It may have been off the beam to add the hate-crime charges to his bill of particulars, even though he was full of hate. But just for example, there is an order of magnitude difference between spray-painting your gang logo on the side of a building, and spray painting swastikas on the side of a synagogue, wouldn't you say?

While I can appreciate the attempt to make alegal distinction between the two, it is a very sticky pass to cut so close to the core issues of free thought and free speech. Similarly there are marginal laws against "fomenting" a riot or "inciting" which again trim the sheets on free speech. It could be argued that there is a distinction between speech and odious crap. But who's to draw that line?

A