What Goes Around Comes Around, Sometimes

What Goes Around Comes Around, Sometimes

. . . How the ACLU construes the Ten Commandments as endorsements of any particular faith is a mystery. How it fails to find any “secular purpose” in warning kids not to murder one another, etc. is even more mysterious. That’s just what the ACLU does.

Baltimore’s Teonna Brown can readily be dismissed as a hateful twit. The ACLU seems unaware that when a country rejects the moral foundations on which it was founded, it ceases to be a moral nation.

What came around to Brown was proper justice. Virginia’s Giles County School Board administered its own justice by circumventing the ACLU and telling it where to stick its complaint. (Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=5451.)

Walter E. Williams: Reverse Racist or Uncle Tom?

Walter E. Williams: Reverse Racist or Uncle Tom?

I’ve long admired Professor Walter E. Williams, a rare breed among men.

The 75 year old conservative, African-American economist, columnist, political commentator, and John M. Olin Distinguished Professor of Economics at George Mason University invariably perceives the nation as it is, not as politicians and special interest groups pretend and twist it to be, which is rare, indeed.

Okay, he calls himself a libertarian rather than a conservative, but close enough.

In an article titled, “America’s New Racists,” Williams once again ruffles the feathers of his fellow black men, exposing and clearly articulating an ugly truth about American society today and cutting through liberal distortions and misleading propaganda. The truth, censored by the MSM and which only an African-American can say without being accused of rabid racism: “Most racist assaults are committed by blacks.”

If he isn’t labeled as such already, that forthright and documented observation will surely earn the professor designation by the derogatory term “Uncle Tom” which is regularly used by professional black agitators to demean African-Americans who don’t tow and spout the race line, who dare to stray off the new plantation.

Williams personally experienced the poisonous fruits of racism in America and knows whereof he writes when he observes that the racist worm has turned 360 degrees and the former victims of the poison have evolved into the evil-doers. As he says, “What’s worse is there are blacks, still alive, who lived through the times of lynching, Jim Crow laws and open racism who remain silent in the face of it.”

He recounts various recent instances of black racist crime, which have been the subjects of articles on this blogsite as well as others not covered here, including serious incidents at Skidmore College, in Denver, San Francisco, Philadelphia, and on Chicago’s beaches. All involved black gangs committing patently-obvious racist hate crimes against both whites and Asians, although the more punitive hate crime charge is rarely applied by either the police or by the media to the miscreants.

In a scathing and verified indictment of the MSM, Williams audaciously and perspicaciously writes, “In many of these brutal attacks, the news media make no mention of the race of the perpetrators. If it were white racist gangs randomly attacking blacks, the mainstream media would have no hesitation reporting the race of the perps.”

Compounding that miscarriage of journalistic ethics, he adds, “Editors for the Los Angeles Times, The New York Times and the Chicago Tribune admitted to deliberately censoring information about black crime for political reasons. Chicago Tribune Editor Gerould Kern recently said that the paper’s reason for censorship was to ‘guard against subjecting an entire group of people to suspicion.’ “ . . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=4855)

2011 April Fools

2011 April Fools

There are so many eligible candidates for 2011′s April Fools Awards that it’s difficult to choose the most worthy but I have narrowed down the best by limiting them to the most current in their various fields. . . Fools rush in where angels fear to tread. April Fools such as Barack Obama, Harry Reid, Charlie Sheen, Bill Maher, David Ferrer, Barry Bonds, and the NYPD rush in when propriety, honesty, decency, and common sense are tossed. Give me good, old fashioned circus clowns anyday!
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=4029)

Nervy News #7: Ham Sandwiches

Nervy News #7: Ham Sandwiches

When is a ham sandwich or sammich not a ham sandwich or sammich?

Well, obviously when the sandwich/sammich becomes a hate crime!

At least that’s what the nitwit administrators at Lewiston Middle School in Maine think. I’m almost certain the Fourth Earl of Sandwich didn’t envision his creation would ever gain the status of a hate crime back in the eighteenth century.

