Recliner Pilot 61 Posted June 29, 2006 .........not desecrating the U.S. flag before I voted against it. Hillary is a SPONSOR of a Senate bill outlawing desecrating the flag, but voted AGAINST the Amendment to outlaw burning the flag. Hillary in '08. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Giants Fan 85 Posted June 29, 2006 Actually, that reflects the majority opinion. I just saw a poll on the news, last night, maybe night before, that most American's were for making it a crime, but not amending the constitution. I happen to agree. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Recliner Pilot 61 Posted June 29, 2006 Goody for you. Now how about addressing the hypocrisy known as Hillary. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Giants Fan 85 Posted June 29, 2006 Goody for you. Now how about addressing the hypocrisy known as Hillary. Uhhh ... yer dumb. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
spottedowl 1 Posted June 29, 2006 Actually, that reflects the majority opinion. I just saw a poll on the news, last night, maybe night before, that most American's were for making it a crime, but not amending the constitution. I happen to agree. Here is the problem as I see it. If local governments try to ban flag burning, the anti-Americans will claim first amendment rights, and they will win in court. If the ban is put forth into the Constitution as written, the courts would only be allowed to rule on the Constitution. With this ban, we will have two Constitutional limits of power in disagreement. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Giants Fan 85 Posted June 29, 2006 Here is the problem as I see it. If local governments try to ban flag burning, the anti-Americans will claim first amendment rights, and they will win in court. If the ban is put forth into the Constitution as written, the courts would only be allowed to rule on the Constitution. With this ban, we will have two Constitutional limits of power in disagreement. I think it's against the law, in some places, to burn leaves in your own backyard. It's becoming against the law to smoke ... all over the place ... so, does that mean if I smoke in public, not because I want a cigarette, but because I am making a statement ... I'm covered by the first? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
spottedowl 1 Posted June 29, 2006 I think it's against the law, in some places, to burn leaves in your own backyard. It's becoming against the law to smoke ... all over the place ... so, does that mean if I smoke in public, not because I want a cigarette, but because I am making a statement ... I'm covered by the first? How is smoking in public protected by free speech? Look, I believe local governments can use existing laws to fine and punish flag burners in public. I really do not care what flag burners do on their private property. Morons marching down the public street should be subject to the following crimes: Arson, disorderly conduct, hate speech, inciting a riot. There may be more. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Giants Fan 85 Posted June 29, 2006 How is smoking in public protected by free speech? Look, I believe local governments can use existing laws to fine and punish flag burners in public. I really do not care what flag burners do on their private property. Morons marching down the public street should be subject to the following crimes: Arson, disorderly conduct, hate speech, inciting a riot. There may be more. Exactly. No reason to fock with the constitution. Local laws should already be established. Otherwise ... I can smoke in protest! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
spottedowl 1 Posted June 29, 2006 Exactly. No reason to fock with the constitution. Local laws should already be established. Otherwise ... I can smoke in protest! Crap! This is a first for us because you made sense and provided something to think about. Keep it up!!! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Giants Fan 85 Posted June 29, 2006 Second hand smoke < automobile exhaust So if you can drive, I can smoke. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
devin952 1 Posted June 29, 2006 Second hand smoke < automobile exhaust So if you can drive, I can smoke. But, what if im smoking while driving, could they make me pull over and finish my smoke? I just dont wanna piss off MADD, them peps just wont die! if i fart, and it smells like beer (i think root beer is close enough) im focked![code] Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Giants Fan 85 Posted June 29, 2006 But, what if im smoking while driving, could they make me pull over and finish my smoke? I just dont wanna piss off MADD, them peps just wont die! if i fart, and it smells like beer (i think root beer is close enough) im focked![code] Good example. Take your average car. There is a person, driving that car, smoking. You have equipment to measure the polutants from both the car, and the cigarette. Guess which one's worse for yah? Go ahead .... just guess. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
spottedowl 1 Posted June 29, 2006 Second hand smoke < automobile exhaust So if you can drive, I can smoke. Nevermind. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cruzer 1,992 Posted June 29, 2006 Second hand smoke < automobile exhaust So if you can drive, I can smoke. i actually agree w/ this - and i'm not even a smoker. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Red White and Blue 0 Posted June 29, 2006 The first amendment specifically protects unpopular political views and ideas. If someone wants to advertise their stupidity by burning the flag, let them. Busting these idiots would only prove them right. Even aside form that, I think it's a bad idea to have unenforceable laws on the books and I resent the time and taxpayer money Congress is wasting on these non-issues that have no change of becoming law. We're bogged down in Iraq, running record deficits and our borders are wide open. Congress should be working on these problems instead of inventing problems to campaign on. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hoytdwow 202 Posted June 29, 2006 Hillary is a SPONSOR of a Senate bill outlawing desecrating the flag No she wasn't. HTH Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Voltaire 4,556 Posted June 29, 2006 I don't think buring the flag should be considered legitimate protest for American citizens in any circumstances. When I have kids, I'm going to homeschool them. And be sure every day -in the middle of China- there will be American kids pledging alligence to the American flag every day before we start class. These same kids will probably have to go into the military to pay for college just like I did. As or this flag burning amendment, it's mostly political grandstanding. It's disgusting that the politicians who wrap themselves in the flag the tightest are the same ones who -at the age of 18- tripped all over each other when they cut and ran and cried to daddy to avoid Vietnam; then have the gall to turn around and question the patriotism of the politicians that actually did go to war in their youth. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ZeroTolerance 582 Posted June 29, 2006 No she wasn't. HTH Whoa whoa whoa, time out. Who said you could use the actual records of congress in political arguments on this board? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Red White and Blue 0 Posted June 29, 2006 It's disgusting that the politicians who wrap themselves in the flag the tightest are the same ones who -at the age of 18- tripped all over each other when they cut and ran and cried to daddy to avoid Vietnam; then have the gall to turn around and question the patriotism of the politicians that actually did go to war in their youth. This really galls me. GWB likely pulled some strings to get into the national guard and I'm fine with that. But for Bush to then make a political career our of smearing the service of decorated vets (through surrogates of course) is about the most cowardly, disgraceful thing I've ever seen. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Voltaire 4,556 Posted June 29, 2006 This really galls me. GWB likely pulled some strings to get into the national guard and I'm fine with that. I'm not fine with that at all, it's an abuse of the system. And a sign of cowardice. He abused the system repeatedly in his career- cashing in his oil stocks just before they crashed and the Texans stadium deal were other examples from before he wsa elected. Then he's stockpiled his administration and key government positions with people just like him. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites