Who Hates Sarah Palin?
According to many in the media, we truly have discovered someone worse than Hitler - and it's Sarah Palin. Head to any left-wing blog or even CNN for that matter and you'll find the zaniest of conspiracies -- froth that even a dude with rabies would find unseemly.
So how can one person create so much bile among folks who claim to be the most tolerant in the universe? I mean, liberals are the good people: They're open-minded, caring and of course, fair. But somehow, a Republican lady in her 40s is exempt from this treatment. Perhaps, she truly is the devil in a dress, a ghoul that eats children and pollutes the planet and possibly beats Barack Obama, the patron saint of every customer buying wheat germ in bulk at GNC.
But I know the real reason why every single elitist media type is terrified of her. They've never met her. And by "her," I don't mean Sarah Palin. I mean "her", an actual normal woman with a bunch of kids, an average husband and no desire to watch "The L Word." She's scary to these folks the way Wal-Mart is scary to them: Both are alien to someone who blogs about their chakras. They won't go there, because they've never been there.
To them, hating Sarah Palin is a symptom of larger bigotry against the rest of us, the normal. If they saw her at a party, they would wonder how she got in. She's the anti-Obama, the anti-New York Times, the anti-everything that Tim Robbins loves, which is why I love her - and you should too. And if you disagree with me, then you sir are worse than Hitler.
The vastly incorrect Jeremy Clarkson on the difficulties of charity
He has recently been to Cambodia, it seems
Since we're told charity begins at home, it's better, I've always thought, to give 1m pounds to a hapless British person than 10 cents to an organisation that provides sandwiches for prisoners in Turkey. Now, however, I have decided that, actually, charity begins in Cambodia.
Some people get all dewy-eyed about Africa. That's jolly noble, but I don't see the point because I fear that no matter how much money you pump in, the bejewelled pigs that run the place will pump it straight back out again, into the coffers of Kalashnikov and Mercedes-Benz. The only thing I'd send to the dark continent is a team of SAS hitmen to shoot the likes of Mr Mugabe in the middle of his face.
Others would say that we have enough problems on our own shores without getting all teary over the children of Mr Pot. I disagree, because these days, every time I think of underprivileged people in Britain, the hideous face of Shannon Matthews's mum pops into my head, all greasy, fat and stupid, and it's hard to summon up any sympathy at all.
Cambodia, though, is different. It's a country of 14m people but between them they have only about 5m legs. In fact, there are 25,000 amputees, the highest ratio per capita of any country in the world. This is not because Cambodians are especially clumsy. It is because of landmines. Nobody knows how many mines were laid during the endless cycle of warfare, but it's sure to be in the millions. What we do know is that since the Vietnamese invaded in 1979 and drove the madman Pol Pot into the hills, 63,000 people have trodden on one. One man has had his left leg blown off four times. They gave him a good prosthetic after the first and second explosions, but since then he's had to make his own out of wood.
And it's still going on today. In most places in the world, you can get three rice harvests per year from your paddy field. In Cambodia, it's one. This is partly because the Khmer like a weird sort of rice that's harder to grow, but mostly it's because you set off with your plough and within minutes there's a big bang and your water buffalo has become a crimson mist. As a result of the ordnance lying in every field, no one is fighting for a right to roam in Cambodia. They have no equivalent of the Ramblers Association. They have no concept of Janet Street-Porter. In fact they have no concept of England.
Because the education is so poor, most people there believe the world is made up of four countries: Thailand, Laos, Cambodia and Vietnam. Everywhere else is France. All white people are therefore French. Angelina Jolie, who adopted a Cambodian baby, does much to help clear the landmines and has been made a Cambodian citizen, is French. I was French. And every night, most of the men settle down to watch Manchester United and Chelsea slug it out for honours in the French Premier League. I'd never met an adult anywhere in the world (apart from America) who'd never heard of Great Britain. In Cambodia nobody had.
What's more, you will never see a Cambodian person wearing sunglasses. Mainly this is because the average wage in Cambodia is less than $800 a year and so Ray-Bans are a bit out of range. But also it's because Cambodians all have flat noses. So sunglasses simply fall onto the floor every time you hop to the shops, and every time your buffalo explodes.
That's what did it for me. The sunglasses. Not the education. Not the notion of living in a country where there is no Janet Street-Porter. The landmines made my eyes prickle, but my heart just mushroomed over the idea that they can't afford to wear shades. And that even if they could, they'd keep falling off. I have therefore decided that I must do something. Unfortunately, however, we all reach a point like this when we decide we must help, and then it's so very hard to know what should be done next.
Secretly we all know that for every pound we donate to a large charity, only 2p actually reaches the people we have in mind. The rest is spent on adverts for highly paid co-ordinators in The Guardian and expensive offices in London's glittering West End.
