« No you haven't. | Main | Jerker Notes »

June 23, 2005


The following Senate members are idiots: * Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter (R-PA) * Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN) * Sen. Orrin G. Hatch (R-UT) * Sen. John Thune (R-SD) * Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY) Also stupid are 209 House Republicans and 77 House Democrats, but I hold a special place in my stupid list for Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-CA), Queen of the Evil. Extra special props to Ms. Clinton, however, for perhaps the stupidest thing I've ever heard come out of her mouth: > [I would] support federal legislation that would outlaw flag desecration, much like laws that currently prohibit the burning of crosses, but I don't believe a constitutional amendment is the answer. There's a big difference between burning a flag and burning a cross. Burning crosses are symbols of intimidation used against individuals. Burning or desecrating a flag is a form of political speech *about our government*. If I hate my new neighbors because they're black, I don't whip out an American flag and burn it. I get out a can of gasoline and a box of matches, and burn a gigantic cross and offensive racial slurs in their lawn. And then I dance around in a silly hat because I'm too ashamed to let my face be seen. Ms. Clinton is outdone, however, by Ms. Lofgren (D-CA). She first makes a little speech about how a flag desecration amendment would be the first amendment to curtail the First Amendment, and this is a bad thing: >[O]ne of the things that has made our country strong and free is the proposition that Americans are free to express their opinions even when we don't agree with those opinions. And as has been mentioned by other Members, the amendment before us would be, if adopted, the first time that the first amendment to the Constitution of the United States had been altered by an amendment. I think that we would make a mistake to amend the first amendment. That's why our soldiers go off and fight for our country, to keep our freedoms down through the lines. Sane enough, right (if you ignore the fact that "Congress shall make no law" seems to fly over everyone's head)? But she then goes on to attempt an amendment to the flag desecration amendment such that the flag desecration amendment could not pass into law until war veterans receive an amendment (still with me?) providing the benefits and medical care they were promised: >But I think there's another reason why this amendment has been offered, and that's to divert attention from something that we can do something about, and that's making sure that our veterans get what they are entitled to for the efforts they have made for their country. My amendment would make sure that this article would not take effect until Congress, by law, ensures that the veterans benefits promised to an individual in connection with that individual's enlistment or induction in the armed services cannot, after that enlistment or induction, be diminished. Her motion fails, having been tabled after a tiny bit of argument. After it's tabled is when she goes completely bat shit loco and her true colors show. Amending the Constitution to ban flag burning is bad, so let's just accomplish the same end through another means. She brings up another of her amendments, and the clerk reads it: >Amendment to H.J. Res. 10, offered by Ms. Lofgren of California. Page 2, strike lines 8 and 9, and insert the following: Every flag of the United States manufactured in or imported into the United States after the effective date of this amendment must be manufactured out of flame-resistant material. Yes, your eyes do not deceive you -- after giving the impression of railing against the flag desecration amendment, she offers a way to ban flag burning without banning flag burning. Let's just amend the Constitution (!?) to make the flags flameproof, then you *can't* burn them! Eureka! Heaven help us. As much as current members of the government in both the Democratic and Republican parties don't want to hear it, political speech and expression are still protected in this country by the First Amendment. If someone wants to burn the country in effigy using an American flag, that's their right. Countless people have died in the history of America to protect our rights. Even today, the "War on Terror" is being spun as our men and women being overseas to "defend our rights." Why, then, are our Congresspeople and the Bush administration trying to take away right after right directly under our noses? Do we need to deploy the National Guard to defend us from the idiocy of Capitol Hill while the Army defends us from all those WMDs in Iraq?

Posted by Colin at June 23, 2005 6:00 PM

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:


Post a comment

Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)