Adams wrote the piece in what was supposed to be a satirical attack on hate crimes legislation. In pursuit of that vein, he doesn't let anything get the way of his point, such as the facts.
The original situation took place in Wilmington, NC on July 17. In early morning hours, Chaz Housand and Chet Saunders were beaten into unconsciouness by a group of thugs.
Housand suffered broken facial bones and lacerations; Saunders sustained a concussion and internal bruising, and says that his fine motor skills have been impaired. Neither remembers what happened so neither can say whether or not sexual orientation has a role in their attack.
However, there were witnesses to the attack:
Witnesses said three men had beaten the victims and kicked them when they were down.
“This is our town,” one of the suspects had said, before kicking a victim one last time and leaving, according to the account witnesses gave police.
. . .In the hours after the incident, police received multiple tips. First they got a description of the suspects’ vehicle, Blanton said. Then 911 dispatchers received a call telling police the suspects were at a home on Dapple Court.
Officers went to the residence and saw three men, who fit the suspects’ descriptions, sitting in the living room. One of them had blood on his shoe, Blanton said.
. . . Officers charged Melvin Freanthony Spicer, 25; Daniel Minwoo Lee, 21; and Jong Tae Chung, 27, each with one count of assault inflicting serious injury, according to a statement from Officer Crystal Williamson.
So why does Adams slime his way in? Apparently one of the young man who was attacked had been involved in lobbying attempts to change North Carolina's hate crimes legislation.
So, as Adams seems to imply, forget everything else. The young men probably got drunk and deserved whatever happened:
While neither Housand nor Saunders knows exactly what happened, both said they can think of no reason someone would attack them, other than their sexual orientation. I guess what they are saying is that they have easily discernible characteristics, which make them look “obviously gay.”
. . . People like Chaz Housand and Chet Saunders do need something to protect them from their own stupidity. Saunders told the local paper “I never really expected something like this to happen.” Clearly, anyone who believes he can get so drunk that he forgets much of the night in, of all places, downtown Wilmington is suffering from severe intellectual hernia.
So, let me be clear about where I stand on this issue: We should not, especially in a time of deep budgetary crisis, use public funds to protect the drunk and stupid from their own drunkenness and stupidity.
To the extent that the drunk and stupid are given protection from their own poor decision-making it should come from private initiatives. And so I’ve come up with an initiative that will save the North Carolina taxpayers from having to waste precious resources passing new, or modifying old, hate crimes legislation.
It amazes me. Rush Limbaugh and company seems to always praise conservatives for that "rugged individualism" and spirit that made America great.
I see very few conservatives embodying this image. I see a bunch of overpaid thinktank sucking hacks who really need to sit down before they ruin the public discourse any further.
I can't honestly say what happened to Housand and Saunders. But whatever the case may be, they don't deserved to be slimed by anyone, much less Adams.
What a coward.