You always feel you want to go to the root of the problem. But in the bee that's come to nest in my roost, that'll be hard. Earlier this summer a team of Australian doctors happened upon a little girl in the town of Siem Reap. Her face had been horribly disfigured, by a bloody landmine I suppose, and they were overwhelmed with a need to help. They went to meet her parents, and her father was keen that his daughter be sent to Australia for plastic surgery. Her mother, however, went ballistic when she discovered the poor child would once again look normal. "How will she be able to beg then?" she asked. And the Aussie medics were sent packing.
I can't even ring the Cambodian government for help because I fear it would be extremely enthusiastic and then all the money I sent over would be spent on fixtures and fittings in the finance minister's next luxury hotel. That's if I could raise any money in the first place. It's hard when money's tight here and everyone else has their own pet project.
I suppose I could write to Ray-Ban asking it to design a cheap pair of shades that can be worn by someone who has no nose. But I think it'd be better if I started work on some designs for the most brilliant mine-clearing vehicle the world has ever seen. I'm thinking of strapping some ramblers together, and then . . .
Return of 'hate crimes' plan looms in Congress
Legal crackdown on biblical condemnation of homosexuality feared
A federal "hate crimes" plan to criminalize speech or thoughts critical of homosexuality - dropped from Congress' agenda earlier because of a veto threat from President Bush - may be resurrected before the election, according to an opponent of such advocacy laws. "Here's ultimately what we expect," Mathew Staver, founder of Liberty Counsel and dean of the Liberty University School of Law, told WND today. "The hate crimes plan is to be offered as an amendment to the Fiscal Year 2009 Department of Defense reauthorization bill. That's what the word is, that it's going to be offered as an amendment."
Pro-homosexual advocates long have sought such a law but opponents fear it would be used to crack down on those who maintain a biblical perspective that condemns homosexuality as sin. Observers note that it would criminalize speech and thought, since other criminal actions already are addressed with current statutes.
Canada already has an aggressive "hate crimes" law, and there authorities there have gone so far as to tell a Christian pastor he must recant his faith because of the legislation that bans statements that can be "perceived" as condemning another person.
Some states already have similar statutes, too, and in New Mexico, a photography company run by two Christians was fined $6,600 by the state for declining to provide services to a lesbian couple setting up a lookalike "marriage" ceremony. Also, Colorado Gov. Bill Ritter recently signed a bill into law that opponents describe as draconian, with one analyst expressing the opinion that it actually could be read as outlawing publication of the Bible in the state because of its injunctions against homosexuality.
Staver said his Washington sources said the defense bill was planned for a vote this week only hours after Congress was scheduled to reconvene, but the work was delayed and the apparent schedule for the vote now is Monday. Given an affirmative cloture vote in the Senate, the bill then could be on the floor for a formal approval within as little as 24-48 hours. Staver said the proposal had been made to include the "hate crimes" legislation in the Fiscal Year 2008 appropriations, but the spending bill was passed last winter without the amendment because of Bush's veto threat. The House already had passed the proposal as a stand-alone bill and had it a significant amount of support in the Senate, but its support base started fracturing there when Bush said it was unneeded and promise a veto, Staver said.
Bush has gone on record specifically noting the "hate crimes" legislation would create special privileges for those who identify themselves with an alternative sexual lifestyle.
Staver said since criminal acts already are addressed with existing law, the only impact of "hate crimes" legislation would be to criminalize free speech and religious speech and a person's thoughts. For example, an assailant convicted of attacking a heterosexual might get six months in jail. Under a "hate crimes" plan, if the victim reported being homosexual, the sentence might be enhanced significantly, analysts said. Those who are concerned now should contact their members in the U.S. Senate to express their concerns, he said.
Bush also used the threat of a veto to head off another pro-homosexual congressional plan, called the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, that would have granted special employment privileges to homosexual individuals. Bush's advisory then also cited the plan as being "inconsistent with the right to the free exercise of religion."
According to Rev. Ted Pike, who also has battled "hate crimes" plans, Staver's concern "is justified." "According to the August 22nd Washington Blade, 'Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass), a lead sponsor of the bill in the House, has called on the Senate to pass the measure this year as a freestanding bill.' Frank, a homosexual, is as much a bellwether of pro-homosexual legislative trends in the House, as is Sen. Edward Kennedy in the Senate," Pike reported. "The administration favors strong criminal penalties for violent crime, including crimes based on personal characteristics, such as race, color, religion, or national origin. However . if [the "hate crimes" plan] were presented to the president, his senior advisers would recommend that he veto the bill," the White House said during the earlier discussion.
The statement said state and local criminal laws already provide penalties for the violence addressed by the new federal crime defined in the bill. "State and local law enforcement agencies and courts have the capability to enforce those penalties and are doing so effectively. There has been no persuasive demonstration of any need to federalize such a potentially large range of violent crime enforcement." the statement said. It said the administration believes all violent crimes are unacceptable, regardless of the victims, and should be punished "firmly."
