38 replies to this topic

[preacherman76]

Leonardo, on 16 March 2012 - 03:08 PM, said:

Which means very little in light of the ruling by the US Supreme Court that any burning or desecration of the flag is protected under the First Amendment of the US Constitution.

So, I ask again, what is it the flag actually means?

Depends on who you are asking I guess.

[Taun]

Leonardo, on 16 March 2012 - 02:38 PM, said:

Did 'the politician' (Obama) "feel the need to plaster their image over national symbols"?

I don't see it reported that US flags nationwide are being replaced with one's picturing Obama, all I read was that one flag, on a flagpost in the grounds of a Democrat Party building, was a combination US flag with Obama's picture on it. I did not read that it was Obama's idea to do this, nor that he ordered it.

So, which 'elected official' are you suggesting "we keep our eyes on" regarding this incident?

And not everything, nor any behaviour, can be justified by the "they are military/veterans" trope. I respect those who serve, but that respect does not extend to the point that they can do no wrong.

First off I did not 'justify' their behavior... In fact their behavior needs no justification- it is their RIGHT to protest... I merely pointed out the background of their 'protest' as I saw it...

Secondly, ANY and ALL elected officals MUST be 'watched'... Those of us that live in a representative democracy are part of the Checks and Balances that keep government (or any official in that government) from overstepping their bounds...

Someone in the Presidents political organisation (party) did this... by letting it stand, it is giving tacit approval of it - the Head of a Staff is ultimately responsible for the actions of the staff - in any organisation... This issue could have been quietly 'defused' by the simple act of the President (or a member of his staff) telling them to take it down...  

My comment about 'plastering images all over' comes from many years of watching other countries (through history) create 'personnality cults' by doing this very thing... That is what I was concerned with...

Not that I have to 'justify' my thoughts or beliefs either...

[Leonardo]

Taun, on 16 March 2012 - 05:17 PM, said:

First off I did not 'justify' their behavior... In fact their behavior needs no justification- it is their RIGHT to protest... I merely pointed out the background of their 'protest' as I saw it...

Secondly, ANY and ALL elected officals MUST be 'watched'... Those of us that live in a representative democracy are part of the Checks and Balances that keep government (or any official in that government) from overstepping their bounds...

Someone in the Presidents political organisation (party) did this... by letting it stand, it is giving tacit approval of it - the Head of a Staff is ultimately responsible for the actions of the staff - in any organisation... This issue could have been quietly 'defused' by the simple act of the President (or a member of his staff) telling them to take it down...  

My comment about 'plastering images all over' comes from many years of watching other countries (through history) create 'personnality cults' by doing this very thing... That is what I was concerned with...

Not that I have to 'justify' my thoughts or beliefs either...

You are presuming the President (or his staff) knew about this before the protest occurred?

And my point about 'justification' was not aimed at anyone in particular.

preacherman,

Quote

Of course. But that doesnt mean they will get what they want.

Again, I agree. Because what they want may contravene what others are allowed.

[Simbi Laveau]

Dredimus, on 16 March 2012 - 02:56 PM, said:

The United States Flag: Federal Law Relating to Display and Associated Questions.

Presented by the Congressional Research Service.

Page CRS-7, Section 8-G.



Senate.Gov

Thank you .
In general,its rude. Burning the flag can get you arrested,but this guy is such an egomaniac,that he needs to see his face 50 times ?
Does he have his name tattooed on himself somewhere too,so he can read the magnificence every day ?
Im Oblam The Man !


Hey,I'd rather,if they have to do this,they put Robert Downey Jrs face on it,or frigging Big Bird,or How about 50 Cartmans ?

Please Biach,get OVER yourself .Its just rude.

Edited by missymoo999, 16 March 2012 - 06:06 PM.

[Rafterman]

Leonardo, on 16 March 2012 - 02:05 PM, said:

I agree completely. The vets have every right to express their outrage. Do they have the right to demand the flag be removed?

Sure they do.  And the DNC has a right to tell them to pound sand.

[conspiracybeliever]

They should have ironed it.

[Dredimus]

preacherman76, on 16 March 2012 - 05:06 PM, said:

Depends on who you are asking I guess.