It seems some Lewiston Middle School kid who I’d have to guess was about 12 or 13 thought it would be amusing and crack up his buddies to put a ham sandwich on a cafeteria table where Somali students happened to be chowing down their lunch.

The ham must have made the Somalis retch since most Somalis are Muslims and Muslims regard even being in the same room as a pork product as the equivalent of being denied their 72 virgins after they move on up to Muslim Paradise after killing infidels.

The hate-criminal, (presumably a boy since young girls would never commit a hate crime), was summarily suspended by officials at Lewiston even though the ham sandwich was in a brown bag. . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=1720)

Contrarian News

Contrarian News

An investment contrarian is one who invests against the trends. If the market is headed upwards–a rarity these days–a contrarian will sell and vice versa. Contrarian news likewise moves in the opposite direction of prevailing trends and as such is more newsworthy than conventional news.

Three contrarian news views:

Bullying Can Be a Good Thing: Just about every student K-12 has either been a bully, been bullied, or has witnessed the fine art of bullying up close and personal.

Bullies and bullying have become popular buzzwords in educational circles in recent years as if they were new phenomena. Programs and seminars have been introduced to combat the evil of one kid or a bunch of kids intimidating or physically harming a weaker victim.

Now comes a study out of England, a British study of American children 11 and 12, which shows that being bullied can be advantageous to the pre-pubescent set. A prime requisite for the bullied is that they resist the intimidation and fight back in one way or another. In that eventuality, they gain respect and a sense of maturity. . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=1711)

Hate Crimes=Thought Crimes

Hate Crimes = Thought Crimes

Britain doesn’t lead the world in much nowadays, unless you include British Petroleum successfully polluting vast tracts of the Gulf of Mexico and its horrendous health care system.

However, the Brits are still the leaders of the pack when it comes to politically correct Big Brotherism especially when it comes to punishing free speech and so-called hate crimes.

According to Merriam-Webster.com, the concept of “hate crime” dates to 1984 and is defined as ”any of various crimes (as assault or defacement of property) when motivated by hostility to the victim as a member of a group (as one based on color, creed, gender, or sexual orientation).”

Now, virtually any crime of violence against persons or property can reasonably be interpreted as a hate crime since few such crimes are motivated by the antithesis of hatred and the un-loved person or thing thereby becomes the object of some form of attack.

For law enforcement agencies to determine that a run-of-the-mill crime qualifies as a hate crime, they would have to prove the perpetrator had hateful thoughts toward a victim, based on “color, creed, gender, or sexual orientation,” barring a statement by said perpetrator such as, “I hate Buddhists” before fire-bombing a Buddhist temple. Otherwise, he might just be a random temple fire-bomber.

Point is, to be enforced, law enforcers and juries must be able to read the minds of the alleged perps and be satisfied the crime in question was also a thought crime.

Great Britain, apparently, doesn’t draw such fine distinctions. . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=1695)

Are There Love Crimes, Too?

Are There Love Crimes, Too?

For every yin there’s a yang, no? For every plus there’s a minus, no? For every good there’s an evil, no? So, why shouldn’t there be love crimes for every hate crime?

Well, no. Love crimes are only punishable by a face slap or a firm adieu.

The whole concept of “hate crimes” is an absurdity cooked up by minorities who pretend to believe that every insult, every malocchio, every slight infraction constitutes a crime of hate and must be punished by more severe retributive justice than your run of the mill, average crime.

Thus, if one gets knocked to the ground by a mugger who punches one’s face, kicks one’s ribs, steals one’s wallet but who never says a word in process, that’s just a crime. If someone is tripped and falls and the tripper says, “Take that, you filthy honkie!” then the tripper has committed a hate crime.

Hate crimes, though, only seem to happen to black and homosexual victims.

Go figure.

It’s all silliness, politically correct silliness that has the potential of condemning people to much longer prison terms than they deserve and, when they reach prison, woe unto him when other inmates learn they committed a crime of hate!

That’s almost as horrendous as being a child molestor and they will be manhandled accordingly.

Where is the ACLU when you need them?

