What is the logic of Hate Crimes legislation?

Do some victims deserve less justice? - The Boston Globe:

"why should 'hate crimes' motivated by racial, religious, or sexual bigotry be punished more severely than equally hateful crimes motivated by contempt for the homeless? If a bunch of hoodlums murder a man by setting him on fire in his wheelchair, what moral difference does it make whether they despised him for being disabled (covered by the new bill) or for being a street person (not covered)? Is it worse to douse a man with gasoline and strike a match while shouting, 'We hate cripples!' than to do the exact same thing while shouting 'We hate the homeless' -- or 'We hate skinheads' or 'We hate Communists'?
It is indecent for the government to declare that a murder or mugging or rape is somehow more terrible when the murderer or mugger or rapist is motivated by bigotry against certain favored groups. The inescapable implication is that murders, muggings, and rapes committed against other groups are less terrible."

In a society dedicated to the ideal of "equal justice under law" -- the words are chiseled above the entrance to the Supreme Court -- it is immoral and grotesque to enact legal rules that make some victims of hatred are more equal than others.

In fact, the law has no business intensifying the punishment for violent crimes motivated by bigotry at all. Murderers should be prosecuted and punished with equal vehemence no matter why they murder -- whether out of hatred or sadistic thrill-seeking or revenge or the promise of money. It is not the criminal's evil thoughts that society has a right to punish, but his evil deeds.

I have always believed that attacks are equally hurtful to those involved & society at large, regardless of the motives of the attackers. Hate crimes legislation is really an attempt to regulate thought, but society should only be concerned with behavior.

I imagine that prosecutors & defense attorneys spend a lot of time trying to define the motive for an attack. While that is probably useful, I hope it doesn't take investigative time away from proving who committed an attack. It would be a shame to convict the wrong parties, or only some parties involved, because valuable time was wasted trying to prove that this was a Hate Crime.

Daimler sells Chrysler for $7.4 Billion, keeping $1.6 billion in debt

Chrysler Sold to Cerberus for $7.4 Billion:

"The Chrysler Group has been sold to Cerberus Capital Management LP for $7.4 billion dollars. This also means that Chrysler is the first of the big three that is privately-owned.

Cerberus will own 80.1 percent of the company, whereas Daimler will continue to own the remaining 19.9 percent (for what reason, we cannot say). By transferring the new holding company -- to be called Chrysler Holding LLC -- to Cerberus free of debt, Daimler has to foot an additional bill of $1.6 billion. Cerberus will be on the hook for pension and health care obligations, however.

In terms of the future, things look pretty muddled. Cerberus is known for buying companies on the brink of bankruptcy and then 'instituting drastic measures to make them profitable again.' Could this mean the selling off of certain brands to the highest bidder? (Selling Jeep to GM comes to mind.) Could this mean the scrapping of certain projects? (Goodbye Challenger?) Could it mean some serious cutbacks in employee benefits? "

Daimler taking on over a billion dollars in debt to get out illustrates just how bad the situation is for American auto companies - they owe so much to their former employees (and future retirees) as pension & medical benefits that we'll probably see all three of them get out of their obligations via bankruptcy or legislation.
Ultimately, the American public will pay for these benefits as either inflated prices on American cars, increased taxes, and/or profits going overseas.

News-Leader.com | Business:

"'The Germans never knew really quite what to do with Chrysler,' Cheetham said. 'Managing across the pond and managing this very, very different business is very difficult.'

It all looked different in the mid-1990s. Daimler-Benz was eagerly searching for new markets and opportunities, at the dawn of what many thought would be an age of global consolidation. Chrysler was an ideal target, with cleverly designed, efficiently built minivans, pickups and Jeeps.

Throw in a rich country that was car crazy and it made perfect sense.