Former White House insider Chuck Colson, in his Breakpoint commentary, at one point decried what he described as a "Thought Crimes" plan. "This bill is not about hate. It's not even about crime. It's about outlawing peaceful speech - speech that asserts that homosexual behavior is morally wrong," he said. "Some say we need this law to prevent attacks on homosexuals. But we already have laws against assaults on people and property," Colson continued. "Moreover, according to the FBI, crimes against homosexuals in the United States have dropped dramatically in recent years. In 2005, out of 863,000 cases of aggravated assault, just 177 cases were crimes of bias against homosexuals." He noted, as WND earlier reported, in other locations, such as England, Sweden, Canada, and even Philadelphia, where similar laws have been approved, the "Thought Police" already have prosecuted Christians.
In Philadelphia, a grandmother was hauled to jail and threatened with 47 years in prison for proclaiming her Christianity on a public street, Repent America has reported. The woman, Arlene Elshinnawy, 75, and grandmother of three, was holding a sign: "Truth is hate to those who hate the truth," before she was hauled off by police officers.
New Zealand man freed from jail after false rape evidence admission
This doesn't happen, according to feminists
A Rotorua man's former partner has admitted gathering false evidence which led to his being jailed for rape before a court quashed his conviction.
Robert Sutton, who owns the Happy Angler store at Mourea, spent 10 months behind bars after being convicted in October 2005 of two violent rapes he says he never committed. He was released following a successful appeal and feels the wheels of justice are finally starting to turn in his favour.
The main complainant in the case against him, his former partner Marion Anne Carter, has this week admitted her role in Mr Sutton's wrongful conviction, pleading guilty to perverting the course of justice. Now Mr Sutton has just one wish - that she too spend 10 months in jail. "I shared a cell with a guy who was doing 17 years non-parole for murder. It didn't make sleeping very easy. I don't wish it on anyone - but her."
Carter, who lives in Te Awamutu, pleaded guilty this week in the District Court at Te Awamutu and will appear in court in Hamilton on October 31 for sentencing. The charge of perverting the course of justice carries a maximum penalty of seven years' jail.
Mr Sutton was sentenced to 10 years' imprisonment in October 2005 after being convicted of 15 charges - two of rape, nine of assault and four relating to assault with a weapon.
Carter had told police she was raped by Mr Sutton after he broke down a locked bedroom door. There were two other complainants involved in the other charges. Mr Sutton walked free after serving 10 months and one day in jail. He fought his conviction from behind bars. The Court of Appeal quashed his convictions in light of new evidence showing Carter was "involved in gathering false evidence in support of the allegations prior to the trial".
The police decided in August last year they would not put Mr Sutton on trial a second time. He told The Daily Post yesterday he wrote to Police Minister Annette King and Bay of Plenty police district commander Superintendent Gary Smith following his release, asking that Carter be arrested and charged.
"I'm pleased with the outcome, that they did charge her with perverting the course of justice. I think she deserves a prison sentence the same as I did ... then [she shall know] what her lies can get her into."
Mr Sutton said her arrest also sent a strong message to women about the consequences of making false allegations. That, in turn, was good news for those with legitimate complaints. "The police will then take more notice of women who are genuinely raped."
Asked what had happened between he and Carter that would cause her to falsify evidence against him, Mr Sutton said their 10-year relationship had been rocky and there were regular arguments about money and the business. He said the whole ordeal had made him "very gun shy of women" and he would not jump into another relationship but was now starting to enjoy life again following a harrowing three years. Loyal local customers and "some very good friends" had helped him through a very tough time, he said.
"It's been a hell of a battle for me, getting back into my business again. I'm lucky the people of Mourea have been wonderful but financially it just about cost me the shop."
He estimates his time in prison plus the ordeal of the court process have cost him about $100,000, which included the cost of hiring a lawyer for his appeal. Mr Sutton said he was considering seeking compensation. "It would be good if I could but I'm not sure what tack to take now."
Source. (Via Strange Justice)
Political correctness is most pervasive in universities and colleges but I rarely report the incidents concerned here as I have a separate blog for educational matters.
American "liberals" often deny being Leftists and say that they are very different from the Communist rulers of other countries. The only real difference, however, is how much power they have. In America, their power is limited by democracy. To see what they WOULD be like with more power, look at where they ARE already very powerful: in America's educational system -- particularly in the universities and colleges. They show there the same respect for free-speech and political diversity that Stalin did: None. So look to the colleges to see what the whole country would be like if "liberals" had their way. It would be a dictatorship.
For more postings from me, see TONGUE-TIED, GREENIE WATCH, EDUCATION WATCH INTERNATIONAL, FOOD & HEALTH SKEPTIC, GUN WATCH, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE, AUSTRALIAN POLITICS, DISSECTING LEFTISM, IMMIGRATION WATCH INTERNATIONAL and EYE ON BRITAIN. My Home Pages are here or here or here. Email me (John Ray) here. For readers in China or for times when blogger.com is playing up, there is a mirror of this site here.