Such common sense! Any individual who purposefully injures or takes the life of another commits an act, or crime, which should be punished under a system of laws.
So-called "progressives" appeal to the classes, or groups, which they have created as voting blocks, by claiming to be able to read the minds of some criminals as being motivated by what they describe as "hate." Such dishonest manipulation of the law never was intended in the Founders' concept of "equality before the law."
Perhaps Maher fears that if conservatives gain power, they will somehow define his actions as "hate crimes," and, thus, he is seeing the disadvantages of allowing political groups to define actions motivated by "hate."
Thomas Jefferson stated:
"The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods, or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg."
Good one. I'm sure with enough power behind us - maybe a suck-up press that switches sides - we could become just as thin-skinned and arrogant as elite liberals are... of course, at that point most of us would change parties and stand with the 'out' group - and the Constitution...
Hate crimes are thought crimes - thought crimes are totalitarian...