greenpeace2 previously said:

No, he didn’t burn a cross on anybody’s lawn. He didn’t assault anyone. He didn’t spray-paint swastikas or racial slurs on anybody’s car.

Here’s what he did: the hideous crime itself. In a speech to an audience of church pastors, he actually spoke the dreadful words, “We are a growing Christian community.”

The thought police swung right into action. First some shady Muslim group filed a civil rights complaint: somewhere, somehow, the mayor’s words violated some thin-skinned Christian-basher’s civil rights. What particular civil right might have been thus violated is not specified. Then a vigilante outfit called “the Antelope Valley Human Relations Task Force” announced that it was going to ask that the mayor be charged with a federal hate crime--on the grounds that his remarks were “divisive and exclusive rather than inclusive.”

Apparently it has become a crime to say things that are not “inclusive,” whatever the hell that is. It joins the list of other federal crimes--kidnapping, counterfeiting, hijacking an airplane, etc.

Not wanting to risk going to jail along with murderers, robbers, rapists, or New Jersey politicians, the mayor speedily issued an abject apology: “I sincerely apologize… But in talking to my friends of 30 years, it was clear that a lot of people felt excluded.”

Felt excluded? Did I wake up in the Twilight Zone this morning? Do we make a federal case--literally--of some injustice-collecting crybaby’s feelings?

What is this--Canada?

Having received the mayor’s boot-licking mea culpa, the Antelope Valley Human Relations Task Force decided not to pursue any hate crime charges. Would these people know a genuine “human relation” if it bit them on the bottom? Are they so strapped for things to do, that they have to incinerate the First Amendment every time some pinhead feels excluded?

I take back what I said about Canada. Although that country does not have a First Amendment supposedly protecting freedom of speech, Canada does have Ezra Levant and some other courageous individuals to uphold the cause of liberty.

But Canada also has law allowing its so-called “human rights tribunals” to accept a plaintiff’s freakin’ feelings as evidence. First Amendment notwithstanding, this is where our own glorious leaders plan to take us. The Lancaster incident shows that we’re on our way there.

Why didn’t the mayor of Lancaster say something like this?

“I’m sorry some of you ‘felt excluded’ by me calling this town a Christian community. But if that’s all you’ve got to trouble you, you should be out in the street doing cartwheels for pure joy. Most people have real problems to worry about.

“If you don’t like what I said, that’s just too cotton-pickin’ bad. Last time I looked, we had a First Amendment in this country and I had freedom of speech. I haven’t heard the Constitution’s been amended to get rid of it.

“If you don’t like me, vote me out of office, or whatever. In the meantime, go ____ yourselves.”

When we start putting people into jail for something that they say, we will have ceased to be America and become the cold, stultifying, Stalinist gulag so dear to the hearts of academics and progressives everywhere.

Antelope Valley Human Relations Task Force, you are Stalinists. You are bullies. You are fools, busybodies, agitators, and schnooks. You are un-American. What the major of Lancaster dares not say to you, let others say. Will you slap a hate crime charge on everyone? Shall we empty our prisons of murderers and mobsters to make room for anyone who makes you feel “excluded”?

You creep me out.

American Christians have only themselves to thank for allowing Christ-haters to take over the public sector of our country. Now these villains have begun to encroach upon the private sector. Today, the mayor of Lancaster; tomorrow, they’ll be using the public schools to teach children to rat out their parents for any non-inclusive comments they might make.

The mayor of Lancaster failed to stand up to these people.

Will you?

http://www.chronwatch-america.com:80/articles/6400/1/The-Mayors-Hate-Crime/Page1.html

abc200 previously said:


This is an old probem and the mayor was stupid.
http://www.christian.org.uk/news/20090120/scouts-adopt-islamic-pledge/?e230109
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1096510,00.html
GP2 is so stupid..........
H is definitely not any variety of Christian - just workships the satanic god of consumerism and goes round the World exploiting people ad ripping them off so why complain?
S.

glomarexplorer previously said:


And the epitome of intelligence chimes in with his usual crap.

