"I (swastika) Obama" carved into golf course green

I would say it is a sign of the times.,

Wished they would be so eager to begin the independent 9/11 investigation.

If that same message had been printed on a t-shirt or bumper sticker, would the FBI and Secret Service still be involved? I lay money they would. I'm half-tempted to have a t-shirt printed and test that wager.

The fact that the FBI and Secret Service are involved is more damaging to and revealing of Obama than anything carved into that golf course. I can't tell you how many times I saw Bush's and Clinton's faces on negative political expressions in close proximity to a swastika (or the like). As far as I know, the FBI and Secret Service didn't go after the people for "hate" messages. If they did it certainly wasn't publicized or popular, and previous presidents were smart enough to keep it quiet. The fact that the Big Brother agencies are involved is, in and of itself, it's own message. The message there is, "Paint the emperor in an unbecoming light and Big Brother will come after you."

I guarantee you that had the swastika been an actual heart symbol, Big Brother would not be pursuing the artists. At worst, the only issue pressed (which is really the only issue to begin with) would have been the vandalized turf, and possibly trespassing. Even those might not have been pressed.

Change has definitely come to America.

”The vandals snuck in at night and carved their message of hate, according to the owner of the country club. ”

How, exactly, is this a message of hate? I took it as a truth-based message of, “We know who you are, who you work for and what you're up to. The gig is up. Facts concerning you have leaked out into public consciousness and recognition. That's your fault for not being more careful to hide it; don't blame us for noticing. Many of us do not approve. If you don't like it, then perhaps you should stop conducting your self in a manner consistent with other historical socialist and communist leaders. If you don't like it, then perhaps you should make a conscious effort to distance yourself from that sort of behavior.” Granted, the vandals had absolutely no right to damage someone else's property. Still, they could have been more effective in their message by being more tactful, but is this really a hate message?

Has anyone else noticed the increasing frequency and relentlessness with which the h-word being divisively thrown around in the past few months? It's all over the news, subtly implanted into any given story with surgical calculation and precision. On CSPAN I even heard them talking about amendments the FY2010 Defense Budget that expand the scope and subject matter of hate crimes. Hate crime laws are frequently but quietly tacked onto completely unrelated bills at the last moment. And our attention is being drawn more and more to hate and hate crime bills.

Total, complete, silent tolerance of everything – whether you despise it or not, whether you believe in it or not and whether or not you see it as a threat to your way of life – is being crammed down your throat on a subconscious level, and we had better recognize it and get a handle on it right now, while it still matters. Otherwise, within the next decade or so, we will find ourselves begrudgingly going through our lives, complacent about the unimaginable new “norms” that we face at every turn. Once that mindset of complete complacency about EVERYTHING becomes our standard, all subsequent generations will be tolerant of things they should not and otherwise would not, without even questioning it in any given instance.

There is a distinction to be made between hate and speaking out in a tactful, considerate manner against things with which we disagree. However, the hate crime laws make no such distinction. If there is an issue with which you disagree, too bad. There is no tactful, intelligent manner in which you can utter a single word or even state a personal opinion about it without violating any hate crime laws that might exist and be pertinent to the issue at hand. No, you are to shut up, sit on your first amendment rights, go with the imposed flow, take it and let it happen with zero opposition and zero stated opinion.

I'm sure I'm opening myself up for attack here, but I personally believe that the ideologies of political correctness and unreasonable tolerance are two of the major factors degrading and destroying this country, and two of the most effective engines of world government advocates. In fact, I know this to be the case (which is, in itself, and entirely separate thread). The thing is, you are welcome to exercise your right to free speech, using it to attack me and slam for my beliefs. I welcome it and am big enough to take it. I am not susceptible to the mindset being fostered where I don't have to be big enough to take it or even be exposed to it because my government has passed a flurry of laws to limit my exposure to it, to keep me from getting my feelings hurt, and where those laws preclude me from being responsible to stand up for what I believe in and retort back. As I've said many times before, if you are always careful to refrain from speaking on any matter that might offend someone else, then you'll find yourself going through life silent and begrudgingly complacent. Is that what America is all about? That's what they want, that's what they are slowly-but-surely getting and that's what their hate crime laws are designed to foster. You cannot speak on any given matter without offending SOMEONE (and that's the way it should be) but you should still speak your mind and stand up for what you believe in. Our Founders encouraged such an atmosphere. So rip me up if you like. Call me every name in the book for my beliefs. I can dish it out as well as take it. My middle fingers are strong and I'm not afraid to use them.

Now, am I advocating expression/action of hate? Not at all, although I really couldn't care less who hates me, or who expresses such hatred. As I alluded to before, there is a distinction to be made between hateful speech/actions and tactfully giving someone an earful of your position and/or choosing not to associate yourself with people you do not like. That distinction should be based on common sense, proper education and sensitivity to your fellow man (or woman) – NOT defined and enforced by blanket laws which say I can't utter a word of disagreement on a particular subject. If we feel that someone is attacking us then we should retort back and debate the matter – not run screaming and crying to the cops. There are things I hate and I'll be damned if I will let some lawyer or bureaucrat stifle me from speaking out on them when I know I'm doing so in a considerate, intelligent, tactful and constructive manner.

So how do we combat the ever-increasing influx of far-overgeneralized hate crime laws? How do we avert them taking us where we're about to end up? Anyone who speaks in opposition to any hate crime law, current or pending, is quickly painted as an unamerican hater. Yet, inaction and complacency will quickly put us in the world painted above, which, in my opinion, is far more dangerous then being called unamerican.

I hate hate crime laws, the people who blindly vote for them for fear of being given a jacket, and the people who quietly and deceitfully sneak them into the law books. Yeah, the h-word; I said it, and I DARE anyone to come through my door, giving me lip about it!