    To me, as a soldier, it means a lot of things. As a soldier you bring that flag with you as a banner every where you go. No matter where you are in the world that flag stands out, everyone knows where you are from and what you are. To me, it used to be that it stood for everything that was right... democracy, freedom, prosperity and a chance to become more. However, in the last few years not only has the flag itself been tarnished time and time again, but the reputation of that flag as well due to bad policies and decisions made by men that think they know better than the founders of this country. As a soldier, just as these vets, I reserve the right to become angry when some one tries to make a mochary out of our banner... we reserve our right to protest and point out the wrong doing and no one can take that away from us.

Secondly

Quote

Which means very little in light of the ruling by the US Supreme Court that any burning or desecration of the flag is protected under the First Amendment of the US Constitution.

So, I ask again, what is it the flag actually means?

You are are confusing desecration with display. A flag DISPLAYED at the DNC (a politically affiliated organization mind you) is subject to the laws of DISPLAY.  By saying otherwise you are stating that the DNC was willingly desecrating the banner of the United States. And YES, the DNC would be directly affiliated with the office of the president seeing as how he is running for another term, thus, they are representative of him at this point in time.

[Robbie333]

Dredimus, on 16 March 2012 - 09:18 PM, said:

    To me, as a soldier, it means a lot of things. As a soldier you bring that flag with you as a banner every where you go. No matter where you are in the world that flag stands out, everyone knows where you are from and what you are. To me, it used to be that it stood for everything that was right... democracy, freedom, prosperity and a chance to become more. However, in the last few years not only has the flag itself been tarnished time and time again, but the reputation of that flag as well due to bad policies and decisions made by men that think they know better than the founders of this country. As a soldier, just as these vets, I reserve the right to become angry when some one tries to make a mochary out of our banner... we reserve our right to protest and point out the wrong doing and no one can take that away from us.

Secondly



You are are confusing desecration with display. A flag DISPLAYED at the DNC (a politically affiliated organization mind you) is subject to the laws of DISPLAY.  By saying otherwise you are stating that the DNC was willingly desecrating the banner of the United States. And YES, the DNC would be directly affiliated with the office of the president seeing as how he is running for another term, thus, they are representative of him at this point in time.

       Bravo and a hardy salute. I am with you. I don't see a piece of cloth which is red, white and blue. I see a vision we seem to have lost with the blood of thousands of our men and women whom died believing this vision so when you treat this flag with disrespect you are disrespecting the thousands who suffered and died for it.

Edited by Robbie333, 16 March 2012 - 09:24 PM.

[and then]

Leonardo, on 16 March 2012 - 03:08 PM, said:

Which means very little in light of the ruling by the US Supreme Court that any burning or desecration of the flag is protected under the First Amendment of the US Constitution.

So, I ask again, what is it the flag actually means?

Apparently in the rarified air that you breathe, not much.  But then, that's ultimately your problem and not mine.  These vets have the freedom to choose to protest the actions of this party hack and with any luck and some good press coverage they will succeed in their fight.

[Simbi Laveau]

Dredimus, on 16 March 2012 - 09:18 PM, said:

To me, as a soldier, it means a lot of things. As a soldier you bring that flag with you as a banner every where you go. No matter where you are in the world that flag stands out, everyone knows where you are from and what you are. To me, it used to be that it stood for everything that was right... democracy, freedom, prosperity and a chance to become more. However, in the last few years not only has the flag itself been tarnished time and time again, but the reputation of that flag as well due to bad policies and decisions made by men that think they know better than the founders of this country. As a soldier, just as these vets, I reserve the right to become angry when some one tries to make a mochary out of our banner... we reserve our right to protest and point out the wrong doing and no one can take that away from us.

Secondly



You are are confusing desecration with display. A flag DISPLAYED at the DNC (a politically affiliated organization mind you) is subject to the laws of DISPLAY.  By saying otherwise you are stating that the DNC was willingly desecrating the banner of the United States. And YES, the DNC would be directly affiliated with the office of the president seeing as how he is running for another term, thus, they are representative of him at this point in time.

The last 2 administrations,have treated our service people SO BADLY,its despicable.
I was walking in NYC Chinatown,and i found this framed thing on the street.
I think the poor man had passed away,and his stuff was just dumped in the garbage.
Its on Whitehouse stationary,and signed by harry Truman.
Its a letter of thanks,for serving the united states during ww2.

