I must confess that I somehow missed this important news story when it happened. The only reason that I even glimpse at New York 1 is because it’s the default channel when I turn on my Time Warner Cable. The story I heard yesterday made me take a look at the original story.

What immediately amused me was the fact that the NYPD and local politicians are calling this a “hate crime.”

Wait a minute! Hasn’t the Supreme Court ruled that burning the American flag is protected under the first amendment? Hasn’t the Left and their cronies at the ACLU consistently defended this act?

So let’s get this straight. Burning the American flag is freedom of speech, but burning the Rainbow flag is a hate crime – give me a freakin break already! Maybe burning the Rainbow flag in front of the LGBT center was stupid, or even distasteful, but a hate crime?

This incident made me wonder if the American flag is the only flag that you can get away with burning in this country.

Let’s see:

Would burning the Mexican flag be construed as a hate crime against Mexican immigrants? What I do know is that illegal Mexican aliens have burned and stomped on the American flag during their May Day rallies in support of blanket amnesty and open borders. Check out YouTube if you have any doubt.

Would burning the Lebanese or Iraqi flag on a street in Dearborn, Michigan be considered a hate crime against Arabs and Muslims, or political free speech? I wouldn’t want to volunteer to carry out that social experiment. Meanwhile, one can go on YouTube and find dozens of videos of Muslims living in America burning and stomping on our flag. What a great country – eh?

I fully understand the argument of the difference between burning the American flag as opposed to the Rainbow flag. I realize that the stars and stripes represent a nation, and can therefore be seen to represent the nation’s political policies, while the Rainbow flag represents a minority group, but calling this a hate crime is really pushing it. A true hate crime (if you believe in the classification to begin with) should be limited to physically causing a person bodily harm, or killing them. Hate crimes shouldn’t be watered down and expanded to include protection of symbolic inanimate objects. What’s next? Maybe tearing up a poster of the Village People, or destroying a Celine Dion CD in public – please!

The NYPD should be concentrating on stifling the city’s increasing crime rate. They should focus on developing strategies for preventing vicious flash-mobs from forming before some innocent person finally gets killed for being in the wrong place at the wrong time. By comparison, the Rainbow flag burning is pretty trivial. If caught, the person responsible should probably face misdemeanor charges depending on the details of how the burning took place. According to reports, the burned flag wasn’t the property of the center, so perhaps the perpetrator is guilty of trespassing and maybe violating some fire code – at most. My intuition also alerts me to the possibility that this was an “inside job” pulled off to highlight all of the hate that’s supposedly being spread around by the vicious right-wingers in the Tea Party movement. The Left is really getting desperate so I wouldn’t put anything past them.

Stupid – yes.

Hoax – maybe.

Hate crime – no.

None of the stories that I’ve read about this decision explain how the tests are discriminatory. How exactly does a test discriminate? Once a person meets the basic requirements to take a test, whether it’s a test to become a CPA, a licensed real estate broker, or a firefighter, it’s up to the individual if they pass or fail.

The fact that Blacks make up only about 3% of the FDNY seems to bother a lot of people - including Judge Garaufis. I never heard of anyone who was saved from a fire by the FDNY complain about the skin color of the firefighters. Anyway, the Judge noted that blacks in the FDNY fall well short of “other uniformed services.” Does that mean that the tests for those other uniformed services are fair and unbiased? Does the validity of a test now depend on who passes and who fails?

The lawsuit was originally brought by three people who evidently failed the test, and the Vulcan Society, an organization comprised of black NYC firefighters. The Vulcan Society has stated that they would like 60% of all new hires to be black or Hispanic.

This ruling asks the city to come up with a remedy, or a court ordered remedy may be imposed. Can anyone say Racial Quotas?

I can’t give you the official numbers, but anyone who lives in NYC can attest to the fact that a vast majority of NYC traffic agents are black. Is that exam somehow biased against whites? I don’t believe that; I just believe that a greater number of blacks want those jobs as compared to whites.

I have my own theories as to why there aren’t too many black firefighters in NYC. I believe that one of the reasons is that more whites want the job as opposed to blacks. More white applicants lead to more white firefighters – it’s simple mathematics. For many middle class whites being in the FDNY is a family tradition. There are still many second and third generation firefighters in the department. I believe that there are other cultural and socioeconomic reasons for the disparity, but I prefer keep those theories and opinions to myself.

For those people who believe that race-based quotas are good for society, be careful what you wish for. One day you may find yourself or a family member in emergency surgery under the scalpel of a surgeon who made it through medical school because a judge decided that a medical exam was biased or some quota needed to be filled.

A year ago today, US Airways flight 1549 made what some have called a miracle landing in the middle of the Hudson River after its engines were damaged by birds. When all of the 155 passengers walked away from the potential disaster, I’m quite sure that they didn’t think about the racial, ethnic, or gender disparities among US Airways pilots. Instead, they probably considered themselves very lucky to be flying on a plane piloted by a top-notch pilot by the name of Chesley “Sully” Sullenberger.

Reich, a left-wing ideologue, said the following when discussing Obama’s massive infrastructure plan.

“I am concerned, as I’m sure many of you are, that these jobs not simply go to high skilled people who are already professionals or to white male construction workers”

This is a great example as to why the Left loves public works infrastructure spending. It’s their big chance to participate in social engineering and vote buying. The Highways, Bridges, Tunnels, and Railways are supposed to be built by people with no skills, no construction experience, and who are not “professionals.” What a freaking joke!

Reich went on to say that the jobs should go to the chronically unemployed, minorities and women. Is the federal government now supposed to pay for training classes to teach construction techniques and practices to housewives and the homeless?

To all of you white blue collar, democrat males out there; is this what you signed up for when you voted for Obama? It doesn’t really matter, because this is the kind of crap that you are going to get from this bunch, whether you like it or not! I would advise you guys to stop blindly following your union leaders and start thinking for yourselves.

My belief has always been that illegal immigrants from Mexico and South America will wind up getting a large portion of these “stimulus” jobs. In fact, I would bet that the infrastructure program and Comprehensive Immigration Reform (also know as amnesty) will be linked together by the liberals. They will tell us that we desperately need these immigrants to help rebuild our country.

I guess the new catch-phrase will now be: “the jobs laid off Yuppies won’t do and white male construction workers won’t be allowed to do.”