Meanwhile, MMFA, a clearly partisan group that, like the bootlicker, simply echoes the admistration’s talking points, never has its tax exempt status question.

Also, the “Shield Law” contains a natinal security exception; so President Mugabe and his corrupt regime would have just gone after Rosen and his family and co-workers on that basis.

20.Aww…………Free association/acceptance can not be achieved through “social engineering” by progressives. I expect a lawsuit any day to force inclusion of LGBT scoutmasters and who knows what other “problems” progressives will find down the road that will need to be “corrected”.

Of course. Rather than see the vote yesterday as a vote for tolerance, it will be seen as weakness and the progressive sharks will see blood in the water.

And the entire purpose of shield laws in the modern world is to enshrine that some press is more equal than others. If a ‘shield law’ protecting CBS and excluding LGF had been in place, would we have known that CBS was pimping forged documents?

http://commoncts.blogspot.com/2013/05/now-we-know-ten-leading-democrats-wrote.html

You’d get Bambi-in-the-headlamps stares. You’d get spluttering and red faces. You’d get insults one might expect from kids in the seventh grade. But you’d get no satisfactory answers.

I had a very interesting exchange with one statist lefty just the other day. I was told — for at least the thousandth time — that because I’m a libertarian, I’m a “conspiracy theorist.”

I explained that conspiracy theory assumes that grand ideas can be effectively implemented by a central elite, capable of marshaling the cooperation of a wide a diverse bunch of people. That libertarians don’t believe this can be done — which is exactly why we’re libertarians in the first place. And that, therefore, calling us “conspiracy theorists” makes no sense.

I got a stare, and spluttering. He didn’t know how to answer me, because his keepers hadn’t told him what to think about it.

The USA needs a strong 4th estate to keep the sunlight on government actions. Hopefully congress can pass a shield law to give protections to journalists and ensure they can continue to dig into the government actions.

Yet leftie orgs were also targeted.
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2013-05-14/irs-sent-same-letter-to-democrats-that-fed-tea-party-row-taxes

This is exactly like when conservatives railed against NGO’s and their non profit status and then organizations like Greenpeace were targeted in a blanket sweep.

The difference in this case is the IRS decided to organize by political affiliation and that is the problem. If they would have looked at all groups to see if they had the privileged of Tax Free donations in the same manner, it would be just fine. Its hard to say this is dem led program when we can see Several liberal groups denied in the same sweep, and I have seen no evidence that says this was a White House Led initiative.

We can’t always know what someone else’s motive was for committing a horrible act. We can enable other people to keep such an act from being committed against them.

Comment by Lori Heine — May 23, 2013 @ 2:13 pm – May 23, 2013

Perfectly put.

But the reason liberals push “hate crimes” has nothing to do with preventing such acts from being committed; it’s merely using such acts to impose speech codes.

Such as the screaming fit after the Giffords shooting about “civility” and how words were “causing” people to act violently.

Which of course magically vanished as a cause-effect relationship when the words of the LGBT community, Dan Savage, Joe Jervis, and the SPLC caused Floyd Corker to go on a shooting rampage.

Whenever liberals start ranting about “hate crimes”, ask them to affirm the following:

1) I am a bigot who can only be restrained from attacking or killing people I don’t like by stricter sentencing laws.

2) Certain words and statements must be banned because I am incapable of hearing them without flying into a violent murderous rage that will result in the death of people around me.

What you’ll find is that the “hate crimes” supporter, like all gun-grabbers and Obama DOJ/IRS supporters, does not believe the rationale for such laws applies to them — which demonstrates that their demands for “hate crimes” laws have nothing to do with society’s benefit and everything to do with their selfish fascist desire to use the force of law to criminalize and punish the behavior of others.

In follow-up to last week’s tragedy in Manhattan, I did find the time today to visit the site. It’s New York, so the scene is pretty much back to normal with no physical evidence in sight. Still, some of the locals have built a small shrine on the corner — mostly candles, a few poems and photos (interestingly, many spelled the victim’s name “Mark” rather than “Marc” as in most of the news stories). More than a few people were stopping to view or pay their respects.

Good on them, I say.

Islam is different from the other religions. It relies, fundamentally, on the Sword in a way that the others don’t. It took Christianity hundreds of years to do anything like what Islam was doing from day one. The Bible urges Christians to spread the word by their teaching, faith and good example; but the Koran commands Muslims to literally conquer the world. Not to absolutely convert everybody in the world (which is why they do usually allow Christian or Jewish minorities in their midst); but to use physical (military) force to gain universal political hegemony for Islam.