stuffed into a suitcase in Rough River, three days after his abandoned truck was found in Indiana.  On June 27 Cottrell was arrested for the murder.  Despite claims to the contrary, Cottrell’s family and friends were stunned by the murder; at trial, they testified that they’d never heard him use derogatory language about Phillips’ orientation.  Cottrell had stated that he would “cold cock” Phillips if he ever made a pass at him, but mutual acquaintances all said that Phillips was never aggressive and Cottrell harbored no hate.  The two seemed to get along well.  Cottrell claimed at trial that Phillips attempted to rape him–convenient, considering Kentucky’s law allowing a victim to use deadly force to escape forcible sexual intercourse (the “stand your ground” law).  While it is possible that Cottrell instigated the whole thing, I think if he killed Phillips for being gay there would have been far more evidence of his malice.  Our only real witness, though, is also the perpetrator.  Verdict: partial TRUTH, mostly HYSTERIA.

Glenn Kopitske–on August 2, 2002, Kopitske’s mother drove out to his house when she couldn’t reach him by phone and found him dead in his small, isolated home in Weyauwaga, Wisconsin (not far from Milwaukee).  He’d only been dead for two days but the heat and humidity had expedited his decomposition; it wasn’t until the Milwaukee pathologist turned the body over that his liquefied brain matter was leaking from a quarter-sized bullet hole in his skull.  The odd markings on his back and chest turned out to be stab wounds.  Kopitske had been murdered.  Yet when police combed through the victim’s home, there was no evidence–no hair, no blood, no sign of forced entry or a struggle, nothing.  They did, however, discover his keys missing and his back door locked, and his mother said he never locked the back door.  After extensive canvassing in town, a college freshman named Olivia Thoma finally came forward with a shocking revelation: Gary Hirte, the town hero, straight-A student, athlete extraordinaire and the town’s first Eagle Scout in 20 years, had been talking about committing the murder.  Chillingly enough, by the time she came forward police found that Hirte had been bragging about it to several people, including rivals on the football field.  What cemented it for them was that he told Thoma that he’d taken the keys.  He had also showed the blood-spattered knife he’d used to a friend.  Hirte told Thoma, on whom he had a crush, that he’d done it just to see if he could get away with it.  A neighbor then came forward and said that a few nights before the murder, he’d seen a car with square headlights and rectangular taillights shining a powerful spotlight on the house.  Hirte’s friend later admitted they’d gone “shining for deer” and hadn’t realized that it was a dry run to see what the neighborhood was like at night.  Hirte was arrested and indicted, and after days of incarceration and time with his lawyer, suddenly came the story that he’d concocted in his defense: he’d had a sexual encounter with Kopitske that night while drunk, and when he woke sober in his car, he went on a rampage and murdered Kopitske.  Hirte’s lawyer claims a forensic report suggests a sexual encounter took place, but the police report says there was no evidence of any such thing in Kopitske’s home or on his body.  Hirte’s story is the only thing anyone clings to in pointing to this as an anti-gay hate crime, and the evidence suggests Hirte is lying through his teeth.  An FBI profiler pointed to distinct signs that Hirte was a psychopath–he dated a girl 5 years his junior, hung out with an unpopular boy though he was the most popular guy in town, he killed small animals and bragged about it, and–most disturbing–he took Kopitske’s keys as a trophy, showing them off to people he bragged to about the murder.  Left unchecked, Hirte stood a good chance of becoming the next great serial killer.  On top of all of this, Kopitske’s parents said he was not gay and never would have taken anyone, let alone a high school student, to his home to have sex.  Hirte may claim until he dies that his story is legit, but the evidence profoundly says otherwise.  This was no hate crime; Hirte’s story is a front.  He certainly never claimed religion as his basis.  Verdict: HYSTERIA.

Jason Gage–on March 11, 2005, Gage went out with a few friends to the local gay bar, Kings & Queens, including friend Joseph Lawrence.  They later went to The Times Bar, retiring afterward to Gage’s apartment where Lawrence decided to wait for a ride because he was too drunk to drive.  The next morning, Gage began contacting friends in a panic, saying he’d gotten into a fight that had “gotten way out of hand.”  He asked if he should call police, because he didn’t know if Gage would press assault charges.  But on March 14, police found Gage dead in the apartment after he hadn’t shown up for work for three days and concerned friends called.  He’d died of severe head injuries and a stab wound with a piece of glass to the neck, though there were few signs of struggle outside of the bedroom.  Lawrence, for his part, had several gay friends and went to the gay bars with them; his fiancee told police that the fight never would have happened unless some sort of sexual advance was made AND Lawrence was very drunk.  There is actually no evidence whatsoever that Lawrence killed Gage simply for being gay, and religion was never used as an excuse.  Lawrence plead guilty and, possibly out of genuine remorse, waived all rights to appeal whatever sentence the judge might give him.  Verdict: HYSTERIA.

The Puzzles Lounge–this one is typically referred to simply as “the Boston gay bar attack” even though I starkly remember watching it on the news for several days.  On February 2, 2006, 18-year-old Jacob Robida walked into the Puzzles Lounge in Boston and ordered a drink with a fake ID.  He ordered the second drink and asked the bartender if he was in a gay bar, and the bartender confirmed it; after downing the second drink, Robida produced a hatchet and started attacking patrons.  When several wrestled him to the ground, he pulled a gun and started shooting.  He ran off, having seriously wounded four people.  Police raided his mother’s house and found Nazi regalia and anti-Semitic writings strewn about Robida’s bedroom.  On February 4, Gassville, Arkansas police officer Jim Sell pulled Robida’s 1999 green Pontiac over; Robida calmly talked to him for a few minutes before shooting and killing him, then taking off again.  Eighteen miles later, in Norfork, Robida engaged police in a gunfight.  He killed his companion, Jennifer Bailey, whose presence has never been explained, then was shot in the head by pursuing officers.  This was a hate crime; evidence showed that Robida had planned the attack for some time.  However, he never called himself a Christian, nor blamed his hatred on God.  Verdict: both TRUTH and HYSTERIA.

We’re up to TWO so far now–two out of nineteen.  Some of the crimes listed aren’t even hate crimes.  Let me say now that the fact that a crime victim is gay does not automatically mean they were targeted for their orientation.  Please, folks, research what you’re claiming before you try to use it to your benefit.