I was intrigued,looked it up.He sent one to ever single vet that came home....

These fools,deny you proper medical care,and say you have to pay for your own ptsd therapy,even though they made you do 5 tours,back to back,in both Iraq and Afghanistan.
Fail
I say they should burn this flag,as its not really a us flag at all.

[Cradle of Fish]

If you want to see a cult of personality in the United States look no further than Ronald Reagan.

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

missymoo999, on 16 March 2012 - 06:04 PM, said:

Thank you .
In general,its rude. Burning the flag can get you arrested,but this guy is such an egomaniac,that he needs to see his face 50 times

Where in the article does it say Obama told them to do this?

[Leonardo]

Dredimus, on 16 March 2012 - 09:18 PM, said:

To me, as a soldier, it means a lot of things. As a soldier you bring that flag with you as a banner every where you go. No matter where you are in the world that flag stands out, everyone knows where you are from and what you are. To me, it used to be that it stood for everything that was right... democracy, freedom, prosperity and a chance to become more. However, in the last few years not only has the flag itself been tarnished time and time again, but the reputation of that flag as well due to bad policies and decisions made by men that think they know better than the founders of this country. As a soldier, just as these vets, I reserve the right to become angry when some one tries to make a mochary out of our banner... we reserve our right to protest and point out the wrong doing and no one can take that away from us.

Secondly



You are are confusing desecration with display. A flag DISPLAYED at the DNC (a politically affiliated organization mind you) is subject to the laws of DISPLAY.  By saying otherwise you are stating that the DNC was willingly desecrating the banner of the United States. And YES, the DNC would be directly affiliated with the office of the president seeing as how he is running for another term, thus, they are representative of him at this point in time.

Robbie333, on 16 March 2012 - 09:23 PM, said:

Bravo and a hardy salute. I am with you. I don't see a piece of cloth which is red, white and blue. I see a vision we seem to have lost with the blood of thousands of our men and women whom died believing this vision so when you treat this flag with disrespect you are disrespecting the thousands who suffered and died for it.

So, rather than a "cult of personality", you enjoy a "cult of the flag"?

The flag means nothing, it is a piece of material that flaps in the wind. The flag is simply a symbol and has no meaning in and of itself.

What has meaning is what is symbolised - that would be the freedoms and liberties that Americans profess to hold so dear.

If you want to worship something, worship those ideals - not the symbol you have invented to represent them.

[Dredimus]

Leonardo, on 17 March 2012 - 10:04 AM, said:

So, rather than a "cult of personality", you enjoy a "cult of the flag"?

The flag means nothing, it is a piece of material that flaps in the wind. The flag is simply a symbol and has no meaning in and of itself.

What has meaning is what is symbolised - that would be the freedoms and liberties that Americans profess to hold so dear.

If you want to worship something, worship those ideals - not the symbol you have invented to represent them.

It has nothing to do with worship and everything to do with the Ideals that the flag represents. You will never see it this way if you have never served under that banner. Im not going to sit here and debate my patriotism or any other topic of that nature with you. Its an agree to disagree type thing. Im not trying to change your mind, you are more than free to think what you wish. Just keep in mind that to some of us its more than a piece of cloth. Its a representation of everything this country used to stand for.

[The Unseen]

I understand their view,I for one don't want that Fool on the flag Either .So what if he is the First black president,Who is he to place his picture on the Flag! I mean it's bad enough that we see his ugly face on bumper stickers,coffee mugs,and every other place.Leave our Flag alone,Out of all the Presidents we have had he is the last one who needs to be on it,I did not serve my country to have his face plastered on the flag.The flag stands for freedom and to put his face on it would be like he is the one we were fighting for and that also means to me that he wants to be"AMERICA" and he is nothing more than some person that got elected to office,He has done nothing to deserve to be placed on the flag,and even if he did do something "GREAT" he still has no right to change our FLAG.Put his face on a mountain like they did Washington and the other's but only if he saves the planet or something other than that maybe he should just keep his face in a picture in his wallet.LEAVE THE FLAG ALONE!!!!