Too bad the Darwin award skipped him this year once again. However, I remain hopeful, because if you play Russian Roulette long enough, eventually the gun wins.

clinker previously said:

it's simple: separation of church and state. something the bush admin ignored. learn your american history and stop fingerpointing or I'll nuke you. I'll nuke you all ! w/tongue planted firmly in cheek

greenpeace2 previously said:




For the record, the big talk liberal agenda Clinton gov. did almost nothing for AIDS torn Africa. To busy getting BJ's in the Oval Office.

The Bush gov. sent hundreds of millions to help AIDS victims in Africa that were ignored by the socialist lovey dovey Clinton.


Popular in Africa: Bush has given more aid than any other US president

By Steve Bloomfield, Africa Correspondent

As George W Bush works his way through a five-country African tour, most of the elements that make up an average Bush foreign junket will be in place. Chorus of schoolchildren singing to him at the airport? Check. Obligatory "traditional costume", worn with a smirk? Check. Public anger towards one of the world’s most unpopular leaders? Er, not quite.

The US President's visit to Benin, Liberia, Ghana, Rwanda and Tanzania may, on the surface, be about promoting America's funding for Aids treatment, shoring up support for a US military base on the continent, and quietly scoping out new oil opportunities. But there is another, perhaps more important, reason for President Bush's week-long visit to Africa: people actually like him here.

A recent report from the Pew Global Attitudes Project found that "the US image is much stronger in Africa than in other regions of the world". At least 80 per cent of respondents in Ghana, Kenya and Cote d'Ivoire were favourable to the US. In all other sub-Saharan African countries polled, there were more "favourables" than "non-favourables". Part of the reason for that support is money. Lots of it.

When President Bush came to power in 2001, the US spent $1.4bn a year on humanitarian and development aid in Africa. By 2006, the figure had quadrupled to $5.6bn a year. And it is likely to get bigger. The centrepiece of Mr Bush's aid to Africa is the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (Pepfar), a five-year, $15bn Aids prevention and treatment programme launched in 2003. His most recent budget proposes doubling the funding to $30bn over the next five years.

It has helped to fund anti-retroviral (ARV) drugs for 1.3 million people across the continent. Before, the US funded ARV treatment for just 50,000 people.

Taken alongside US funding for malaria prevention, plus the Millennium Challenge Accounts, which provide funding for countries with strong governance records, Mr Bush has done more for Africa than any other US president, according to Joel Barkan, a senior associate at the Washington-based Centre for Strategic and International Studies. "I am a very severe critic of the Bush administration," he said, "but you cannot take away from the president the fact that the commitment of the US, in terms of aid and debt relief, is certainly greater under Bush than Clinton."

For all the work that Bill Clinton has done on Aids prevention through his charitable foundation since he left office, he took little interest in Africa during his presidency. His one and only visit was in 1998, when he apologised for his government’s inaction during the Rwandan genocide. It was also on Mr Clinton's watch that US troops pulled out of Somalia following the Black Hawk Down incident in 1993, leaving the country in the midst of a deadly security vacuum that exists to this day.

For President Bush, this is his second visit – and the fifth for his wife, Laura. Such is the indifference with which the White House has traditionally viewed Africa that Mr Bush is the first incumbent ever to visit the continent more than once. Before Mr Clinton's trip the last US President to step foot on African soil was Franklin D Roosevelt in Casablanca, where he met Winston Churchill during the Second World War.


(You see, Liberals talk big about all the good they will do, then they do little. It took the Conservative Christian Bush to show compassion. Now I expect the usual Bush haters to post their usual rants, but the facts speak for themselves)

abc200 previously said:


Perhaps Bush did have the vision that he could grab Africa's natural resources by his Aids adventure.
But there was a lot of pressure by activists who saw vast profits being made by drug companies through HIV drugs ; Gliead sales 5 billion dollars sales and huge profits.
The internationla pressure on Bush by the Chuches and others as related in this 2001 article made his actions due to pressure not charity.
http://www.zenit.org/article-37?l=english
S.