Chances are that someday hate crime laws will be declared unconstitutional since they are targeted laws written and passed to mollify certain segments of the population spelled out in Wikipedia as “racial group, religion, sexual orientation, disability, class, ethnicity, nationality, age, gender, gender identity, or political affiliation.”

With all those categories, hate crime rates occurred at the rate of 47 per every 100,000 people through 2006, hardly epidemic proportions even though hate crime laws were on the books in at least 45 states. . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=1545)

You Say, "Hate Crimes." I Say, "First Amendment."

You Say, “Hate Crime.” I say, “First Amendment.”

When you say potato and I say potahto, it doesn’t mean much. Same goes for tomato and tomahto.

When you say I can’t speak and write whatever I wish to speak and write–as long as it’s the truth and not likely to get people to stampede out of a non-burning theater–I say you’re trampling on my rights under the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America.

On Thursday, October 8th, 2009, the U.S. House of Representatives voted to “strengthen” so-called federal hate-crime legislation to incorporate any and all criticism and attacks on homosexuals.

It was passed handily just a few hours ago as of this writing with all the sneakiness Democrats could muster, including attaching the hate bill to a defense bill to insure its passage: http://bit.ly/DP06X

Had it been proposed as a separate bill, the House probably still would have passed it over Republican opposition given the makeup of the new leftist, gay-friendly, Constitution-unfriendly Dem majority.

However, that party loves late night machinations almost as much as it loves spitting on Americans’ rights.

The legislation now goes to the Senate for a vote and then inexorably on to Obama’s desk for signature, inexorably since Democratic Senate ratification and the president’s autograph are foregone conclusions.

Obama had cautioned gays to hold fire as he diddled over . . .

(Read the rest at http:genelalor.com)

Just Don't Call Them Racial Hate Crimes!

Just Don’t Call Them Racial Hate Crimes!Published in September 15th, 2009 | EditPosted by Berlet98 in AMERICAN CULTURE TODAY, MEDIA, OBAMA, POLITICSWe all know kids, especially boy kids, fight.

It’s part of the maturation process for the male of the species comparable to big horn sheep butting heads and young wolves biting their siblings, all in the cause of determining the dominant big horns and the alpha males.

Sometimes, however, kid fights become something else entirely, such as brutal assaults on one kid by multiple other kids as a child audience looks on and rabidly cheers the assault.

When the assailants and audience are of a different race from the assailed, the spectre of racism and racial hate crime unavoidably rears its ugly head and may be undeniable.

Now, Jesse Jackson has assured us that Blacks can’t be racists by virtue of the fact they are not “empowered” in America. The logic of that thinking has long eluded me but most of what the Rev. Jackson preaches eludes my simple mind.

In any event, take a look at this video which appears to show a number of unempowered Black boys on the way to or fro school beating the living hell out of a White boy: http://bit.ly/boJ7Q.

Normal Is As Normal Does, Except with "Hate Crimes"

Normal Is As Normal Does, Except with “Hate Crimes”

What’s normal?

It used to be that “normal” was one of those words that didn’t really need defining. The meaning was understood and had universal agreement as to its meaning.

Normal was as normal does, Forrest Gump might say, as in conforming to accepted standard, natural, usual, and conventional.

Like so many other things in our topsy-turvey, increasingly bizarre contemporary world and society, normality is now subject to debate, thanks primarily to the social ascendancy of homosexuals and the Gay Lobby.

Normal is about to become abnormal and its antithesis, the weird, twisted, and abnormal, will be decreed as the norm and may God forbid former normals contest the new norms!

Hate and hatred are two other words that used not to require definition. There were degrees of hatred but whatever the degree it still meant to dislike, scorn, or loathe.

Thus, a few generations back, if we had heard of a “Hate Crimes Bill,” we would with reasonable confidence assume it would entail penalties for commission of a hateful crime.

That was then, this is now.

In days of old, twenty years back, a proposal to penalize hatred would never have made it to the stage where it could be declared a crime.

