dubyaD40.com - Wally's Wild Life

Wally's Wild Life


Burning the Constitution to Protect the Flag posted by Wally 9:22 AM Congress should protect our Freedoms, not our symbols. Now that they've solved all the other pressing problems in the country, the Senate is about to begin debate, again, on a flag desecration amendment. This is sort of a biennial event - every election year it rears its ugly and unnecessary head. Problem is, this time it might actually pass. While we at dubyaD40.com respect and revere our flag, we see it as a symbol of something much much greater - a symbol of a whole myriad of Freedoms that we have kind of gotten used to. We find the irony almost overwhelming in diminishing the freedom of expression by protecting the ultimate symbol of the freedom of expression. The Bill of Rights is the envy of freedom lovers everywhere. It has not changed one whit in the more than two centuries since it was written. Now Congress wants to amend it to shrink the protection it provides for unpopular political expression. The issue is a proposal to authorize Congress to prohibit desecration of the American flag. (snip) Do they think they're more patriotic than Gen. Colin Powell, the former secretary of state? He said in opposing a flag desecration amendment, "The First Amendment exists to insure that freedom of speech and expression applies not just to that with which we agree or disagree, but also that which we find outrageous." Marine Col. John Glenn the astronaut and former U.S. senator? He said, "To say that we should restrict the type of speech or expression that would outrage a majority of listeners or move them to violence is to say that we will tolerate only those kinds of expression that the majority agrees with, or at least does not disagree with too much. That would do nothing less than gut the First Amendment." LINK To those who say that making it a crime to desecrate the flag would do little to restrict our freedoms, let me point out some the other nations that have such laws: China, North Korea, Cuba, Iran, Iraq (before we shocked and awed them), etc. Nice company we'd be keeping. To those who say "since so few people do it, hardly anyone would be impacted" I say, exactly. What's the point? The point is, it's all politics. They're threatening to diminish the Bill of Rights in order to score political points in an election year. They're selling your rights for a few votes. They are dancing on our most sacred of documents, shouting about how patriotic they are by protecting our flag. Even Republicans are apalled by this politicking at the expense of our Constitution. "The House and Senate floor is about substantive work for the nation, and I think campaigns ought to be kept in the streets where they belong," said former House Republican Leader Dick Armey of Texas. "Frist seems to be going about 80 percent politics and 20 percent policy, though I would be hard pressed to find what that 20 percent is." Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the second-ranking Republican leader in the Senate said "Protecting the First Amendment takes precedence. I think the First Amendment has served us well for over 200 years. I don't think it needs to be altered. LINK" What they don't see, or what they are hoping that we don't see, is that they are defacing our Constitution to save the flag. You know what I have to say about that? Arrest this man! ON further review, I found this interesting little tidbit. According to U.S. Legal Code, Title 4, Chapter 1, Section 8: "(k) The flag, when it is in such condition that it is no longer a fitting emblem for display, should be destroyed in a dignified way, preferably by burning." Permalink :: 0 comments :: Post a Comment

A Thief in the Night posted by Wally 11:39 AM Our fearless leader, the most powerful man in the world, the tough-talking, cowboy strutting, bold and decisive President of the U.S. crept into and out of Iraq like a thief in the night yesterday, without telling anyone. The Iraqi Prime Minister was only given a five-minute warning before the meeting with Bush. So much for being the leader of a sovereign nation. But with poll numbers barely above freezing, Bush apparently felt it was time for another "Mission Accomplished" moment, dropping in on an official visit to boost morale and show that he means business in setting up Iraq as a free and self-governed nation. Only problem, it's hard to impress people with your commitment to them when nobody knows you're there, when you have to sneak in and out afraid to show your face in public. You could hardly call the trip a state visit. Unannounced, Air Force One touched down at an airport closed by American edict, the President was whisked away on American equipment, American guns ready to blaze, to an American village in the center of the capital, secured by American soldiers, who closed bridges and barricaded streets. LINK In other words, he invaded Iraqi airspace unannounced, took over a large contingent of the Iraqi security force (i.e. our troops), sauntered in and out of the country with less warning than if he was flying into Des Moines (he's have to alert air traffic control for that), just so he could talk up their new sovereign government. I assume that I'm not the only one who sees the irony in this. While this was a big surprise to almost everyone, it was not a complete surprise visit. In fact, this trip had been in the works for a month. Knowing that a good photo-op is better than a good policy, Bush had been very secretly planning this for some time. The planning began after Bush directed his staff that he wanted to travel to Baghdad as soon as new Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki filled the final positions in his government. With that completed last Thursday, the wheels were set in motion for the trip to take place. Apart from Cheney, the only Cabinet members notified in advance were Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld. LINK Is our fearless leader really that paranoid that he has to take this many precautions to keep people from knowing about an official state visit? Is this the actions of a leader, or a coward? Is he really that afraid of the "free and democratically elected government" he set up in Iraq? How can he be that afraid, and still proclaim how great things are going over there? Does anybody still believe him? Apparently, according to this article, the Iraqis don't. The Sunnis see it as a political stunt, and even the Shia know what the trip is really all about. "This visit carries a lot of meanings, but this visit means nothing to the Iraqi street. There will never be any benefits from such a visit and the only one to benefit from this visit is Bush himself and his troops here, not the Iraqi people," said Hassan al-Robaie, a lawmaker loyal to al-Sadr Our President - sneaking in and out like a burglar. Kinda makes you proud, doesn't it? Permalink :: 0 comments :: Post a Comment