Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Sandman on June 22, 2005, 10:36:05 PM
-
I can only assume that the House has nothing really important to work on.
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20050622/D8ASREC00.html
I wonder... do they have any sense of priority whatsoever? Is this the best they can do?
I think they should all be fired. This is a colossal waste of time and taxpayer dollars.
-
D-N.Y., said, "If the flag needs protection at all, it needs protection from members of Congress who value the symbol more than the freedoms that the flag represents."
Well spoken and right on the money.
-
The proposed one-line amendment to the Constitution reads, "The Congress shall have power to prohibit the physical desecration of the flag of the United States."
I don't like where this is headed...Whats next?
Congress shall have power to prohibit freedom of religion with regards to non-Catholic and non-Protestant religions
Congress shall have the power to bypass the Sixth Amendment for no other reason than to keep 'enemies of the state' safely detained without evidence.
Congress shall have the power to prohibit freedoms of speech and press with regards to the actions of Congress
Please. Extreme left-wing nonsense here.
-
Originally posted by AdmRose
Please. Extreme left-wing nonsense here.
I believe you have your political extremest wings confused.
-
You are all ignoring the key phrase, "public sentiment."
-
Originally posted by rpm
I believe you have your political extremest wings confused.
Technically either extreme will do but I'll humor you and say "right wing extremist nonsense"
-
Originally posted by AdmRose
I don't like where this is headed...Whats next?
Congress shall have power to prohibit freedom of religion with regards to non-Catholic and non-Protestant religions
Congress shall have the power to bypass the Sixth Amendment for no other reason than to keep 'enemies of the state' safely detained without evidence.
Congress shall have the power to prohibit freedoms of speech and press with regards to the actions of Congress
Please. Extreme left-wing nonsense here.
Hrm. Sounds like the Patriot Act to me. :)
-
Originally posted by rpm
I believe you have your political extremest wings confused.
.... Uhm, how do you say it? Oh yes,.... shack.
-
Bit precious isn't it?
What would they have made of this if the flag was American?
(http://www.123posters.com/images/music/m-sexpistols1.jpg)
I don't know .... you yankees :rolleyes: :lol :lol :lol
-
Who you callin a Yankee? :mad:
-
:lol :lol
-
"Ask the men and women who stood on top of the (World) Trade Center," said Rep. Randy (Duke) Cunningham, R-Calif. "Ask them and they will tell you: pass this amendment."
you can't ask them jackhole...they are dead...and i am not sure how kouth it really is to be using thier dead bodies as a political tool.
perhaps instead you might ask them why we trained osama and why the us continues to shelter the saudis from scrutiny.
and then you might ask them if they mind you passing a law which basically states that you dont trust the citizens to uphold the sanctity of the flag on thier own in lew of your screwed up version of what it has suddenly come to represent.
oops. rant filter fell off.
-
yep... total bull... waste of time.
Both sides do it tho... the dems try to make it illegal to fly a confederate flag.
The lefties never got upset about that little bit of "free speech" infringement but...
When the same sort of mentality is used against them... it is hand wringing, bring out the free speech card, time.
Everyone wants to control everyone elses behavior and they all think their control is just control.
90% of the time they are wrong on both sides.
lazs
-
Originally posted by Sandman
I can only assume that the House has nothing really important to work on.
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20050622/D8ASREC00.html
I wonder... do they have any sense of priority whatsoever? Is this the best they can do?
I think they should all be fired. This is a colossal waste of time and taxpayer dollars.
Welcome to the Democratic-run state of Washington. Washington State Senator Darlene Fairley (D-Lake Forest Park) believed military personnel are not capable of fending for themselves in the civilian world, where high-interest payday loans lurk.
...Fairley....the chair of the state Senate's Financial Institutions, Housing and Consumer Protection Committee, sponsored the seven bills. If passed, the bills would put restrictions on payday lending to military personnel; lower the maximum allowable size for payday loans and the amount of interest charged; limit borrowers to one outstanding payday loan every 60 days; and give borrowers the option to skip a payday when repaying a loan.
Where was the rage from our democratic friends when Washington State Sen. Karen Keiser (D-Des Moines) has introduced legislation totax cosmetic medical services?
...but...not limited to, cosmetic surgery, hair transplants, cosmetic injections, cosmetic soft tissue fillers, dermabrasion and chemical peel, laser hair removal, laser skin resurfacing, laser treatment of leg veins, sclerotherapy, and cosmetic dentistry.
Then there's State Sen Paul Shin. You guessed it. A Democrat. And he doesn't want you to collect rainwater on your property unless the State Department of Ecology says it's OK. (SB 5113)
Bottom line. Both sides of the isle, whether at a state or federal level, offer ludicrous bills. Its a norm in our government, driven by lobbyists.
(And for the record, I think it should be legal to burn the American flag as part of free speech, but don't try it in my front yard, unless you want to be bloody.)
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
You are all ignoring the key phrase, "public sentiment."
The same public sentiment that had this line associated with it?
Supporters said the measure reflected patriotism that deepened after the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, and they accused detractors of being out of touch with public sentiment.
I really don't think public sentiment is really driving the supporters. How did they derive that public sentiment does want this?
-SW
-
Smells like political gamesmanship to me. Are 10+ Democrats going to defect in the Senate to pass this measure? I find that pretty unlikely. Possible but unlikely. Republicans can then use these votes against the amendment as proof that Democrats lack patriotism.
Such is politics.
-- Todd/Leviathn
-
"I don't support burning of the flag but I'll fight like hell to defend your right to do it."
-
I don't support the burning of any flag nor the the flying of the confederate flag...
In both cases it is nobodies business but the burner/flyers.
I am just pointing out how the control freaks of either side can justify one and ban the other.
lazs
-
It is a BS waste of time.
To lazs, I've never heard of an attempt to outlaw the flying of the Confederate flag, but if there is one I oppose it.
Removing it from state flags where it was coincidentially added during the Civil Rights struggles of the '50s and '60s is not the same thing however. It was added with the intention of making a clear statement of the position of those state governments. It should not be on those flags because of why and when it was added. If it had been added for memorial reasons in, say, the 1870s I'd have a different opinion.
That said, in no case should anybody be stopped from flying the Confederate flag as individuals or as private groups. No restricts as to where it can be flown should be allowed either. They should be allowed to march down main street with it if they like, so long as they obey traffic laws.
-
and it is who that discerns what is "intent"? And.... is not "intent" simply another way of saying..... free speech?
A confederate flag is historical... that can't be denied... for it to fly (under the US flag) in states and counties that were former confederate states is perfectly reasonable.
While I aplaud your liberal attitude toward allowing someone to fly it.... I am appaled at your thinking that you have the ability to tell what is "intent" or not and squash free speech based on that.
by your reconing then... would it be ok to fly it at state owned and maintained battlefield sites from the civil war? Or perhaps it would be better to burn any pictures in the lobby of said sites that showed confederate soldiers flying it?
It's all so confusing when you pick and choose what is free speech huh? A man would need god like powers to descern "intent" eh?
lazs
-
btw.
curious...
have we had a recent outbreak of flag burnings that i am unaware of?