It couldn’t logically or legislatively be deemed criminal since criminals had to DO something, commit some act which the Powers-That-Be, acting on behalf of the general public, found culpable and worthy of punishment.

That was then, this is now.

Hatred, as with love, anger, frustration, etc. are not acts. They are emotions, feelings, thoughts that should fall short of execution of a crime.

If John Doe detested his despicable boss or if Jane Doe loved her married boss and never acted on those emotions, how could they be condemned?

How would their feelings even be known unless John repeatedly flipped his employer the bird or Jane grabbed her boss’s butt at the water cooler? Those would be acts as opposed to mere thoughts and, again, back in the olden days, our thoughts were our own.

And legislation was a tad more rational.

That was then, this is now.

In the twenty-first century, emotions and thoughts are about to become federal crimes if the mind readers in Congress, under pressure from that Gay Lobby, get their way.

For background on this issue, please see “All Conservatives Will Be ‘Hate Criminals’ under H.R.1913.RFS,” http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=1070. Also, . . .

(For the rest, see http://genelalor.com)

All Conservatives Will Be Hate Criminals

All Conservatives Will Be “Hate Criminals” under H.R.1913.RFS

(Third in a series in recognition of New York City’s “Gay Pride Week”)

I think most of us believe in the axiom of live and let live, in the plaintive cry of Rodney King’s, “Why can’t we all just get along?”

I’m all for that, as long as we’re not expected to gather for a group hug and sing “Kumbayah,” and with another notable exception. When others trample on our rights, on our liberties, on our values, on our free expression of our beliefs then, no, we can’t all just get along until they cease and desist.

The Congress of the United States is in the process of such a trampling, a veritable stomping, by virtue of a new “Hate Crimes Law” which, when passed and signed into the law of the land will become yet another nail in the coffin of America’s freedoms.

Just as most of us want to simply live and let live, most of us decry senseless hatred which is not what this bill is all about. What it’s all about, under the guise of making hatred a thought crime, which is absurd and bad enough, is an effort to control and prosecute free speech, which is unconstitional and also bad enough.

Sponsored by Rep. John Conyers, the “2009 Hate Crimes Bill,” HR 1913, takes thought crime and free speech prohibitions to a level inconceivable as little as six months ago. As one distinguished scholar interprets it, HR 1913 will unprecedentedly establish a preferred category of both victims and law breakers, based on sexual proclivities.

For the most part, homosexuals will be the trod-upon victims, heterosexuals the criminals. However, the good news is that only those heteros who dare to express an opinion, verbally or in writing, such as in this blog, could be prosecuted.

“Liberty University law professor Shawn Akers writes that if H.R. 1913, the federal ‘Hate Crimes’ bill, becomes law, ‘local and state law enforcement would have the incentive of federal funds to prosecute cases involving . . . preferred victims to the exclusion and neglect of less valuable victims.’ Membership in the ‘preferred’ category is ‘based not on immutable characteristics but on the class member’s choice of sexual conduct . . . and subjective gender self-identity:” http://americansfortruth.com/news/analysis-of-2009-hate-crimes-bill-hr-1913.html#more-2733.

See that website for the full text of “Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2009.″

Anyone interested in reading the entire document will be accomplishing much more than our lawmakers do. They are inclined to vote into law bills they don’t bother to read, even multibillion dollar stimulus packages. That law covered a staggering 1588 pages and not a single legislator deigned to read it.

This proposed “hate bill” that will alter our lives, and our Constitution, is a piddling few pages but most of our leaders still won’t read it. It was passed by the House on April 29th and now officially identified as H.R.1913.RFS rests in the hands of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

That panel is chaired by Patrick Leahy and includes such Democrat notables as Arlen Specter, Dick Durbin and Chuck Schumer. Feel free to guess how they will vote.

(If the website link for the bill’s text is outdated, it can be found here in all its ignominious glory: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D? )c111:9:./temp/~c1118bgECl:: )

Prof. Akers’ extensive analysis of the content and probable impact of the original HR 1913 is a chilling account. . . .

(Read the rest at http://genelalor.com)