Daimler and Chrysler said it was a 'merger of equals,' but then-Chief Executive Juergen Schrempp later dismissed that in an interview, leading to a lawsuit from billionaire investor Kirk Kerkorian. He lost, and it was clear the center of power had shifted to Stuttgart, Germany."

With the American leadership chased out in the '90s and the German leadership leaving now, it will be difficult to stay focused on the business of building cars & trucks. I hope they bring in some good talent and don't just hold a big garage sale.

Retooling likely for newly purchased Chrysler - Los Angeles Times:

"Although Cerberus is ponying up all those billions, most of the money will be pumped directly into the new Chrysler Corp.'s automotive and financial operations. Only $1.35 billion would go directly to Daimler, which in turn would lend Chrysler $400 million and pay a variety of closing costs and other fees that would result in a net cost to the German automaker of $650 million.

'In effect, Daimler is paying Cerberus to assume the risk of owning Chrysler and its $19 billion of underfunded healthcare liabilities,' "

. . .

"In addition to the automotive organization, Cerberus would gain control of Chrysler Financial, the company's $57-billion lending arm.

It is expected to meld some of that unit into another of its recent acquisitions, GMAC Financial Services, to shave costs.

"I looked at this deal and didn't see at first glance how it made sense," said Tulane University finance professor Peter Ricchiuti, a former Wall Street broker and an equity market specialist. "I wasn't sure what Cerberus could do that DaimlerChrysler couldn't. But if they can somehow combine a lot of the operation of Chrysler Financial with GMAC, that would help make a difference."

Ricchiuti and other analysts see Cerberus as being in a better position to extract wage and benefit concessions from Chrysler's unions than was DaimlerChrysler.

That's not a process that can be accomplished overnight, but one potential advantage Cerberus gains is that Chrysler has acknowledged its failings and begun to develop small cars and fuel-efficient engines to help it weather the changing market.

Chrysler has launched a major housecleaning aimed at eliminating 13,000 North American manufacturing and salaried jobs and shutting several factories. Those are cost-cutting moves Cerberus won't have to make, freeing the company to concentrate its turnaround efforts on improving Chrysler's operating efficiencies and its product portfolio."

This all sounds good, but American manufacturers make big vehicles because that's what the public wants to drive - despite the cost of fuel. Retooling to compete head to head with the imports puts them at a disadvantage making lower profit vehicles in competition with the world's experts in that market. This sounds like tough times coming for the auto-workers.

Scientology vs the BBC

BBC NEWS | The Editors:

"It's not a question of us setting out to call Scientology a cult - it's just a question of us asking legitimate questions, and their organisation being unwilling to engage seriously with us. And when you go in as a journalist to try and deal with that, it's explosive. I'm now dealing with a situation in which the Church of Scientology has released a video to all MPs and peers accusing Panorama, of staging a demonstration outside one of their offices in London and making a death threat - or as they call it, a terrorist death threat - against Scientologists. The BBC, accused of terrorism.

The Church did, at first, agree to be involved. Over a day and a half, they organised formal interviews for us - they wanted us to talk to actresses Anne Archer and Kirstie Alley, as well as other celebrities and sports stars. They lined them all up, one after the other, and they talked about what Scientology meant to them. They were convincing and strong - Kirstie Alley in particular was very persuasive. John asked why some people say that it's a sinister cult, and about claims of brainwashing. Which, for the record, is not an allegation we've made - I don't want Scientologists in the UK to think that that's our view.

We completed the interviews, then three or four days before transmission, we received solicitors' letters from California saying that the interviewees no longer wanted to take part. So we were obliged to remove them.

In a sense, they've shot themselves in the foot by refusing to allow us to broadcast those viewpoints, when that was what we wanted to do. The Church rejects all criticism, and disputes that they offered us conditions on access which we couldn't accept."

Religions that are intentionally opaque to outsiders are frightening to the general public. In this era of terrorism, their leaders need to understand that the world is bigger than just their group - and that mankind is cruel to frightening things we don't understand. On the other hand, mankind generally ignores things that have been demystified. A little positive PR could have gone along way towards providing the freedom they desire.

Opening a racial Pandora's Box in California

American Thinker Blog: Opening a racial Pandora's Box in California:

"Yesterday, America moved one baby step closer to apartheid, a society in which racial groups are officially considered unequal and consigned to their own separate spheres under the law. California's supreme court granted a temporary stay in a murder trial about to begin, on the unprecedented ground that the county where the crime took place and the trial was to be held does not have enough residents of the same color as the defendant, who is black.
. . .
Since we are guaranteed a jury of our peers, if the stay is upheld and a change of venue required by the California supremes, the justices would in effect be ruling that being of a different race can make one not a peer and unable to judge fairly in the eyes of the law."

We need to get back to the basics that made this country great - Balkanizing the country does not improve anyone's life.

Polar Bears having babies - haven't they heard about Global Warming?

Polar Bear Baby Boom Occurring in Eastern Arctic, Will Media Notice? | NewsBusters.org:

"Despite all the carping and whining by folks like soon-to-be-Dr. Al Gore and his not so merry band of sycophant devotees about global warming killing polar bears, there is actually a baby boom occurring in this species in Canada’s eastern Arctic."

In the early 70's, when Earth Day was first celebrated, "they" were concerned about a new Ice Age coming (I was there to hear the spiel & read the handouts) - now it's global warming. Perhaps weather cycles occur in patterns that are longer than the average TV show, and need to be viewed with a little historical perspective and an understanding of outside influences - like the Sun.

For some people, life is all about controlling other people's activities. We shouldn't let them control us - we should educate ourselves and make decisions on our own.

PBS Suppression of the Film : "Islam vs. Islamists"

Pajamas Media: Film Review: "Islam vs. Islamists":

"Burke’s doc is a riveting and creatively made film about the most important subject of our time: what to do about radical Islam? It confronts this dilemma in a sly, novelistic manner, inter-weaving the stories of good, moderate Muslims with the Imams and supposedly “true Muslims” who, not surprisingly, accuse the moderate Muslims of not being Muslims at all. Soon enough we learn these Imams are apologists for terrorism and for the worst kind of medieval religious sadism.
... our Public Broadcasting network, an organization supported by taxpayer money, is practicing the most obvious censorship. PBS is operating here in the manner of similar institutions in the former Soviet Union and in modern day Iran – financing artists and then withholding distribution of their work when it is not deemed ideologically “correct”. It’s a form of thought-control and it’s unconscionable.
HOW CAN I SEE THIS FILM?

As of now, you can’t. There have been three public screenings so far, two in Washington and one in New York (standing room only). Another is under discussion for Los Angeles. Pajamas Media will keep you apprised if this happens.

WHAT CAN I DO?

You can sign the petition protesting PBS’ censorship here (http://www.freethefilm.net/)."

Why our taxpayer dollars are spent on the arts when there are people starving in Africa is beyond me . . . with 500 channels on your local Cable or Satellite system, there is absolutely no need for government funded propaganda.

Modern cars have "black boxes" - some people worry about that

Security Watch: Is your car spying on you? - CNET reviews:

"In California, aides to Governor Schwarzenegger have floated an idea in which these same MVEDRs could be enlisted to record mileage and thus impose an additional mileage tax on those drivers who drove greater distances between refuelings. In Oregon, a similar proposal calls for MVEDRs to include GPS transponders in order to tax cars only while driving within the state boundaries."

So if you work hard to improve your gas mileage, the state will increase your taxes! Might as well just put the pedal to the metal....

Most of the comments on this article are concerned about privacy violations. None of them cite actual violations. These devices are installed to help manufacturers improve their products, fight lawsuits, and provide better service to their customers.

Folks who're worried about their privacy should take it up with their legislators - asking them to determine who should own this data, how it is to be controlled, and what penalties should be available for violations.